Sex rules
fiat lux
By: Justin Noia
Issue date: 10/4/07 Section: Columns
Last update: 10/4/07 at 7:10 AM EST
Last update: 10/4/07 at 7:10 AM EST
- Page 1 of 2 next >
|
British philosopher Roger Scruton observed that sex is an act of either desecration or sanctification. But if my views on sex were informed solely by the profligacy of popular culture (otherwise known as Friday night at Duke), I should think it was always the former.
The only thing I don't hear regarding lust is not to entertain it; the only thing I don't hear regarding sex is not to indulge in it. But even in hearing about doing it, I never hear about doing it in a manner that seems in any way enjoyable. It's always a blur of body parts and confused adolescent passions masquerading as "freedom" or "love," as if the words themselves justify.
Let's assume what I circumlocutorily stated in my first article: human life has inherent worth. With inherent worth comes inherent dignity.
We humans are unique among all the animal kingdom in recognizing at once our dignity above the animals and our ability to descend below the animals.
And if Scruton was right, we are capable not just of debasing but also of magnifying our dignity-through sex. To make sex sanctifying requires exercising temperance and restraint so that we keep ourselves apart from the animals. That means, for most of us, abstaining from sex while in college.
This is not to prudishly flee from sexual feelings, but rather to elevate sex to a place more special, important and pure than the sewer in which typical "liberated" society places it; and thereby to treat the act respectfully, carefully and humanly.
Here, then, are some reasons to avoid premarital sex:
1. Authentic love demands it. Many people engage in premarital sexual activity because they want to feel loved. There's nothing wrong with wanting that. But numerous recent studies (e.g., by the Population Research Institute and National Institutes of Health) have found that sexual activity leads to and is correlated with considerable teenage depression.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 22
Daniel Simpson
Daniel
posted 10/04/07 @ 8:35 AM EST
Mr Noia,
I am quite impressed with the maturity and dignity you exhibited in your article. Way to tell the truth to a so-called "liberated" community
w
posted 10/04/07 @ 10:09 AM EST
Though they were points I would debate, you had a rather coherent article right up until you compared birth control to abortion. At that point, everything you said just got balled up into religious dogma and became utterly irrelevant to someone who doesn't already agree with you on everything else. (Continued…)
Stephen
posted 10/04/07 @ 10:35 AM EST
Spectacular job. Unfortunately, w doesn't seem to desire to open one's mind to new ideas. You did not mention birth control in general; you mentioned abortion and a hormonal control that is a type of abortion. (Continued…)
Caroline G.
posted 10/04/07 @ 12:47 PM EST
I am horrified by this column, althought I suppose I shouldn't be after reading last week's column on reproductive rights. While Mr. Noia is entirely entitled to his opinion on sexual practice, I find the undertones of his column deeply misogynistic. (Continued…)
duke student
posted 10/04/07 @ 1:29 PM EST
Caroline G.- I admire your response and I agree with you 100%. Though Noia is entitled to his opinions, the fact that he thinks that marriage is the utmost level of mutual love and respect is also untrue. (Continued…)
Caitlin McLaughlin
posted 10/04/07 @ 2:36 PM EST
Just curious Justin, in your backwards fantasy world that you forced on all of us in your Chronicle editorial today, are men expected to remain as chaste as women until marriage? Or are they exempt from premarital transgressions because women dress like "object(s) to be gawked" and don't make you "work for it"? I am also curious when Pratt students became qualified to talk about sex!
Concerned woman
posted 10/04/07 @ 2:58 PM EST
This to me reeks of an attitude that separates women into pure and beautiful _creatures_ to be protected and evil temptresses who lead men astray. It seems to give the alternative of being viewed as an evil slut by people who share the author's view and suppressing my own humanity which includes sexual desires. (Continued…)
Reader
posted 10/04/07 @ 2:59 PM EST
"If I can't get any, no one should."
Religion, ethics, gender roles...blah blah, true love, the Notebook
Contrary to popular opinion, not everyone on campus is regularly hooking up especially not the author. (Continued…)
Kelly Margolis
posted 10/04/07 @ 3:29 PM EST
I'll just roll my eyes and put the rest of your column aside, Mr. Noia, but how can you say that love must fertile or fecund? So that means that if one of your precious virginal maidens happens to have an inborn hormonal problem that prevents her from bearing children, then she can never be an object of this love? Well, I guess she might as well go ahead and have sex then and at least get some pleasure out of life. (Continued…)
hmm
posted 10/04/07 @ 6:31 PM EST
Mr. Noia,
FYI, there are lots of other reasons women use hormonal birth control besides contraception. You should do better research before making such blanket judgments. (Continued…)
Post a Comment