There's an 'Age is not a contraceptive' campaign in the UK.

[Christine Murray]

@Joel you assume lots don't you ? and Westawake , l think its great that many options are available to us women , afterall we are responsible for ourselves in our adulthood.

[fionnmccool]

do people get contraception advice from Eastenders? Anyway other issues include STIs, the right type of contraception and common problems in later pregnancies.

STIs are a different issue from pregnancys which occur within a committed relationship which I think we shouldnt be trying to scare people away from. Really STI education is something that isnt age related. Everyone should be educated about how to avoid these these from an early age and by the time they get older they should already know about those risks. It's not intended as a flippant question but are you referring to older women who have led a sheltered life and then suddenly go mad with promiscuity Shirley Valentine style without any experience of how to use condoms ?

As for Eastenders, I think they've covered (well before the old 9 pm wastershed) perhaps every depressing subject and its consequences except maybe bestiality.

[west'sawake]

Maybe she is, I haven't read on yet, but I don't think so. Either way, too many are pushing contraception who have an agenda and a commercial interest in it, of all the revolutions that seem to have lasted, and I believe will in time be seen to have had the most far reaching and damaging consequences for human relations and society in general, it has to be the sexual revolution, and at its heart is the dualistic approach to the human person, damaging men and women. I also believe the Church completely failed to educate men on the real meaning of sacrifical love and that a woman's dignity was not upheld in an itch being satisfied on demand. Ephesisans has never really being understood as mutual and total self giving, show me no sacrifice and there is no depth.

[Sailor]

Maybe she is, I haven't read on yet, but I don't think so. Either way, too many are pushing contraception who have an agenda and a commercial interest in it, of all the revolutions that seem to have lasted, and I believe will in time be seen to have had the most far reaching and damaging consequences for human relations and society in general, it has to be the sexual revolution, and at its heart is the dualistic approach to the human person, damaging men and women. I also believe the Church completely failed to educate men on the real meaning of sacrifical love and that a woman's dignity was not upheld in an itch being satisfied on demand. Ephesisans has never really being understood as mutual and total self giving, show me no sacrifice and there is no depth.

This is a political forum - not a religious one

[Cato]

...it has to be the sexual revolution, and at its heart is the dualistic approach to the human person, damaging men and women.

Would you mind unpacking that statement a little for me? Thanks.

(I ask because I'm interested - this is not the start of an attack or anything.)

[west'sawake]

Now what have I landed myself in. O.K. here goes, many view the family as a bastion of oppression, marxists and deconstructionists, especially, their influence in politics and education in Europe has been dominant post WW11 and not as many believe, the Church or Churches,

These revolutionaries argue that real liberation means freeing men women and children from such traditional bonds or servitude, and thus loath anything that opposes their 'truth', be it: natural law theory, religion, denominational education, they are as doctrinaire as any Church; radical feminists especially see the 'traditional' family as patriarchical and enslaving, trouble is, this view of liberation is one based purely on function or utiliarianism; the bonds of self sacrifice, of love, of gender specific roles are seen as imprisoning and a form of patriarchal inculturation, only by deconstructing and dissolving those bonds can the individual familiy dependants become autonomous and capalbe of self realisation, traditional sexual morality and religious values get in the way and need to eradicated, and the surest way to do that is to make sex purely functional and recreational, to detach the biological pleasureable aspect from the psychological and spiritual, to split in two the human being, (dualism). to reject and compartmentalise the fertility aspect, to isolate it and treat it with suspicion as if an infection to be avoided, but to do it in a way that has nothing sacrifical as a marker of love, rather to smother it, and take the shortest route, pop a pill or wear a condom is taking a dualistic, or splitting approach to a person, and that is not how we are made, we are unity of body, soul, heart, mind, spirit, emotions, all.

Deconstructing the family, ridding society of gender roles, be they male or female, means ending a process that strove towards virtue, self sacrifice, and reliance on each other, to build within the family and extended family, social wealth and social capital, now such roles are expected of and handed over to the State, the State becomes the carer, the autonomous units within the family become less and less 'reared' and 'cared' for by any full time parent. Ironically pro natal policies, of cradle to grave welfare of generous child benefit, instead of encouraging replacement levels of population, eventually denude and weaken the social capital, less children not more are born, at its root is the sexual revolution and its facilitator, immediate and widespread contraception.

This really has resulted in the bonds of virtue and self restraint being dissolved and that which we thought imprisoned us, unconquerable fertility, gone. Roger Scruton put it well, we were liberated with an apprehensive gulp and now know why; we see the consequences for us all, very few are not affected by it, the relationships that fail, the marriages that break down, the crisis pregancies, the rocketing STIs, the feral children, the urban wastelands, all delivered courtesy of the culture that peddled sexual nirvana, welfare instead of community and extended family, the deconstruction of the family, the Marxist nirvana that Communism itself could not achive, is now nearly among us and it has come about primarily because of the sexual revolution.

