Comments on: Mandatory Sex Education for Your Children http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:03:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Karrie http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-220 Karrie Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:39:37 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-220 First to establish some points, lets go waaaaaaay back, and understand where our knowledge of Jesus originates, the <em><strong>Bible</strong></em>.  The Bible exists in multiple manuscripts, none of them original, and multiple canons, none of which completely agree on which books have authority.  Scholarly perspectives fall within a spectrum of maximalist (Everything is true) and minimalist (A work of theological fiction) approaches.  What is true is that only a fraction of texts survived the Early Christian Era, that was reviewed and edited by the early church fathers beginning in the reign of Constantine in the 4th century. Investigations of ancient Syro-Palestinian cultures in connection with the OT manuscripts are extremely important in how we understand this.  I recently visited a small Biblical Archaeology museum at a Seventh Day Adventist college made me realize what we are contending with.  Archaeologist William Dever (formerly of the U of Az, now in retirement in Cyprus) , has pointed out that there are in fact multiple histories within the Bible, including the history of theology (the relationship between God and believers), political history (usually the account of "Great Men"), narrative history (the chronology of events), intellectual history (ideas and their development, context and evolution), socio-cultural history (institutions, including their social underpinnings in family, clan, tribe and social class and the state), cultural history (overall cultural evolution, demography, socio-economic and political structure and ethnicity), technological history (the techniques by which humans adapt to, exploit and make use of the resources of their environment), natural history (how humans discover and adapt to the ecological facts of their natural environment), and material history (artifacts as correlates of changes in human behavior). Dever notes that the role of archaeology increases as one goes down this list, and that archaeologist's interpretations of the written record can differ markedly from the record itself. The current understanding of the New Testament leaves out several books, the Apocrypha and the Gnostic Canons.  Dr. Karen L. King of the Harvard School of Divinity has researched and written extensively on the Gnostic and Apocryphal texts and presents a cogent argument for a broader understanding of the times. Second:  The history of marriage is problematic as well.  Marriage had originally been an agreement between 2 families.  In Medieval European history there had been a series of restrictions on what constituted marriage.  By the time we get to the American Colonies, marriage had been recognized as extended cohabitation.  The introduction of licenses was originally intended to keep "racial purity" in early American society.  While contemporary physical anthropologists have completely debunked the myth of race, we still have the license/document that makes it a legal arrangement. Meeting coming up, more later...   First to establish some points, lets go waaaaaaay back, and understand where our knowledge of Jesus originates, the Bible.  The Bible exists in multiple manuscripts, none of them original, and multiple canons, none of which completely agree on which books have authority.  Scholarly perspectives fall within a spectrum of maximalist (Everything is true) and minimalist (A work of theological fiction) approaches.  What is true is that only a fraction of texts survived the Early Christian Era, that was reviewed and edited by the early church fathers beginning in the reign of Constantine in the 4th century. Investigations of ancient Syro-Palestinian cultures in connection with the OT manuscripts are extremely important in how we understand this.  I recently visited a small Biblical Archaeology museum at a Seventh Day Adventist college made me realize what we are contending with.  Archaeologist William Dever (formerly of the U of Az, now in retirement in Cyprus) , has pointed out that there are in fact multiple histories within the Bible, including the history of theology (the relationship between God and believers), political history (usually the account of “Great Men”), narrative history (the chronology of events), intellectual history (ideas and their development, context and evolution), socio-cultural history (institutions, including their social underpinnings in family, clan, tribe and social class and the state), cultural history (overall cultural evolution, demography, socio-economic and political structure and ethnicity), technological history (the techniques by which humans adapt to, exploit and make use of the resources of their environment), natural history (how humans discover and adapt to the ecological facts of their natural environment), and material history (artifacts as correlates of changes in human behavior). Dever notes that the role of archaeology increases as one goes down this list, and that archaeologist’s interpretations of the written record can differ markedly from the record itself.
The current understanding of the New Testament leaves out several books, the Apocrypha and the Gnostic Canons.  Dr. Karen L. King of the Harvard School of Divinity has researched and written extensively on the Gnostic and Apocryphal texts and presents a cogent argument for a broader understanding of the times.
Second:  The history of marriage is problematic as well.  Marriage had originally been an agreement between 2 families.  In Medieval European history there had been a series of restrictions on what constituted marriage.  By the time we get to the American Colonies, marriage had been recognized as extended cohabitation.  The introduction of licenses was originally intended to keep “racial purity” in early American society.  While contemporary physical anthropologists have completely debunked the myth of race, we still have the license/document that makes it a legal arrangement.
Meeting coming up, more later…
 

