[BikerNYC]

Freedom always leads to things that many people would prefer not to have around. And, yes, freedom does have its risks. That is why freedom is stifled in so many parts of the world, so as to eliminate that which many find offensive and to avoid whatever risks that are attending.

One hundred years ago we couldn't even have this discussion amongst polite society, since it touched upon such vulgar and salacious topics. There was no law, per se, that deprived people of the opportunity to discuss these things amongst themselves; it simply wasn't done. And, admittedly, there was a risk that the mere speaking of such things would awaken in people the desire to experiement and to experience, exactly, what people were talking about.

Now, certainly, those who cared not to partake of such discussion should have been allowered to excuse themselves from the room; that would be fair. But I prefer -- and I guess that's what it is, a preference -- to live in a society that allows people to take risks, to live the way they believe is best for them (subject to a few commonly agreed upon limitations that are always changing), than to feel a social pressure to hide away what would make them happy.

Yes, freedom can be ugly, sickening, disease-ridden, it can lead to all sorts of behaviors that many find objectionable, it can be obscene and taken to extremes, it can also be used to maintain older conventions and to express whatever feelings one might have on any subject...but I wouldn't have it any other way.

[Jim Scott]

Yes, freedom can be ugly, sickening, disease-ridden, it can lead to all sorts of behaviors that many find objectionable, it can be obscene and taken to extremes, it can also be used to maintain older conventions and to express whatever feelings one might have on any subject...but I wouldn't have it any other way.

Freedom to indulge our baser instincts without the slightest concern about the results of those excesses is not pretty and I don't find that equating 'freedom' with hedonism a compelling argument but a society gets what it wants and we opted for the Playboy mentality writ large and so, we have it.

I'm well aware that many see this widespread hedonistic behavior as a splendid expression of personal freedom. I do not. I see it as an abuse of freedom in order to excuse crass sexual indulgence and to even mock sexual virtue as 'old-fashioned' and of course to utter the well-worn cry; 'You can't shove your morality down my throat', as if the social expectation of mere circumspect behavior was some terrible oppressive imposition to bear.

I have no desire to codify sexual behavior and that is not the real point. Western society set norms for sexual behavior, including marriage expectations, based on experience over many centuries. Some took them to extremes, of course, but American society was never a Taliban society as some like to hint at. Most Americans agreed with the societial norms of forty or so years ago and were glad to have them in place, as they prevented much of the grief - physical and emotional - we see now as a matter of consequence following the abandonment of sexual mores by most, especially the young.

We cannot turn back the clock, as it were. I believe that eventually the obvious shallowness and bitter fruit of sexual freedom taken to the extremes, as it has in America, will cause society to recede from the edge and re-establish some sensible norms that most of our people can agree to, without feeling some precious freedom has been oppressed. Maybe not. Society is fluid, changing with each generation. The base instincts will always be there and unleashing them in the name of freedom may eventually be seen as the mistake it was. Only time will tell us that and most of us, unfortunately, will not be here to witness that change, should it ever come. Meanwhile, the STD's, the abortions, the fatherless children and the abandoned mothers will continue, and the youth of our nation will continue to rush headlong into meaningless and shallow realtionships that usually end in nothing. Marriage withers, extreme sexual expressions grow and thrive and we call it freedom, and celebrate the consequences in order to justify them.

Well, I contend that the 'sexual freedom emperor' indeed has no clothes on and eventually we'll simply admit it and return to a more sensible and less harmful view of what sexual freedom means beyond indulging in sex anywhere, anytime, with almost anyone, at a whim, and calling it a 'relationship'. Chasity, male and female, and a certain value on it will be seen as a positive attribute, not a hurdle to be jumped to win a prize. Respect for the opposite sex as a fully human being, not simply a sexual object, will return. Marriage will be honored beyond the wedding day. Sex will be seen as a special gift of intimacy sincere, committed, loving people give to each other, hopefully in marriage only, not simply a recreational pastime used to imitate true intimacy. One can hope.