Since sex used to mean for marraige only, at least in the sense of social norms and cultual expectations, once contraception became culturally dominant, marriage was no longer necessary, marriage and sex were no longer closely synonymous, marriage became but a shell institution and the family whatever its form became contracted out and life itself became cheapened since the contraceptive mentality eventually leads to an abortion mentality, abortion being back up contaception since most abortions now are not for the extraneous hard cases but rather for social reasons.

What followed had an inevitable logic to it, sex with whom we want, whenever we want, with the opposite or same sex, with a single or a swinger, with enhancements, with pornography, whatever, can we even be surprised that paedophilia is increasing, is not our culture with the sexualisation of children at a younger and younger age be it in music, pop lyrics , fashions, explicit value free sex ed, vaccines at a 11, not a culture of vicarious paedophilia? All this is why we should be apprehensive, all this is our sexual liberation.

Now wait for the usual rush in of exceptions, or clutching of straws from some here, yes sexual immorality was always with us, prostitution, pornography, STIs etc, yes many women were abused, were shamefully tied metaphorically and in reality to the the home, because husbands did not love as Christ wanted them to love. Yes many shameful and degrading things happened even during times of conventional sexual morality but no way near the degree it is happening now. Also, who among us does not struggle? Sadly too many now don't even think they should struggle, there is no shame, it all has to be let hang out, otherwise we are repressed, virtue is such an old fashioned word, restraint is so limiting, nah we'd rather be prisoners of the revolution, we'd rather indulbe and satiate ourselves. Let no one tell me this is not the age of excess, be it money, or sex, be it Clinton's unique use for a cigar or Wall st piggin out on the tax payer, and no this is not about puritanism or prudishness, as Dante reminded us Purgatory was full of those, rather it is about the truth that with love comes responsiblity, and yes the cross, even a little one, one we just won't carry.

With the cross came hope, came life after death, came the proof of real love, those who have grasped this in a different way are the real saviours of culture, of a culture of love, be it Buddha with his eightfold path, knowing passion can be liberating and imprisoning, the latter if not mastered, Jesus with redemptive love, Gandhi with the cross of
passive resistance, confucius, and so on, how arrogant of this century to think that those who went before us were not liberated, we are the prisoners not them.

I believe though that this particular revolution like all revolutions has arrived at a stage where it is no longer self sustaining because of the damage done.

The fact is the State is no a person, it cannot love, it cannot rear, and no matter how the family is deconstructed, how the units (children or parents) are prepared for only a functional approach to society, something deep within us, because we are not dualistic but whole, is dulled, akin to being thinned out and not really visible to each other at all, in the end to use that cliche all we need is love, contraception has not delivered it, nor will the State. The sexual revolution has left society satiated, drained and seriously damaged, as the impersonal, all invasive, all caring State, spreads its tentacles out more and more, but after winter comes spring, the spark is within us, truth will be known again, and the monster slayed, Love really does conquer all.

[femmefatale]

Now what have I landed myself in. O.K. here goes, many view the family as a bastion of oppression, marxists and deconstructionists, especially, their influence in politics and education has been dominant post WW11 and not as many believe the Church.

These revolutionaries argue that real liberation means freeing men women and children from such bonds, an thus loath anything that opposes that their 'truth', be it natural law theory, religion, especially denominational education, they are as doctrinaire as any Church, radical feminists especially see the 'traditional' family as patriarchical and enslaving, trouble is, this view of liberation is one based purely on function or utiliarianism; the bonds of self sacrifice, of love, of gender specific roles are seen as imprisoning and a form of patriarchal inculturation, only by deconstructing
and dissolving those bonds can the individual familiy dependants become autonomous, traditional sexual morality and religous values are thus a problem to be solved, and the surest way to do that is to make sex purely functional and recreational, to detach the biological pleasureable aspect from the psychological and spiritual, to split in two the human being, to reject and compartmentalise the fertility aspect, to isolate it and treat it with suspicion as if an infection to be avoided, but to do it in a way that has nothing sacrifical as a marker of love, rather to smother it, and take the shortest route, pop a pill or wear a condom is taking a dualistic, or splitting approach to a person, and that is not how we are made, we are unity of body, soul, heart, mind, spirit, emotions, all.

Deconstructing the family, ridding society of gender roles, be they male or female, that were to strive towards virtue, self sacrifice, and reliance on each other, to build within the family and extended family social wealth and social capital meant giving the roles over to the State, the State becomes the carer, the autonomous units within the family become less and less 'reared' and 'cared' for by any full time parent. Ironically pro natal policies, of cradle to grave welfare of generous child benefit, instead of encouraging replacement levels of population, eventually denude and weaken the social capital, less children not more are born, at its root is the sexuaa revolution and its facilitator immediate and widespread contraception since the bonds of virtue and self restraint are dissolved and that which we thought imprisoned us is gone, but Like Roger Scruton put it, we were liberated with an apprehensive gulp and now know why; we see the consequences for us all, very few are not affected by it, the relationships that fail, the marriages that break down, the crisis pregancies, the rocketing STIs, the feral children, the uran wastelands, all delivered courtesy of the culture that peddled sexual nirvana, welfare instead of community and extended family, the deconstruction of the family, the Marxist nirvana that Communism itself could not achive, is now nearly among us and it has come about because of the sexual revolution.

