Pages

Showing posts with label promiscuity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label promiscuity. Show all posts

Friday, March 16, 2012

Christianity's "War on Women"?

Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, announced on January 20, 2012, that, as part of preventive health services for women, all health plans must provide no-cost coverage—including deductibles and co-payments—for all contraceptives and sterilization procedures approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Her announcement ignited an immediate furor from conservatives and Catholic groups complaining that this regulation—part of Obamacare—impinged on their first amendment right to religious freedom.

Besides the fact that it is against Catholic teaching, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops argued that contraception is not basic healthcare but "an elective intervention that stops the healthy functioning of healthy women's reproductive systems." Conservative commentators railed that requiring taxpayers to fund contraception is essentially forcing citizens to pay other people to have sex.

Not long thereafter, the Obama administration granted religious institutions an exception: An employee of such an institution that does not provide reproductive healthcare can seek it directly from the insurance company at no additional cost. On March 1, the Democrat-controlled Senate rejected 51-48 a proposed amendment to the healthcare law extending this exception more broadly.

The absurdity of the contraception mandate was revealed on February 16, when Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University Law Center graduate student, was asked to speak before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee (not a formal Congressional hearing). She argued that religious institutions, even those with moral objections, should provide free contraception in their health insurance. She claimed that birth control could cost $1,000 per year (or as she specifically said, $3,000 over three years), stating that four out of ten of the university's female students suffered financial hardship because the student health insurance plan does not cover it. Many low-income students must go without contraceptives, she averred, because the women's free health clinics cannot meet the need.

Critics like Rush Limbaugh pummeled Fluke on the air, highlighting the ridiculous nature of her claims, especially the cost of contraception. As Cathy Cleaver Ruse, a Georgetown Law graduate, wrote in an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal:
But an employee at a Target pharmacy near the university told the Weekly Standard last week that one month's worth of generic oral contraceptives is $9 per month. "That's the price without insurance," the employee said. (It's also $9 per month at Wal-Mart.)

. . . Should Ms. Fluke give up a cup or two of coffee at Starbucks each month to pay for her birth control, or should Georgetown give up its religion? Even a first-year law student should know where the Constitution comes down on that.
Limbaugh ran afoul of the media after he used terms to describe Fluke that he later regretted saying and apologized for. However, his outburst was enough to alter the angle of the debate. Jesse Ferguson, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, complained, "Rush Limbaugh has come to Republicans' defense in their war on women." Fluke herself opined in a statement on March 1, expanding the field of those attacking "all women": 
Unfortunately, numerous commentators have gone far beyond the acceptable bounds of civil discourse. No woman deserves to be disrespected in this manner. This language is an attack on all women, and has been used throughout history to silence our voices. The millions of American women who have and will continue to speak out in support of women's health care and access to contraception prove that we will not be silenced.
That same day, The Washington Post ran a guest editorial by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite titled "All about Eve: The Christian roots of the GOP's war on women." She writes:
This attack on women is, and I am grieved to say it, driven by a particular Christian theological perspective that denigrates women and holds them responsible for sin, particularly sexual sin.

GOP politics today is, in fact, all about Eve.

The GOP war on women will continue precisely because of the conservative Christian theology that drives wedge politics in a campaign season has a fundamental contempt for women and their equal dignity and worth.
We in the church of God realize that it is not all Eve's fault. In I Timothy 2:14, Paul clearly writes that Eve sinned because she was deceived and implies that Adam sinned willingly (see Genesis 3:6). Further, the apostle states in Romans 5:12 that "through one man sin entered the world," and he repeats this in verses 15, 17, 18, and 19, naming Adam as the sinner. Thus, a "Christian" theology that puts women down for "Original Sin" is not based on biblical teaching.

The Bible consistently teaches that it is the man's responsibility to set the moral tone in his marriage and family, which Adam failed to do. This morality in relationships begins even before marriage. A young man looking for a wife must be scrupulous in his courting of a young woman, keeping the seventh commandment firmly in mind (Exodus 20:14).

And this brings us back to the controversy over the contraception mandate. Americans are embroiled in this argument because of promiscuity—illicit premarital sex by both men and women. The sexual revolution has borne more bitter fruit, this time endangering one of the fundamental freedoms granted to citizens by the Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It has become evident that a large segment of the American population values their sexual freedom more highly than their religious freedom—to the detriment of those of us who do not.

Jeremiah 13:26-27 confirms this as a sign of the end, as God promises destruction: "Therefore I will uncover your skirts over your face, that your shame may appear. I have seen your adulteries and your lustful neighings, the lewdness of your harlotry, your abominations on the hills in the fields. Woe to you, O Jerusalem! Will you still not be made clean?"

Unfortunately, at this point, national repentance seems unlikely. Is it not ironic that, in a country that values freedom so much, a kind of liberty—libertinism—could be so instrumental in bringing it down?