]]> By: Jason Carr http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-218 Jason Carr Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:31:27 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-218 <p>Sorry for the long period of silence.  I've been on vacation and we've been through an H1N1 scare with Reese (as diagnosed by a doctor), when in fact he did not have H1N1.  But that's an entirely different topic. ;)</p> <p>It is clear that obviously Jesus was sexually pure, as he is purity by definition.  Therefore, the decisions that Jesus made surrounding sex are very important, as they are our best example of sexual purity.</p> <p>The concept of Jesus having been married is extremely foreign to me; I can't imagine his lifestyle fitting in well at all with any kind of a healthy marriage.  Jesus was entirely focused on His purpose, and it seems that a marriage relationship might have gotten in the way.</p> <p>Clearly, Jesus struggled with the same bodily urges that the rest of men do.  The difference, however, is that his faith was strong enough to never give into them.  It would be nice if we had clear evidence of what Jesus did or did not do sexually, but I think the lack of examples of Jesus' sexual experiences is a testament to the likely fact that Jesus refrained from sex for much (or more likely all) of his life.</p> Sorry for the long period of silence.  I’ve been on vacation and we’ve been through an H1N1 scare with Reese (as diagnosed by a doctor), when in fact he did not have H1N1.  But that’s an entirely different topic. ;)

It is clear that obviously Jesus was sexually pure, as he is purity by definition.  Therefore, the decisions that Jesus made surrounding sex are very important, as they are our best example of sexual purity.

The concept of Jesus having been married is extremely foreign to me; I can’t imagine his lifestyle fitting in well at all with any kind of a healthy marriage.  Jesus was entirely focused on His purpose, and it seems that a marriage relationship might have gotten in the way.

Clearly, Jesus struggled with the same bodily urges that the rest of men do.  The difference, however, is that his faith was strong enough to never give into them.  It would be nice if we had clear evidence of what Jesus did or did not do sexually, but I think the lack of examples of Jesus’ sexual experiences is a testament to the likely fact that Jesus refrained from sex for much (or more likely all) of his life.

]]> By: Tom Wadsworth http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-198 Tom Wadsworth Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:47:05 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-198 Carrie: You've said many things that are helpful and insightful.  But your last posting left me wanting.   There have been, and always be, attempts to reinterpret history.  The alleged scholarship behind the claims that Jesus was married is, bluntly, not credible.  The vast amount of relible data from the earliest and best sources supports the view of Jesus found in the gospels.   I acknowledge a tendency in early Christian writers to overstate and overglorify the traditions that had been passed to them.  But frankly, I have a hard time accepting the notion that Jesus' sexual purity was 'later added'. Carrie: You’ve said many things that are helpful and insightful.  But your last posting left me wanting.
 
There have been, and always be, attempts to reinterpret history.  The alleged scholarship behind the claims that Jesus was married is, bluntly, not credible.  The vast amount of relible data from the earliest and best sources supports the view of Jesus found in the gospels.
 
I acknowledge a tendency in early Christian writers to overstate and overglorify the traditions that had been passed to them.  But frankly, I have a hard time accepting the notion that Jesus’ sexual purity was ‘later added’.

