Sex education? No, we’re witnessing the pursuit of ignorance on matters of sexuality

Apr 26, 2016 by

by Phil Lawler, LifeSite:

If you can trace your family tree back far enough, you’ll probably encounter people who had no formal education, owned no books, perhaps couldn’t read and write. But your uneducated ancestors knew what “marriage” meant– which is more than you can say for the typical Ivy League professor today. Your “benighted” ancestors would be both absolutely astonished that the literati of the early 21st century cannot figure out what was so obvious to them, centuries ago, and utterly appalled by the bogus unions that our contemporaries accept as marriages.

(By the way, I am not just thinking only of same-sex unions. I also have in mind the “open” marriages and the deliberately barren unions, the Hollywood-style serial marriages, the Kardashian couplings.)

The point is not that your ancestors would disagree with today’s opinion leaders about the definition of marriage. No; the point is that your ancestors recognized an institution– the lifelong union of a man and a woman– which the fashionable elite no longer recognizes today. You could call that venerable insitution by a different name, but you would not change its nature. Nor can you change the nature of a shack-up, or a sodomite union, or an adulterous affair,  by calling it a “marriage.” You can call a square a “circle,” if you like, but that won’t make it round. It will only make you look foolish– as our generation must look foolish to our saner ancestors.

Read here

 

Related Posts

Tags

Share This