Do you a deal Belly.

I'll take the sex, you have the religion. That's fair isn't it?

Dear runner,

Please forgive my previous post to you.
It was a dummy spit - and I should not
have posted what I did to you. I apologise
as I didn't mean it. I know that you mean well
deep down. Mea Culpa.

The churches attitudes to sex in earlier centuries was probably based on the societal practicalities of those times and then became a tradition enshrined in religious doctrine.

With no effective contraception and women in those times often having 10 or more children, the society or rulers probably decided that it was in the best interests of society to make the man who fathered the children responsible for feeding them etc. Otherwise the burden for abandoned wives and children would have been placed on the society as a whole. The mother too might have just decided it was all too much and just left her children on the orphanage doorstep and disappeared.
Therefore, it made sense from a societal perspective to strictly enforce the having of sex and as a consequence children within a legally binding agreement called marriage.

For a man to put so much into providing for so many children he would have needed absolute assurance that they were his and so the woman’s womb in effect became the sole possession of her husband under this legal marriage agreement.

To make sure women stuck to this arrangement women having any kind of sexual freedom was frowned upon. Hence the double standard of morality imposed on women as opposed to men.

The male church leaders quickly realised that not allowing contraception was highly beneficial to the power of the church(numbers)and also monetary ,the wealth that pours into the coffers of the church from its followers.(and pays the wages of the imams and priests) also increases the Money paid to the priest for weddings, funerals etc and for teaching in religious schools.

This is the same reason the muslim leaders do not allow contraception today(power and money), although the world has had the pill for around 40years or so. Plus the men in those countries have been conditioned to believe that women are somehow less human than they are and inferior.

In the West we worry about date rape, in the muslim countries they have State Rape, in the form of child brides and forced marriages.

Sometime I wonder what it is that makes some people adore the image of a man being tortured to death but see the image of a naked child "obscene".

Then I remember that the it's the same people who teach modesty, courtesy and generosity but live in depravity, rudeness, and greed.

If women want to share the blame for this sort of society then they should be entitled to. Wisdom and mercy aren't biological concepts and neither is it an excuse for oppression.

Men have done a pretty lousy job of it so far. Maybe a change is overdue.

Belly
<My interest, have to ask we refrain from generalized judgments, came about after hearing an ex Muslim lady. She spoke of 9 year old Brides.>

I heard the ex muslim lady speak about the 9year old brides proposed
by the new Muslim Brotherhood too. She referred to it as the New Muslim Winter as opposed to the New Muslim Spring that was promised.

It was a brilliant and highly intelligent speech, I was surfing through the TV channels and there she was apparently speaking to an audience in Melbourne somewhere. I tried to find the speech on the internet I was so impressed with her words but I couldn't find it.

Lexi

No need to apologise and thanks anyway. I have been trying to analyse my post and I can see that it came across as a 'sermon'. My apologies. I will attempt not to preach to you or anyone else. I would be lying to myself and my Maker if I did not try and interpet what I believe God thinks and says. The subject is 'sex and religion'. My views do seem narrow minded to many however that does not make them wrong in themselves. A broad mind does not automatically mean a virtous mind.