]]> By: Karrie http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-197 Karrie Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:25:00 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-197 Hi, Jason: You mustn't feel that your earthly, physical struggles separate you from God.  What is most fortunate is that although <em><strong>you </strong></em>may have feelings or concerns about your own issues of the flesh, scriptures tell us that God who created you and Jesus who was God in flesh both intimately understand the conditions of life in human form. When scripture says Jesus Christ was God made flesh, we need to understand he was a man physically and had first hand experience with the biology of the human body. There exists recent scholarship and speculation regarding the extent of Jesus earthly experience.  Religious Studies scholars and theologians studying the Apocryphal Canon have stated that Jesus Christ himself may have been married.  Jesus' own "sexual purity" was later added and emphasized when the teachings of Augustine of Hippo, along with those of Paul, influenced the leadership of the early church in the late 4th and early 5th century.  While some may consider the more recent opinions as "fringe," what they compel us to do is gain a clearer understanding of the detailed and nuanced history of the Early Christian Church. This would put into perspective what we follow in our dogmas and doctrines.   Hi, Jason:
You mustn’t feel that your earthly, physical struggles separate you from God.  What is most fortunate is that although you may have feelings or concerns about your own issues of the flesh, scriptures tell us that God who created you and Jesus who was God in flesh both intimately understand the conditions of life in human form. When scripture says Jesus Christ was God made flesh, we need to understand he was a man physically and had first hand experience with the biology of the human body.
There exists recent scholarship and speculation regarding the extent of Jesus earthly experience.  Religious Studies scholars and theologians studying the Apocryphal Canon have stated that Jesus Christ himself may have been married.  Jesus’ own “sexual purity” was later added and emphasized when the teachings of Augustine of Hippo, along with those of Paul, influenced the leadership of the early church in the late 4th and early 5th century.  While some may consider the more recent opinions as “fringe,” what they compel us to do is gain a clearer understanding of the detailed and nuanced history of the Early Christian Church.
This would put into perspective what we follow in our dogmas and doctrines.
 

]]> By: Jason Carr http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-196 Jason Carr Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:41:24 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-196 <p>Karrie, to be completely honest I don't think we'll ever see entirely eye-to-eye on this matter.  I would suspect that you see more along the lines of my father's views, which I do not wholly agree with.</p> <p>My lusting may be "restrained", but that does not make it any less sinful.  Whether or not you call it lust, I am still tempted (and moved) to think some rather disgusting thoughts and (hopefully only in the past) to partake in some rather disgusting behaviors.  Male sexuality is often so strong that to "let it free" in any manner would be incredibly dangerous and ill-advised.  Clearly, the thoughts that run through my mind on a regular basis are the definition of lust.</p> <p>I am not personally taking any scripture into play here other than Christ's simple commandments for us not to lust.  It is dead clear in Matthew 5:27-30.  There is no question that I am constantly guilty of this very thing, exactly how Christ describes it.</p> <p>It would be detrimental to my faith to accept these thoughts as healthy and righteous, or to excuse them as part of my physical nature.  We are often fighting our "physical nature" as Christians, whether it be to fight emotions of jealousy or hatred, or our tendency to overindulge.</p> <p>It is also personally very clear to me that my sexual thoughts and habits often get in the way of my relationship with Christ.  They can also be a positive influence, when I am enjoying righteous sex.  Still, it would not be spiritually healthy for me to take a less critical eye to myself regarding sex.  It would most certainly take me in the opposite direction.  I've tried it quite a few times, and I've always come out farther away from Christ.</p> Karrie, to be completely honest I don’t think we’ll ever see entirely eye-to-eye on this matter.  I would suspect that you see more along the lines of my father’s views, which I do not wholly agree with.

My lusting may be “restrained”, but that does not make it any less sinful.  Whether or not you call it lust, I am still tempted (and moved) to think some rather disgusting thoughts and (hopefully only in the past) to partake in some rather disgusting behaviors.  Male sexuality is often so strong that to “let it free” in any manner would be incredibly dangerous and ill-advised.  Clearly, the thoughts that run through my mind on a regular basis are the definition of lust.

I am not personally taking any scripture into play here other than Christ’s simple commandments for us not to lust.  It is dead clear in Matthew 5:27-30.  There is no question that I am constantly guilty of this very thing, exactly how Christ describes it.

It would be detrimental to my faith to accept these thoughts as healthy and righteous, or to excuse them as part of my physical nature.  We are often fighting our “physical nature” as Christians, whether it be to fight emotions of jealousy or hatred, or our tendency to overindulge.

It is also personally very clear to me that my sexual thoughts and habits often get in the way of my relationship with Christ.  They can also be a positive influence, when I am enjoying righteous sex.  Still, it would not be spiritually healthy for me to take a less critical eye to myself regarding sex.  It would most certainly take me in the opposite direction.  I’ve tried it quite a few times, and I’ve always come out farther away from Christ.