Since sex used to mean for marraige only, at least in the sense of social norms and
cultual expectations, once contraception became culturally dominant, marriage as no longer necessary, it became but a shell institution and the family whatever its form became contracted out and life itself becomes cheapened since the contraceptive mentality eventually leads to an abortion mentality, abortion being back up contaception since most abortions now are not for the extraneous hard cases but rather for social reasons. Sex with whom we want, whenever we want, with the opposite or same sex, with a single or a swinger, with enhancements, with pornography, whatever, can we even be surprised that paedophilia is increasing, is not our culture with the sexualisation of children at a younger and younger age be it in music, pop lyrics , fashions, explicit value free sex ed, vaccines at a 11, all this is why we shouldbe apprehensive, all this is our sexual liberation.

Now wait for the usual rush in of exceptions, or clutching of straws from some here, yes sexual immorality was always with us, prostitution, pornography, STIs etc, etc, of course, who among us does not struggle, sadly too many now don't even think they should struggle, there is no shame, it all has to be let hang out, otherwise we are repressed, virtue is such an old fashioned word, restraint is so limiting, nah we'd asther be prisoner of the revolution, let no one tell me this is not the age of excess, be it money, or sex, be it Clinton's unique use for a cigar or Wall st piggin out on the tax payer, and no this is not about puritanism or prudishness, as Dante reminded us Purgatory was full of those, rather it is about the truth that with love comes responsiblity, and yes the cross, even a little one that we just won't carry.
With the cross came hope, came life after death, came the proof of real love, those who have grasped this in a different way are the real saviours of culture, of a culture of love, be it Buddha with his eightfold path, kwowing passion can be liberating and imprisoning, the latter if not mastered, Jesus with redemptive love, Gandhi with the cross of passive resistance, confucius, and so on, how arrogant of this century to think that those who went before us were not liberated.


I believe though that this particular revolution like all revolutions arrives at a stage where it is no longer self sustaining becasue of the damage done.

The fact is the State is no a person, it cannot love, it cannot rear, and no matter how the family is deconstructed, how the units (children or parents) are prepared for only a functional approach to society, something deep within us, because we are not dualistic but whole, is dulled, akin to being thinned out and not really visible to each other at all, in the end to use that cliche all we need is love, contraception has not delivered it, nor will the State. The sexual revolution has left society satiated, drained and seriously damaged, nor will the State, as its tentacles spread out more and more.

I, personally, agree with a lot of what you say. However, I think the attacks on socialism/statism are unjustified. If anything, capitalism has driven the dehumanization of love, sex, the body, the person.

[west'sawake]

I, personally, agree with a lot of what you say. However, I think the attacks on socialism/statism are unjustified. If anything, capitalism has driven the dehumanization of love, sex, the body, the person.

Socialism sees religion and traditional morality as something that has to be destroyed if the social State is to win, Marx saw the family, private property and religion as the bulwarks against the State, it is the same post Marxists brainwashed by the Frankford school who push the emotional buttons telling us we need a legally enforced charter on the rights of the child, again the State is to be the final arbiter of those rights, again the family is deconstructed into progentors and offspring. Chilling was it not that terms like mother, father, son, daughther, parents, are used less and less, chillling is it not that education programmes such as SPHE, emasculating masculinity now dominate many schools.


RE Capitalism I agree with you there too in the sense that it sees the social market as another opportunity to increase consumption of unnecessary things, children are targetted as consumers at a younger and younger age, often using sexual images, think of Bratz.

Fact is the post marxists and the capitalists all share the same material and limited vision of mankind, a consumption and function one. All view the State as an ally
as families become broken down into individual consumers of private and public services in a cancerous symbiosis that will eventually destroy the body politic, and therein lies the hope, in the long term it is not sustainable

[femmefatale]

Socialism sees religion and traditional morality as something that has to be destroyed if the social State is to win, Marx saw the family, private property and religion as the bulwarks against the State, it is the same post Marxists brainwashed by the Frankford school who push the emotional buttons telling us we need a legally enforced charter on the rights of the child, again the State is to be the final arbiter of those rights, again the family is deconstructed into progentors and offspring. Chilling was it not that terms like mother, father, son, daughther, parents, are used less and less, chillling is it not that education programmes such as SPHE, emasculating masculinity now dominate many schools.


RE Capitalism I agree with you there too in the sense that it sees the social market as another opportunity to increase consumption of unnecessary things, children are targetted as consumers at a younger and younger age, often using sexual images, think of Bratz.

Fact is the post marxists and the capitalists all share the same material and limited vision of mankind, a consumption and function one. All view the State as an ally
as families become broken down into individual consumers of private and public services in a cancerous symbiosis that will eventually destroy the body politic, and therein lies the hope, in the long term it is not sustainable

There is a truth and beauty to Catholic sexual morality. The abuse of children makes it look like a joke.

[west'sawake]

There is a truth and beauty to Catholic sexual morality. The abuse of children makes it look like a joke.

I agree completely with you, there can be nothing more disordered, ugly and evil than the abuse of the innocents.