I kind of hesitate to link to this, for a bunch of reasons. But I decided I would because I’ve been thinking about the sexual revolution a lot lately and this fits right in.
You have two extremes in discussion of sexual ethics. On one end you have what I’ll call the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic: No sex before marriage, sex is only meaningful within marriage and sex is, in its nature, procreative. Even if it isn’t always, it’s understood that this a reasonable outcome. On the other side you have those who advocate sex is a purely physical thing, that there ought not be broader connections drawn in, that sex is always fine, provided it is consensual. And it ought not be procreative, until and unless you decide it should be.
Those are the basic distinctions on the edges. There are all manner of people who file in between these two extreme positions, but understanding the fringe helps to understand the world we are living in, which has moved away from the Judeo-Christian vision.
Truly, you can be pro-life. That’s an acceptable position even in Canada, even today. But you cannot be in favour of the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. There is nothing so wildly unpopular.
At the same time, there is nothing so wildly unfulfilling as the other extreme for increasing numbers of people.
This discussion was spurred on by watching the video below.by