Kant, Sex Ed, and Sterility

From Contra Celsum’s Integration Into the Void: Forthcoming Reformation,  the author ‘

Sex education in our elementary and secondary schools is an independent yet related obstacle to courtship and marriage. Taking for granted, and thereby ratifying, precocious sexual activity among teenagers (and even pre-teens), most programs of sex education in public schools have a twofold aim: the prevention of teenage pregnancy and the prevention of venereal disease, especially AIDS. While some programs also encourage abstinence or noncoital sex, most are concerned with teaching techniques for ‘safe sex’; offspring (and disease) are thus treated as (equally) avoidable side effects of sexuality, whose true purpose is only individual pleasure. (This I myself did not learn until our younger daughter so enlightened me, after she learned it from her seventh-grade biology teacher.) The entire approach of sex education is technocratic and, at best, morally neutral; in many cases, it explicitly opposes traditional morals while moralistically insisting on the equal acceptability of any and all forms of sexual expression provided only that they are not coerced. No effort is made to teach the importance of marriage as the proper home for sexual intimacy.

The supposed sexual morality of sex education is all about the destruction of the hated bourgeois morality of the (now formerly) Christian West.

Remember when there was a huge amount of outrage, regarding children being taught about sex by strangers?

It’s been three, four decades since then, and now we live in the transsexual phrase of the sexual revolution (but haven’t reached pedophile level of damnation… yet).

Today, it’s still possible for Christians to get their children out of the public schools – and the Boy Scouts. How many will do this?

In the vast majority of cases, I believe the answer is: as many as actually care if their children go to hell or not.

Or again, those who put their children’s salvation and moral fibre above their personal convenience.

This is proving – and has proven – to be a small minority, a mere fraction of the number of Christians.

The future rides with these strong believers, in more than one sense. As for the others, they really should re-read the Psalms (my bold):

Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies: thy right hand shall find out those that hate thee.

Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the Lord shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them.

Their fruit shalt thou destroy from the earth, and their seed from among the children of men.

For they intended evil against thee: they imagined a mischievous device, which they are not able to perform.

Therefore shalt thou make them turn their back, when thou shalt make ready thine arrows upon thy strings against the face of them.

Be thou exalted, Lord, in thine own strength: so will we sing and praise thy power. — Psalm 21: 8-13

If you are sacrificing your children to Moloch, you are proving yourself to be no friend to God, but rather an enemy. Stop it.


Again, from Contra Celsum:

The separation of sex from procreation achieved in this half century by contraception was worked out intellectually much earlier; and the implications for marriage were drawn in theory well before they were realized in practice. Immanuel Kant, modernity’s most demanding and most austere moralist, nonetheless gave marriage a heady push down the slippery slope: Seeing that some marriages were childless, and seeing that sex had no necessary link to procreation, Kant redefined marriage as ‘a life-long contract for the mutual exercise of the genitalia.’ If this be marriage, the reason for its permanence, exclusivity, and fidelity vanishes.

Death comes from the spirit, before it arrives in the physical world.

As it was for the First Adam, so it is with all the actions of men… including groups of men, such as families, nations and civilizations.

Kant’s filth and wilful dismissal of the spiritual connection, the ties of the heart, the union of man and woman in favour of a singular focus of genital pleasure is what I would expect from “modernity’s most demanding and austere moralist”.

*spits*

Naturally, his belief system has come to dominate the leadership of the West, and now the culture as well. In Who Speaks for American Conservatives?, North describes how the economic and political leadership of the West is dominated by men who have no political philosophy, and whose moral philosophy is merely the libertine search for pleasure. (Keynes the Immoralist is only part of the picture North reveals.)


So much for listening to sophisticated liars, telling us what our itching ears cry out for.

Time to face the real world, the world we must approach within the context of God’s Law, if we intend to shape it for God’s righteousness and glory, and our blessing and joy… both us, and our children.

Others shall pleasure themselves, and perish from the earth.

We shall obey God, and inherit the earth, forever.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s