The Worst Sin or Universal Scapegoat?

I wonder why an idea which seems so straightforward in one’s own mind, should become so complicated when an attempt is made to write it down? Possibly, in my case, it is because my private thoughts don’t have to be in a rational order, or don’t have to be linked to create a cohesive whole. Whereas, when written down, it is necessary to create order out of the chaos, to create a natural progression of ideas so that the reader can follow easily and understand fully the line of thought. In my own mind many ideas and convictions do not need referencing, as I, of course, already know the references. In trying to write this I have found the hardest part is in not assuming that the Reader is starting from the same principles and assumptions as myself. So please forgive me if, in places, I am presumptive, or if the flow of thought is not as clear-cut as it should be.

Surfing the net at the local library, I am able to access details on how to construct various incendiary devices, the websites of various political extremists and practically any other subversive site imaginable, but try to access anything with the dreaded word ‘SEX’ attached and lights flash, bells ring etc etc (well not quite, but ‘Access Denied’ flashes up across the screen). Intrigued by this I looked up ‘pornography’ on Wikipedia (which incidentally is deemed acceptable by the library computers, even when giving detailed descriptions), and was amazed to find that the example of soft core porn was a young lady with no less clothing than the average Page 3 Girl.
This led me to wonder why we have such a pre-occupation with sexually related activity. It may not be to everybody’s taste, but that is hardly reason enough for such hysterical censorship.

We fondly assume that the Victorians were so very prim and prudish but, whereas the laws passed during that time may give some credence to that view, contemporary writings would suggest that in actual fact they were not as repressed as we are today. Today anything ‘natural’ seems to be taboo. However, I do appreciate that some of the seeds of today’s repressive attitudes were sown with the rapid urbanisation of Victorian times which separated people from the ‘natural world’ and also with the rise of Freud and Psychology, as well as with the rise of the Feminist Movement. We now seem to live in a world of ‘experts’, and as a society seem obsessed with labelling and pigeon-holing both people and actions. We seem obsessed with the idea that we have to ‘understand’ everything. Unlike the Victorians, we are no longer tolerant of eccentricity. If anyone deviates from the ‘norm’ it must be because something has happened to them to ‘damage’ them. And in a post-Freudian culture that is usually of a sexual nature, and has happened in childhood.

The more I consider this the angrier I get! I object very strongly to being categorised, and to being told what to believe. I can remember watching the Miss World contests, but now, of course, they are condemned as belittling to women. Why? No-one was forced to take part. Why should a woman not be proud of her body if she wants to be? I can understand women being upset that they were just seen as sex symbols when they were just as intelligent as men, when a woman was denied recognition for her intellect because she was a woman. But surely it is just as narrow-minded and arrogant to deny a woman the right to be proud of her body because she is a woman. Those women who want to be able to compete with men intellectually should be able to do so, but those women who want to show off their bodies, of which they are justifiably proud, should also have the right to do so. Feminists tell us that a woman has the right to have control over her own body, and I am in one hundred per cent agreement. If they want to show off their bodies in skimpy swim suits, then that is their undeniable right. Similarly if a woman wants to become a prostitute, to use what God has given her for her own benefit, that is her undeniable right. Why is it so much worse to use the body for gain, than it is to use the mind?
The suffragettes fought for female emancipation from male dominance, in essence for freedom to act as they wanted, but now the feminist movement seems to feel itself justified in dictating to everyone else. As far as I can see the main objection to pornography seems to come from vociferous feminists, who seem to consider that they have been endowed with a God-given right to dictate to women how they should live their lives.

And as for God …. I wouldn’t dare to put words into His mouth …. However, many people would, and indeed do, saying that He considers pornography an abomination.

