Sex and Marriage

No dihydrogen oxide falling. But I did oversleep a few minutes. Still got to gym on time if a bit frantic and the place was a bit crowded for a two day. As usual the podcasts were diverting but not memorable. Although the Guardian’s primary topic of the statistics of sexual activity was moderately illuminating. But, as always, failed to get to the real nature of humans. I suspect we prevaricate more on sex than anything else, especially to ourselves. Denial or insecurity I suppose.

Along that azimuth, I noted an article [Link] that talked about marriage by starting with a startle bit about the Southron Baptists advocating early marriage. Since Southron Baptists are among the most whackadoodle of the Southron theo-fascists my attention span was focused. The article claims that the church is pushing this because more young people are having congress prior to marriage. If we are to credit the latest English sex survey (covered in the Guardian podcast) the fraction is O(1.0). 

I should comment that I was raised in a Southron Baptist family and am the black sheep in part because I am not. Southron Baptist, that is. Or any other organized religion. 

When I was a kid, the Southron Baptists had pretty much abandoned their predestination origins. In fact, I didn’t find out about that until I studied American history after college. Instead, they were pretty much anti. They were against ethanol, drugs, sex, dancing, homosexuality, …. At least officially. It was also common among the members to indulge in at least one forbidden activity. 

My problem with the Southron Baptists, and almost all organized religion, is that they don’t want to have discussion. They don’t want to discuss, they just want to pronounce. A characteristic they share with the Muslims is an emphasis on – nay, demand for – obedience. And it has to be blind obedience. No asking the good questions like why is the deity so insecure that he wants prayer? At least the laudatory stuff that comes across as the most shameless suck-up. Baptists don’t discuss that stuff, at least with the outer circle and since I have never been part of the inner I don’t know if they do or not.

I have given up on testing. At least with religionists. They can’t handle it and are in adamantine denial. For the most part. But most go to the extreme of not discussing the fundamental questions that get paved over with the macadam of ‘holy scripture’. And without the freedom to discuss anything as rational adults, they don’t qualify. At least in my taxonomy. 

I am in favor of marriage. If it’s done right it’s a very constructive symbiosis. All the data indicate that the more mature the participants the higher the probability of success. And nothing is more wasteful than failed marriage except capitalists. 

And I don’t object to religion organizations having some role in formalizing the activity. That formality provides a much needed aspect of inertia, not that any religionist would likely use that idiom. But I do object to their autarchy and rule making. Marriage is hard enough without destructive constraints. Maybe the bogs need them. But I doubt it.

Advertisements