]]> By: Karrie Porter Brace http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-195 Karrie Porter Brace Wed, 11 Nov 2009 06:32:56 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-195 Hi, Jason: First of all, let's clearly define lust in the context of what comprises the male human sexual being.  <strong><em>LUST </em></strong>is defined as an unrestrained desire or craving, it could be anything we irrationally desire, but we tend to associate <em>lust </em>with sexual desire. But because human males are visually oriented as opposed to emotionally oriented there is a  subconscious (or maybe not so subconscious!) tendency to assess other females as potential sexual partners.  This is a biological phenomenon of the human male as mammal, with innate urges for reproduction.  It is how we react to our inherent biology with our adaptation to cultural expectations that defines us as the people God created 'just below the angels' (Thomas Aquinas?). Lust, then is unrestrained.  I guarantee that you are much more restrained than you assume.  If not, Amber would assist in your restraint.  While it is something that you should manage to the best of your ability now, I don't think that a somatic biological response should warrant paralyzing guilt.  As you get older you'll be able to manage this more effectively. But be prepared for a long battle...As long as you have a pulse hopefully you are going to have a sex drive.  But if I may quote Ira Gershwin regarding the aged Methuselah, "...who calls that living when no gal is giving to no man of 900 years..." Again, I think we really owe it to ourselves <strong><em>as a culture</em></strong> to have a better understanding of human sexuality.  When we understand something more clearly we have a greater mastery over it. Here's an idea:  the best way to learn more about a topic is to teach it.   Why don't you learn about this and teach a youth seminar on Christian perspective of human sexuality??  Several years ago the Roscoe UMC did human sexualtiy weekends for the Methodist Youth Fellowship.  These weekends were intended to teach pre-adolescents and young adolescents about their sexuality within the parameters of church  in a non judgemental setting. I think there are several people who had been involved in these efforts still around.  There are definitely former participants of these human sexuality weekends that still attend the church. Ask around, you might be surprised!! Re: Paul...  Although one of Paul's most moving verses were about the nature of Love (1 Cor 13) I also wonder, much like the 1937 work by Arthur Darby Nock, if the Apostle Paul was an extremely repressed homosexual who had an imperfect understanding of Hellenistic culture. He seems conflicted about how people should handle their sexuality in the present (1st century Mediterranean), and encouraged people to remain celibate as the nature of the physical body would pass away upon the return of Jesus.  Odd of him to impose his opinion on the Judeo-Christian world view of the 1st century Mediterranean since our OT God seemed intent on populating the world since the time of Genesis.  It also seemed to be the intent of the Catholic church as well as the Hebrew traditions.  It is also argued among scholars of the apocryphal canon that sexual purity was imposed by Christian patriarchal cultural much later (again, thank you, Council of Nicea) on the stories of Jesus rather thanwhat may have actually been the case. We have to be very careful about what we <em><strong>think </strong></em>is based in scripture and what actually <em><strong>is </strong></em>in scripture.  We must then try to understand the intent of the chapter/verse within its context. After we get a better understanding of sex, then later we can discuss the nature of the soul when released from the physical body. Hi, Jason:
First of all, let’s clearly define lust in the context of what comprises the male human sexual being.  LUST is defined as an unrestrained desire or craving, it could be anything we irrationally desire, but we tend to associate lust with sexual desire. But because human males are visually oriented as opposed to emotionally oriented there is a  subconscious (or maybe not so subconscious!) tendency to assess other females as potential sexual partners.  This is a biological phenomenon of the human male as mammal, with innate urges for reproduction.  It is how we react to our inherent biology with our adaptation to cultural expectations that defines us as the people God created ‘just below the angels’ (Thomas Aquinas?).
Lust, then is unrestrained.  I guarantee that you are much more restrained than you assume.  If not, Amber would assist in your restraint.  While it is something that you should manage to the best of your ability now, I don’t think that a somatic biological response should warrant paralyzing guilt.  As you get older you’ll be able to manage this more effectively. But be prepared for a long battle…As long as you have a pulse hopefully you are going to have a sex drive.  But if I may quote Ira Gershwin regarding the aged Methuselah, “…who calls that living when no gal is giving to no man of 900 years…”
Again, I think we really owe it to ourselves as a culture to have a better understanding of human sexuality.  When we understand something more clearly we have a greater mastery over it.
Here’s an idea:  the best way to learn more about a topic is to teach it.   Why don’t you learn about this and teach a youth seminar on Christian perspective of human sexuality??  Several years ago the Roscoe UMC did human sexualtiy weekends for the Methodist Youth Fellowship.  These weekends were intended to teach pre-adolescents and young adolescents about their sexuality within the parameters of church  in a non judgemental setting. I think there are several people who had been involved in these efforts still around.  There are definitely former participants of these human sexuality weekends that still attend the church.
Ask around, you might be surprised!!
Re: Paul…  Although one of Paul’s most moving verses were about the nature of Love (1 Cor 13) I also wonder, much like the 1937 work by Arthur Darby Nock, if the Apostle Paul was an extremely repressed homosexual who had an imperfect understanding of Hellenistic culture. He seems conflicted about how people should handle their sexuality in the present (1st century Mediterranean), and encouraged people to remain celibate as the nature of the physical body would pass away upon the return of Jesus.  Odd of him to impose his opinion on the Judeo-Christian world view of the 1st century Mediterranean since our OT God seemed intent on populating the world since the time of Genesis.  It also seemed to be the intent of the Catholic church as well as the Hebrew traditions.  It is also argued among scholars of the apocryphal canon that sexual purity was imposed by Christian patriarchal cultural much later (again, thank you, Council of Nicea) on the stories of Jesus rather thanwhat may have actually been the case.
We have to be very careful about what we think is based in scripture and what actually is in scripture.  We must then try to understand the intent of the chapter/verse within its context.
After we get a better understanding of sex, then later we can discuss the nature of the soul when released from the physical body.