Friday, December 21, 2007

The Curse of Teen Pregnancy

Listen (RealAudio)

It is not uncommon today to hear news of some celebrity having a child out of wedlock. Jamie Lynn Spears at the 2007 Kids' Choice AwardsIn fact, illegitimacy seems to be the norm among the famous and infamous these days. The latest blockbuster story is that sixteen-year-old actress Jamie Lynn Spears, younger sister of Hollywood bad girl Britney Spears, is pregnant by her nineteen-year-old boyfriend. The younger Spears stars in Nickelodeon's Zoey 101, in which she plays a clean-cut, sensible character. In real life, she is at this writing twelve weeks pregnant and resolved to have the baby. These days, such a declaration of responsibility is about the best news we can hope for.

Perhaps public acceptance of celebrity promiscuity is at least partly to blame for the United States having the highest teen-pregnancy rate among developed nations. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control show that, in 2004, nearly 36 percent of live births in America were to unmarried mothers, affecting 1.47 million women. Almost a quarter of these unwed mothers were teenagers. Sadly, a recent national study reported that the birth rate for teens rose in 2006, the first increase since 1991.

The situation is far from improving. In 1970, 10.7 percent of U.S. births were to unwed mothers, meaning that in a little over three decades the illegitimate birth rate has jumped by about 335 percent. The nation has had an illegitimacy rate greater than one-third since 2000. What a shameful moral state we are in!

This is just one facet of the sexual revolution spawned in the 1950s and 60s. We could add high divorce rates, more tolerance for "shacking up," increased incidence of sexual diseases, longer welfare rolls, flagrant prostitution, "mature" television programs and movies, and a host of other social ills to the list of repercussions to the heavy drumbeat of sexual freedom. As with all of these societal problems, teen pregnancy is not liberating to the too-young mothers that it affects. In reality, teen pregnancy most often dooms a young woman to a lifetime of hardship.

For starters, she is now shackled to a baby who requires nearly continuous care. Though it may be cute and wonderful, the baby needs feeding, changing, comforting, bathing, and entertaining on an around-the-clock basis. Many young moms do their best to finish high school despite the constant demands of the child, and the most successful have devoted, extended families whose members pitch in to help when things get tough. Yet, such "ideal" situations are not usual. For most young mothers, life becomes a struggle.

Attending college is beyond the abilities of most unmarried women with a child. Costs—both monetary and time—are too steep for them to handle. Were the young lady unburdened with a child, she could go to class and work a job or two to get by, but having a dependent to feed, clothe, and send to daycare makes it almost impossible. So college is ditched in favor of getting a full-time job. However, because she has only a high-school education at best, her career opportunities are often limited to starting out at minimum-wage jobs and hoping to receive promotions down the line somewhere through hard work and on-the-job training. Too often, she ends up in a low-wage, dead-end job and relying on government assistance to make up what she lacks.

Socially, she will likely never recover. Chances are, the father of her child will not marry her, and his support for either her or the child (or both) will be minimal, sporadic, and reluctant. Without the benefit of marriage, she can leverage no legal procedures to compel him to help her. Her chances of finding a husband are cut drastically, since few men relish the thought of becoming an instant father to someone else's child once he says, "I do." Many unwed mothers will at some point live unmarried with a man, and studies show that, while this situation can be economically better than living alone, it falls far short of providing the real benefits that marriage does (see "Unwed mothers' prospects for marrying well, or at all, are greatly diminished, Cornell study finds").

Finally, what about her mental and emotional state? A September 1999 report, "The Age of Unwed Mothers: Is Teen Pregnancy the Problem?" by the Center for Marriage and Families at the Institute for American Values points out a link between unmarried mothers and depression:

One nationally representative study finds that, among White 18 and 19 year olds, about 41 percent of unmarried, first-time mothers reported many symptoms of depression, compared to 28 percent of married, primiparous [first-time] mothers of that age [Source: "Young Maternal Age and Depressive Symptoms: Results from the 1988 National Maternal and Infant Health Survey," American Journal of Public Health 88, no. 2 (February 1998): 266ff]. Maternal depression is a significant risk factor for children, often leading to problems in adjustment that may linger for years after the mother's recovery.

From every angle, the unmarried mother's life is a battle against the odds. She pits her and her child's life and welfare against the cold, brutal forces of this world, and the hard reality is that this uncaring world grinds them down most of the time. Most unwed mothers do not have the resources Jamie Lynn Spears—or any promiscuous celebrity, for that matter—has to avert the hardships inherent in the curse of breaking God's law regarding premarital sex.

There is a great deal of love behind the words, "You shall not commit adultery" (Exodus 20:14), a command that includes all forms of sexual immorality. God does not want to see any young woman have to suffer the adversities single-motherhood can bring crashing down on herself through sin. The best course to take is the old-fashioned, tried-and-true path of wisdom: to abstain from sexual relations until marriage. As many who have done so will testify, it significantly improves the quality of life!