The Seventh Commandment
The insistence by gender activists and enemies of the traditional family that any kind of sexual act is permissible, provided it is performed by consenting individuals (that makes even pedophilia permissible and causes its proponents to rename it "intergenerational sex") devalues the family and endangers its existence.
"You shall not commit adultery." Exodus 20:14
The letter from Paul to the Romans
7 Do you not know brethrenfor I am speaking to those who know the lawthat a law is binding to a person only during his life? 2 Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if he dies she is discharged from the law concerning the husband. 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
That has come to mean that anyone may have sex with anyone at any time either within or without marital bonds. On average, about 20 percent of children from supposedly monogamous stable marriages are not the offspring of their ostensible
natural father, but even children that were born out of an extra-marital sexual relationships that a man's wife had are still the legal responsibility of the wife's husband. That now extends even to those children that his wife brought into the marriage from a previous marriage.
Marriage vows, although they generally include the words "until death do you part," are virtually meaningless these days, to the extent that first marriages now have on average less than a 50 percent chance to last until the death of either spouse causes their termination. The risk of separation and divorce becomes greater with each successive marriage.
There appear to be restrictions with respect to intergenerational sex involving minors, but NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) is working hard on getting that changed. There is good reason to fear that in the process of remodelling our laws to allow for the implementation of "gender-neutral" policies it will happen that even paedophilia will be considered a kind of sexual orientation. That will mean that NAMBLA's efforts will succeed and that even incest with minors, regardless of the sexual orientation or sex of either participant, may not be a criminal offence any longer. NAMBLA states that
if people are not taught to despise their bodies and fear sex, if their sexual choices are not forced on them by others, and if they are not subjected to harsh or stigmatizing reactions to their sexual choices and experiences, they will not be harmed by having sex, regardless of how old or young they are or with whom they have sex." [ http://www.nambla.org/benefit.htm ]
In other words, a successful attempt at seducing a minor will no doubt result in consensual sex. The only possible harm that could arise out of that would be if someone weren't to agree with the view that sex with minors is beneficial to minors and to castigate the child or interfere in any way. Hmm
It's a long way from the age of the cave man to having rules for orderly procreation and establishing marital laws in order to turn savages into members of a civilized society. We worked on that for many thousands of years. Civilization and history are strongly connected and intertwined with that effort and even resulted from it. We haven't been quite successful in achieving that goal, but within less than two generations it has become possible and even likely that all of the evolution of civilization may soon be undone. But there is little at any time that is new under the sun, and the Bible tells us that during much of the history it covers almost identical forces were at play that opposed all attempts to bring order and morals into chaos.
Come to think of it, God did quite a bit in retaliation to slow down the forces that wanted to oppose His laws. In one instance He obliterated two towns, Sodom and Gomorrah, by sending fire and brimstone to wipe them out. As God saw it, there was no other way to cure the problems in those two places. Are we willing to learn anything from that?
Pastor Chris Heinss of the Old Hickory Community Church expresses some of his concerns about that at the following links:
Marriage and the relationship between husband and wife, what they may do and what they may not do, these are some of the main threads that run through the scriptures. That makes sense and can't be any other way. Whether one believes the Bible to be the Word of God or not, it has proven itself to be a prescription for a functioning civilization. It brought order into sexual relationships as well as into social chaos by bringing people out of savagery into the institutions of families and an ordered civilization. It also brought a common code of ethics to the western world.
Much is being made out of the excesses of some members of the Christian religion during the middle ages. The Spanish Inquisition is often cited as an example of Christianity and religions being bad for humanity. About 60,000 people were prosecuted during the Spanish Inquisition. That amounts to an average of 168 people per year during the
358 years of the duration of the Spanish Inquisition. On average,
about six people a year were executed. Thousands of "witches" were burned at the stake. Some of them were women, but most of them were men. That must be measured against other excesses of mankind.
During the regime of the Nazis, over a period of less than 12 years, 12 million people were murdered in deliberately constructed extermination camps, an average of 1 million per year. The Nazis only succeeded in doing that by replacing Christian religions with one of their own, which they called "Gottgläubig", meaning "believing in any gods, as long as it isn't the only God and Christ." Being gottgläubig allowed them also early in their history to be strong advocates of homosexuality.
Still, once Himmler had designed his plan for the creation of the super-race through the selective breeding program of the SS, even the Nazis became aware of the importance of families in the order of things. They promptly murdered some of the homosexuals in their ranks and began a program of incarceration of those in the general population. A small fraction of less than 1% of Germany's population of homosexuals died in concentration camps, as opposed to more than 85% of the Jewish population in Nazi-dominated and controlled territories. Nevertheless, today's homosexuals unabashedly are claiming "Holocaust Status," seemingly oblivious to the fact that many of the Nazis themselves were homosexuals who killed only those homosexuals that were a threat to their power.
