Posted on 11/18/2023 1:22:37 AM PST by spirited irish
History is full of examples of societies that tamper with God’s design for marriage, sex, and the family. It’s no coincidence that en vogue progressive ideas today, ideas with distinct roots in cultural Marxism, also decry marriage and the family as oppressive institutions that should be reimagined and sexual morality as outdated and even harmful.
The Soviet Union was well known for rejecting so-called “bourgeois” morality in ways that led to rejecting reality. Economically this meant squashing human self-interest in favor of state control. So, basic modern commodities like cars and plumbing could take years for the average Russian to secure. Marxist-inspired agricultural science rejected “Western” science and led to the deaths of millions as crops were planted in the dead of winter, too close together, and without pesticides in the mistaken belief that they could be “educated” to take on more beneficial traits.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotandliberty.com ...
ping
Monogamy was introduced to the Jewish people by the Romans. Romans were pagans at the time.
Romans were monogamous before Christianity.
Monogamy's spread in the West had something to do with the influence of Christianity, but not as much as you might expect. Mainstream Christianity has always endorsed and enforced monogamy, and as Christianity spread across Europe in the centuries following the fall of Rome, monogamy spread along with it. However, Christianity's condemnation of polygyny has never been as straightforward as anti-polygyny church leaders would have preferred, because no Biblical passages explicitly prohibit plural marriage.
The case for an automatic association between Christianity and monogamy is weakened further by the fact that socially imposed monogamy was first established in ancient Greece and Rome, centuries before Christianity even existed. Greco-Roman laws prohibited any man from having more than one official wife at a time.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/darwin-eternity/201109/why-we-think-monogamy-is-normal
The sexual revolution in the West was of great benefit to those guys who were already good at snagging the gals. The rest of us less charming types fared little or no better.
You can blame it on numerous factors, including the the disciples of Antonio Gramsci, who adapted Marxism from a class to a cultural war, and the liberal undermining of the mainline Protestant denominations in the early 20th Century and the post-Vatican II Catholic Church decades later. You even hear posters on FR blaming Republican defeat on abortion and advising abandonment of the moral front.
Economic freedom and national defense are secondary to restoring the moral order.
https://breakpoint.org/lessons-from-the-soviets-about-sexual-morality/
Not your blog and not the site you credit.
Therefore, it was really the plan adopted by pagans, not God…
Shocker - Christianity was influenced by the Romans!
We used to correctly call Communism “Godless,” thus “In God we trust” on the coinage starting 1956.
Sadly, we let the “intellectuals” and atheists take over, and instead of labeling communism what it is: man over God, we get crap like this from a mainstream high school textbook:
German philosopher Karl Marx saw communism
as the end result of an essential
historical process. Russian revolutionary
Vladimir Lenin built on Marx’s theories and
sought ways of applying those theories.
Ultimately, however, Lenin’s communist
state—the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR)—became a one-party, totalitarian
system.
Our children are thus taught that communism was, rather than imperfect and Godless, inherently good but implemented imperfectly.
As to the topic of this thread: the sexual revolution, be under the Marxists or in the 1950s/60s American cultural wars, is man placing himself over God. Never works out well for the one who places himself above God...
I agree with your premises and conclusions. Marx did more than hate our Lord, he envied Him. So did most of the revolutionaries from that time. So it was never the case that our Lord did not exist but rather the envious hate-fueled revolutionaries did not want Him to exist.
A great book...”Women, the State, and Revolution” by Wendy Goldmann...discusses the post Russian revolution communist positions on the new family in Russia. The social theories are reminiscent of today’s delusional, fevered sociological reasonings and manifestos.
What we are witnessing is similar ideas foisted on us by young, crazed, inexperienced, and ultimately evil academics using the authority of our constitutional laws while they break those laws to achieve political control.
Religious weddings were banned in Soviet Union (well, you could have church wedding, but you have to have civilian first).
Abortion was (and still is) pretty much the only family planning method.
All kind of sex practices were made legal, including incest.
After WWII, when there were few men left and many women could not find a mate, Soviets instituted a law that out of wedlock father is not at all responsible for his children.