]]> By: Jason Carr http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-194 Jason Carr Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:53:44 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-194 <p>Karrie, thanks for your thoughts.  I am in deep understanding that sex is a beautiful thing, and that it was meant to be enjoyed.  It is clearly a blessing from God.  Still, I do believe that I am tempted to "enjoy" sex in ways that are not wholesome.</p> <p>We can argue whether masturbation is a sin all day, but the fact of the matter is we are not to lust over what we do not have, neither sexually nor non-sexually.  Supposedly, some of us are able to masturbate without lusting.  I, unfortunately, am not.  I believe this might have been the direction you were taking.</p> <p>Truthfully, there's nothing wrong with lust in a marriage relationship.  However, it is extremely difficult (at least for a man) to keep his mind focused entirely on his wife during a solo session.  For many/most/all? men, it is of course nearly impossible to lead a completely sexually pure life, but it is important that we strive to do so.</p> <p>Therefore, yes, sex is meant to be enjoyed, and there is nothing wrong with sex strictly for pleasure.  Still, sex tainted by lustful thoughts not directed at your spouse is no longer pure.</p> <p>I am outspoken on this subject simply because of the saturation of sex within our culture.  I cannot watch most sitcoms without being tempted to lust, nor can I go to some church services without my eyes wandering to areas they shouldn't wander.  Much of this, of course, is my own sinful fault, but most of it could be prevented with a deeper understanding between men and women.</p> <p>I am not "cherry picking" scriptures here to say that the Bible mandates a certain dress code.  However, clearly we are not to cause others to stumble.  It is important for us not to judge, and not to turn nonbelievers away because of what they are wearing.  Still, I do believe it is the responsibility of a Christian woman to be modest in what she wears.</p> <p>I recognize that there is often an incorrect tendency among conservative Christians to believe that sex is the enemy.  Clearly, it is not.  The reason this tendency sadly exists is because of how much it is forced into our lives within our culture.  In many ways, it is the enemy, because of our culture's corruption of such a beautiful thing.</p> Karrie, thanks for your thoughts.  I am in deep understanding that sex is a beautiful thing, and that it was meant to be enjoyed.  It is clearly a blessing from God.  Still, I do believe that I am tempted to “enjoy” sex in ways that are not wholesome.

We can argue whether masturbation is a sin all day, but the fact of the matter is we are not to lust over what we do not have, neither sexually nor non-sexually.  Supposedly, some of us are able to masturbate without lusting.  I, unfortunately, am not.  I believe this might have been the direction you were taking.

Truthfully, there’s nothing wrong with lust in a marriage relationship.  However, it is extremely difficult (at least for a man) to keep his mind focused entirely on his wife during a solo session.  For many/most/all? men, it is of course nearly impossible to lead a completely sexually pure life, but it is important that we strive to do so.