Adam and Eve fell from Grace ….. hence the original Sin, which has somehow become equated with Sex. I’m not too sure how. Eve’s sin was in disobedience and in wanting knowledge (ate of the Tree of Knowledge). She wanted to become as God. God’s anger was not that Adam and Eve were naked, but that they were ashamed of their nakedness. Before that sex was pure and became defiled, but it was not just SEX that changed after the Fall. The Devil got his foothold and wormed his way into every aspect of human life. Sex was just one part of that, so why has it become the scapegoat? Referencing Wikipedia again, the Roman Catholic Church accuses pornography of leading us into a world of fantasy (why is that such a sin??) and the Protestants seem to hang their argument on Jesus’ comments on the Commandment ‘Do not commit adultery’. I found this an intriguing argument, as taken in context of the rest of the Gospels, I read this rather differently.
The only group of people who came under Christ’s direct condemnation were the Pharisees and Sadducees, those who imposed the Law. They made impossible burdens for man to bear through their interpretation of the laws and ordinances, but did not lift a finger to try to help them. They administered the word of the law, but not the spirit. Similarly as in ‘he who is without sin, cast the first stone’, Christ is saying that very few, if any, are without sin as adultery covers even the casual glance! The only ‘Man’ to be born without original sin, Christ alone was entitled to cast the first stone, but he did not. I am NOT saying that Christ was telling us to commit adultery, but rather that he understood our weaknesses and viewed it in context of our humanity. He kept a sense of proportion which few since have. It is also totally erroneous to quote passages from the Bible outside of the context of the rest of the Gospels. The Bible condemns usury (yet Banks are not censored) and Christ drove the money lenders out of the Temple (a clear case of flagellation?) The Bible says that farmers are to leave headlands on the fields, for the birds of the air and the beasts of the field, and to leave the gleanings for the poor. When did you last see this quoted, and how many headlands do you see left today, with ploughing right up to the hedges, where indeed there are any hedges left?
I suspect that it has been very convenient to use Sex as a scapegoat in order to take attention away from other ‘sins’ which where much more profitable for the world (and the Church Militant) at large.

Wikipedia informs us that pornography wasn’t a problem in Jesus’ time which was why he didn’t condemn it! The Jewish authorities were helped considerably in being able to condemn Jesus, and to arrange for his crucifixion, because of the undesirable company he kept. Mary Magdalene was one of only three of his followers who stayed with Him to the bitter end, one of the others being His Mother. It was to Mary Magdalene that Christ first appeared after the crucifixion. Mary Magdalene the prostitute, of whom Christ said much would be forgiven because she had loved much.
Is it also feasible to assume then that those who love little will be forgiven little?

So why are we so obsessed with seeing sex as the ultimate sin/wickedness?
We live in a world of such cruelty and suffering, surely our energies could be better used? Or is it true that if we rail against pornography, we convince ourselves that we are good people, so we can be forgiven our other sins? A convenient smoke screen?

We live in a world of plenty yet a third of that world lives in abject poverty. NOT inevitable as we would like to convince ourselves, just a little bit inconvenient if we are to seriously do anything about it. ‘Do unto others as you would be done by’.
We live in a world where systematic torture is used, even by the ‘civilised’ countries of the First World, all under the pretext of national security. Do we really have no say in this when we live in a democracy?
We live in a world where abortion has become an acceptable fact of life.
We live in a world where animals undergo horrific and torturous journeys of thousands of miles without proper food or water, arriving at their destination cut, torn, broken limbed to be slaughtered in unacceptable conditions. Despite so called EU legislation. But of course, it would not be right of elected MEPs to uphold the law, as it might interfere with free trade – and how many times has that excuse been used?
We live in a world where ‘vermin’ are controlled by glue traps, leaving body parts behind as they try to escape a slow agonising death of starvation, by local councils. But all within government guidelines, so that is perfectly acceptable.
Such is pornography of the worst kind. It is legal, acceptable, inevitable, and most of all we can ignore it. More than that it causes suffering to the weakest of the weak, the poorest of the poor.

And yet, as a consenting adult, despite all the above, the powers that be think that my morals should be protected by denying access to any site tagged SEX. Not Murder, Rape, Exploitation or Usury, but Sex, Pornography, in case I should become morally bankrupt.

I don’t think so; I just have to read the news instead.

And to try to live by Christ’s commandment:

To love one another.


And to those who are morally superior, remember His advice to that most upright of young men, who had obeyed all the commandments, laws, ordinances to the letter, that he should sell all he had and give to the poor. Then he should enter the kingdom of Heaven.