Check Homosexuality and the Nazi Party, by Scott Lively. It provides a detailed look at the progression from the beginnings of the homosexual movement, through the Wandervogel movement (Wandervogel: bird of passage), to the concentration camps. Scott Lively states:
Homosexuals who died in the camps (mostly of disease and starvation) were "a small fraction of less than 1 percent" of homosexuals in Germany (S. Katz:146), compared to more than 85 percent of European Jewry exterminated in the gas chambers.
More significantly, many of the guards and administrators responsible for the infamous concentration camp atrocities were homosexuals themselves, which negates the proposition that homosexuals in general were being persecuted and interned.
While any prisoner could be chosen as a Kapo (a slave overseer), none of the other interned groups except homosexuals had counterparts among the Nazi guards and administrators.
Of course, this doesn't mean that it was homosexuals who committed all of the Nazi's atrocities. Many of the atrocities were committed by non-homosexuals. However, as Scott Lively points out, only homosexuals amongst the inmates of the camps had their sympathetic counterparts in the camp guards. Jews, Gypsies, Communists, Social Democrats and union organizers didn't.
During the regime of Stalin, over a period of about 20 years, 30 million people were exterminated in Ukraine alone, 2.8 million were deliberately starved to death. An average of 1.5 million per year in all were murdered, mostly in Siberian camps. The Russians too had a deliberate program of eradicating the Christian denominations, along with all other religions that the people in various parts of their empire adhered to. In addition, the advocates of the communist revolution proposed what they called free love the elimination of traditional marriages by replacing them with a system of prostitution, much like the one that is being promoted now through the UN gender agenda. [See Communist Manifesto] To make that possible, they implemented a system of easy divorce, whereby anyone could go to a magistrate and declare himself to be no longer married. They soon found that this created so much social chaos that they established more formal procedures by which divorces had to be obtained.*
The feminists are promoting the elimination of all traditional religions, especially the Christian ones and all others that call for traditional families to regulate sexuality. Although they prosecute more than a million people each year in North America alone, mostly men, for crimes that are often trumped up and that mostly don't result in any convictions, they have other, more sinister motives. In the name of limiting population growth, they promote the killing of unborn children at a rate that far exceeds the holocausts unleashed upon mankind by either Stalin or Hitler. 55 million unborn children are now being murdered annually world-wide. What once was regarded the safest place for a child to be, a sacred place, the mother's womb, is now the most dangerous place of all for developing life.
It's quite clear that whenever the constraints of Christianity in western society were cast off terrible atrocities were made possible. I don't know about you, but I prefer even the excesses of the traditional religions over those of the three ideologies, Communism, Fascism, and radical feminism, that brought so much suffering to mankind. Is there really a choice even for those who are not believers? Is there a choice for any nation that wants to consider itself civilized and wants to thrive? Any religion that holds the killings of human beings to be illegal, considers traditional families to be the building blocks of society, and holds the two sexes to be equal but different can't possibly be all bad.
(If the term "radical feminism" (a.k.a. Marxist- or socialist-feminism)
is somewhat new to you, you need to expand your knowledge. After all,
radical feminism, the currently controlling faction of feminism, governs
just about everything that is happening in your life. See,
Carey Roberts column
Carey Roberts is an analyst and commentator on political correctness.
His best-known work was an exposé on Marxism and radical feminism.
Carey Roberts' best-known work, his exposé on Marxism and
radical feminism, is not necessarily easy to find, but
this link will help with that. (Some of the URLs for the article
series appear to keep changing. For that reason the identified link
leads to an Internet search for the series. The first or second link in
the return list will most likely lead you to the series.))
What exactly are the redeeming qualities of the ideologies that are intended to replace our traditions, our traditional religions and our traditional moral values? What has their record of performance been with respect to bringing about better living conditions for all members of society? After more than three decades of deconstructing age-old traditions, are we now all better off?
* Free love, as the early communists called it, is today called sexual freedom.
See The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage, The Atlantic Monthly, July 1926
( See also
a more exhaustive history of the evolution and destructive social impact of
Soviet divorce laws)
Back to The Ten Commandments The Sixth Commandment The Eighth Commandment
1999 06 11
2000 06 03 (to replace page header and to install links to UN gender agenda and Communist Manifesto)
2001 01 29 (format changes)
2001 07 26 (added reference to Free Love)