Therefore, yes, sex is meant to be enjoyed, and there is nothing wrong with sex strictly for pleasure.  Still, sex tainted by lustful thoughts not directed at your spouse is no longer pure.

I am outspoken on this subject simply because of the saturation of sex within our culture.  I cannot watch most sitcoms without being tempted to lust, nor can I go to some church services without my eyes wandering to areas they shouldn’t wander.  Much of this, of course, is my own sinful fault, but most of it could be prevented with a deeper understanding between men and women.

I am not “cherry picking” scriptures here to say that the Bible mandates a certain dress code.  However, clearly we are not to cause others to stumble.  It is important for us not to judge, and not to turn nonbelievers away because of what they are wearing.  Still, I do believe it is the responsibility of a Christian woman to be modest in what she wears.

I recognize that there is often an incorrect tendency among conservative Christians to believe that sex is the enemy.  Clearly, it is not.  The reason this tendency sadly exists is because of how much it is forced into our lives within our culture.  In many ways, it is the enemy, because of our culture’s corruption of such a beautiful thing.

]]> By: Karrie http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-193 Karrie Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:54:12 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-193 I was just re reading your posts on FB regarding your perspective on human sexuality education, self pleasuring, etc Are you concerned about Christian conduct in regard to sexual behavior? I think sex is a wonderful gift from God, and if its true he made us in His own image, he intended us to enjoy it.  If you grew up in a rural area with active livestock breeding programs you might notice we aren't the only species who enjoy the procreative act. But seriously, there are culturally acceptable ways that Christians can experience their sexuality, whether that is with their partner or by themselves. Reading up on this topic, not just about its scriptural basis, but its health benefits, its mechanics, and cultural parameters, might be in order.  You can find Christian-oriented resources on this.  I might also suggest that you read some of Alfred Kinsey, Masters and Johnson or other reputable authorities on human sexual behavior.  Realize, tho, that a perspective of a scientist or a social scientist may be vastly different than what you've known up til now.  Kinsey was raised in a very conservative Christian home.  Even as a bug biologist he had no idea of how human sexuality worked.  He researched it AFTER he got married and introduced a class on human sexuality into the University of Indiana curriculum.  For a long time it was wildly popular! I was just re reading your posts on FB regarding your perspective on human sexuality education, self pleasuring, etc
Are you concerned about Christian conduct in regard to sexual behavior?
I think sex is a wonderful gift from God, and if its true he made us in His own image, he intended us to enjoy it.  If you grew up in a rural area with active livestock breeding programs you might notice we aren’t the only species who enjoy the procreative act.
But seriously, there are culturally acceptable ways that Christians can experience their sexuality, whether that is with their partner or by themselves.
Reading up on this topic, not just about its scriptural basis, but its health benefits, its mechanics, and cultural parameters, might be in order.  You can find Christian-oriented resources on this.  I might also suggest that you read some of Alfred Kinsey, Masters and Johnson or other reputable authorities on human sexual behavior.  Realize, tho, that a perspective of a scientist or a social scientist may be vastly different than what you’ve known up til now.  Kinsey was raised in a very conservative Christian home.  Even as a bug biologist he had no idea of how human sexuality worked.  He researched it AFTER he got married and introduced a class on human sexuality into the University of Indiana curriculum.  For a long time it was wildly popular!