Basically free sex for all the leftover men. (That was abolisher some twenty years later.)
True. Pagan temple prostitution was the norm back then all over the Roman Empire and extending beyond it. The Temple of Aphrodite(Venus)at Corinth was a major site so St Paul’s warnings against “fornication” had special meaning.
King James Bible 1 Timothy 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
How did they feel about fornication, and adultery?
Adultery was made a crime, for which citizen-women could be punished by divorce, fines and demotion in social status; men's sexual activity was adultery only if committed with a married citizen-woman. Families were also offered financial incentives to have as many children as possible.
WE are the (neo) Marxists now.
Amen
You mean as regards the number of wives. while,
in Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe, Brundage writes that “Romans generally tolerated a wide variety of sexual practices. Prostitution, concubinage, masturbation, and homosexual relations all carried no social or moral opprobrium” (Brundage 44). In other words, the pre-Christian society of the early Imperial Empire showed little sign of the sexual ascetism and anti-homosexuality that would later arrive with the development of Christianity. Literature from pre-Christian Rome shows a similar indifference towards sexual preference: in Clitophon and Leucippe, a novel read by Romans of the third century, homosexual and heterosexual romantic love appear as absolutely indistinguishable—with the factor of gender treated merely as an accident (Boswell 86). In fact, the existence of literature with homosexual relationships and the indifference with which sexual orientation is treated in it even suggests that same-sex relationships were quite common. In any case, both these pieces of evidence reflect a society that was comfortable with various expressions of sexuality and homosexual relationships. However, perhaps the most concrete evidence of the early Roman Empire’s tolerance of homosexuality comes from the written law. In the early Empire, same-sex relations were definitely legal; institutionalized same-sex relationships were actually becoming more common just as long-term, different-sex marriages were growing in popularity. - https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1074&context=younghistorians
Pederasty was so common in Roman society and so many young boys were being pursued that rules had to be put in place to protect the freeborn roman... -https://www.ipl.org/essay/Pederasty-The-Role-Of-Masculinity-In-Ancient-FCJHAE7UZV
The Roman view of pederasty was arguably the loosest. Whereas the Samurai and the Greeks viewed it as a spiritual or educational union, the Romans simply engaged in it as a social pastime. In Ancient Rome, it was actually socially normal for older men to prefer younger boys over young women. However, sodomy was still frowned upon, so the only young men available to become sexual partners were slaves, whose rights were unprotected. Pederasty was common practice in the Roman Empire until the rise of Christianity, which, as it did in Greek culture, put a stop to the practice of sodomy by condemning homosexuality. - https://allthatsinteresting.com/pederasty/2
Immorality as it is defined in a modern context has no Roman equivalent... The Roman obsession with appearances and upholding mos maiorum creates a seeming dichot- omy between the behavior expect- ed from those in an honor-shame culture and the general fixation on personal indulgence and fulfillment. Immorality was a foreign concept to the ancient Romans; they were concerned with maintaining the ap- pearance of propriety rather than with denying themselves sexual gratification and the exploration of vices. Excessive self-indulgence was frowned upon as not exemplifying the true characteristics of the proper Roman. Sexual activities were regulated by the mos maiorum and were considered to be ordinary aspects of Roman society. Acts that were daily behaviors for the Romans could be considered unusual, im- moral, or even obscene in a different cultural framework.
From Romulus to Augustus adultery occurred and was considered to be the extramarital relationship by or with married women. According to the law of this period, the unfaithful wife's adultery was always a crime, but the husband's only if committed with a married woman. The unfaithful wife faced prosecution with severe punishment, such as death and exile. She also faced financial penalties related to the dowry. If death or exile was too grave she was divorced, faced infamia or lost certain of her limited rights. In early law she was privately judged by a family council. By the time of August she was prosecuted in a public criminal court. The unfaithful husband escaped all of this. - http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1021-545X2015000200004
Related to this, one could make substantial list of the negative effects of contraception, from STI’s and their cost, to spoiled, easily offended, intolerant students, to suicide to loss of culture and decline of craftsmen, soldiers, character and leadership. Etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.