Sexuality and morality
In the 1960's Herbert Marcuse, Marxist and American University lecturer, helped kick off the sexual revolution after 'identifying' how the change in sexual mores would negatively effect capitalism.

Today, the battle for sexual morals rages on. The currently accepted morals however appear to be do what you like as long as it is between consensting adults. The push to make even more behaviours 'acceptable' .

In the UK, a professor has spoken up saying that sexual affairs between students and teachers can be beneficial. Contrasting this with a recent cast where a female teacher has been convicted of having sex with a 14 year old student. The maximum sentence is up to 15 years in prison for each count, but this teacher got a plea bargain for 3 years house arrest after her defense argued that she was too attractive to put into jail as it would be too dangerous (I'm not kidding!) and that she was going to plead insanity because emotional stress kept her from knowing right from wrong.

In America, parents are unhappy that in sex education class, students are being taught that 'abstinence' includes having sex but following the withdrawal or rhythm methods. Changing the definition of a word is a common tactic in trying to sneak your ideas in without a fight.

Also in America, a preschool teacher has been fired from her catholic school because she has become pregnant outside of marriage. The school felt it was following the guidelines set out in its staff handbook about modelling catholic values. The woman and the New York Civil Liberties Union are suing saying that the firing is discriminatory as only women can get pregnant (And so it is hard to tell when men are having sex outside of marriage). What is even more odd is the comments the teacher has made. She said "I don't understand how a religion that prides itself on forgiving and on valuing life could terminate me because I'm pregnant and choosing to have this baby." Putting aside the difference between forgiveness and consequences, why has she made a big deal out of the comment that she 'is choosing to have this baby'? It sounds as if she wants to be rewarded for not getting an abortion?

Jill Stanek has an article on the disturbing eugenics trend that we have with aborting disabled unborn. According to Jill, 80% of down syndrome unborn are now aborted. Jill asks a pointed question about the idea that we should abort unborn with a lower expected quality of life...

Who decides what qualifies as an abortable handicap? As fewer perfect people are born, will the bar continue to raise? What about deafness? Or Type I Diabetes? What about adult onset disorders like Huntington's Disease?

Indeed. Eugenics is back. It won't be long before people are routinely screening the unborn for desirable traits like hair color, IQ and eye color. Ironically, the people arguing for 'freedom' of reproduction are the ones who are heralding in a loss of individuality in society.
- posted by Alan Grey @ Thursday, November 24, 2005