]]> By: Karrie http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-192 Karrie Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:55:11 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-192 OK, let's be clear about some things. FIRST:  Yes, of course, we women should have a LOT to say about teaching children and young people about sex.  You seriously don't want to wait to explain the process and its repercussions after the fact.  Its dangerous to patently assume that young people, especially young women, will innately know how their bodies work and how easy it is for them to conceive.  We then gestate and give birth to babies.  If you hadn't noticed this is tough work.  We might make it look simple but fellas, it ain't... SECOND: Ancient European sex providers in Rome were not always "prostitutes".  Prostitutes in contemporary Western society are paid sex workers.  There were/are women in other belief systems who provided a sexual services for the people who subscribed to a particular world view.  We, as  Midwestern-American, middle class, Protestant Christians, do not necessarily share the values of this Classical Period world view.  The luxury of our current cultural perspective does not give us the right  to categorize/label/condemn these people who served legitimate roles within their culture for their time.   I think we seriously need to address the use of loaded terms inherent in translating texts from different languages and cultures.  It creates issues in contemporary understandings that cause drastic separation in how behavior and relationships are addressed. The Abrahamic Traditions share a different perspective on sexuality that was culture bound and regulated the behavior of women, perhaps due to the complex Judeo-Christian/Islamic ritual restrictions on inheriting family resources. If you control who has sexual access to your women you know to whom the offspring belong.  You want to insure that your resources are used by your family. It has a lot to do with early agrarian society and how to raise a workforce that ensured the survival of a lineage. What does not explicitly come out in the Abrahamic scriptures, but is still pretty universally observed, is that humans as mammals are inherently sexual beings.  Attempts to regulate sexual behavior were/are intended to keep peace between us.  As humans we constantly struggle with that, even among those who consider themselves Conservative Christians.  Seems we just can't adhere to the standards we set for ourselves. I guess that's why grace and forgiveness is so important. Realize, too, that although we turn to scripture to clarify how we should best conduct ourselves, much of what is in the OT Bible is problematic in applying it to contemporary people.  Seriously read some of that and then consider how often you could have already been dragged out and stoned for transgressing  Mosaic law!!  Many of these laws were made by men for cultural regulation. The fact that some Christian denominations cherry-pick scriptures to regulate their followers' activities, dress code, diets, and attitudes really bothers me.  If our God is a loving God, not sure he'd still want us beating the tar out of each other for wearing the wrong cloth or eating something on the wrong day or claiming someone else's country/resources/people for our own. Wish I'd been present at the Council of Nicea...   OK, let’s be clear about some things.
FIRST:  Yes, of course, we women should have a LOT to say about teaching children and young people about sex.  You seriously don’t want to wait to explain the process and its repercussions after the fact.  Its dangerous to patently assume that young people, especially young women, will innately know how their bodies work and how easy it is for them to conceive.  We then gestate and give birth to babies.  If you hadn’t noticed this is tough work.  We might make it look simple but fellas, it ain’t…
SECOND: Ancient European sex providers in Rome were not always “prostitutes”.  Prostitutes in contemporary Western society are paid sex workers.  There were/are women in other belief systems who provided a sexual services for the people who subscribed to a particular world view.  We, as  Midwestern-American, middle class, Protestant Christians, do not necessarily share the values of this Classical Period world view.  The luxury of our current cultural perspective does not give us the right  to categorize/label/condemn these people who served legitimate roles within their culture for their time.   I think we seriously need to address the use of loaded terms inherent in translating texts from different languages and cultures.  It creates issues in contemporary understandings that cause drastic separation in how behavior and relationships are addressed.
The Abrahamic Traditions share a different perspective on sexuality that was culture bound and regulated the behavior of women, perhaps due to the complex Judeo-Christian/Islamic ritual restrictions on inheriting family resources. If you control who has sexual access to your women you know to whom the offspring belong.  You want to insure that your resources are used by your family. It has a lot to do with early agrarian society and how to raise a workforce that ensured the survival of a lineage.
What does not explicitly come out in the Abrahamic scriptures, but is still pretty universally observed, is that humans as mammals are inherently sexual beings.  Attempts to regulate sexual behavior were/are intended to keep peace between us.  As humans we constantly struggle with that, even among those who consider themselves Conservative Christians.  Seems we just can’t adhere to the standards we set for ourselves.
I guess that’s why grace and forgiveness is so important.
Realize, too, that although we turn to scripture to clarify how we should best conduct ourselves, much of what is in the OT Bible is problematic in applying it to contemporary people.  Seriously read some of that and then consider how often you could have already been dragged out and stoned for transgressing  Mosaic law!!  Many of these laws were made by men for cultural regulation. The fact that some Christian denominations cherry-pick scriptures to regulate their followers’ activities, dress code, diets, and attitudes really bothers me.  If our God is a loving God, not sure he’d still want us beating the tar out of each other for wearing the wrong cloth or eating something on the wrong day or claiming someone else’s country/resources/people for our own.
Wish I’d been present at the Council of Nicea…
 

]]> By: Jason Carr http://www.jasoncarr.com/family/mandatory-sex-education-for-your-children/comment-page-1#comment-190 Jason Carr Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:48:57 +0000 http://jasondavidcarr.com/?p=465#comment-190 <p>Thanks, Dad.  There we have it. ;)</p> Thanks, Dad.  There we have it. ;)

]]>