I think there may have been a day when "fundamentalist" people were very angry about Sex Ed. I have read somewhere that the debate raged about what can or cannot be taught to our children in the way of sex and I know that it is still a somewhat contested issue. Unfortunately the newest issue of Teaching Tolerance Spring 2007 makes painstakingly clear that the debate over Sex Ed has become much, much, deeper.I had before this day been unaware that such a magazine existed as Teaching Tolerance but have come to find that they are indeed a nice, glossy covered, well designed, widely read magazine. After all, Emmaus Bible College of all places has a subscription, they must be big if thats the case because we don't get secular magazines unless they are front and center (Time, Newsweek, etc...) So I thought since I haven't blogged in over a month I would put my feelers out and find what there was to think about and critique.
I didn't have to look very far.
As I said, in this quarter's issue of said magazine, Carrie Kilman writes "This is Why We Need a GSA", an article promising tolereance by allowing the Homosexual middle schooler a safe environment.
Now I am all for middle schoolers not being bullied. I don't think that people who have "alternative" sexual views should be hated and hate is not a Christian virtue, homosexuals need to be loved by Christians no doubt (I do feel that homosexuality should be condemned and that those participating in homosexuality face an eternal judgment but more on that later), but homosexual middle schoolers? Myabe I am misjudging Miss Kilman and Teaching Tolerance, but does it seem like maybe bullying isn't the agenda here? If bullying were the agenda why on earth doesn't she mention the countless nerds and glasses wearing awkward middle schoolers who are bullied every day? Where are the articles about that?
I think that first and foremost one thing should be absolutely and unblushingly be noted: Sex is being changed and emasculated from what it was once even among the secular.
Just take for instance what Miss Kilman says of the spotlighted Wisconsin GSA (GSA stands for Gay Straight Alliance),
Like most GSAs this one is part social, part support, part leadership development. "My stepmom says we're too young to know our sexuality," says Chad. Her comment prompts a round of groans, eye-rolling, and head-shaking. "We're not too young to know how we feel," says Nina. "It doesn't take a certain age to know yourself".
Ok now have I missed something, or did a little seventh grader, a seventh grader who knows zero about sex (apparently GSAs aren't about the mechanics of sex see quote ahead), just completely redefine sex? Yes she did. Even logical, everyday, non-Christian, some even non-conservative, people will tell you that sex and feelings are intertwined. Not only that, but there was once a day when seventh graders blushed to talk about sex, not scoffed at adults as knowing nothing. There are some interesting elements indeed in this article. I think this could be noted well,
That GSAs are about sex is a common misconception, says Juchems, from GSAs for Safe Schools. "When adults say that, we say, 'Actually you're confusing sexual activity with sexual orientation,' he says, 'You can talk about the feelings and identity without talking about the mechanics of sex"
Really? Thats possible? You really believe that curious seventh graders are not going to find out how the mechanics of theie orientation work outside of the GSA? Unbelievable.
It is a sad day, sex is no longer viewed with feeling-"orientation"-and sex act as one whole? Apparently feeling has nothing to do with sex anymore. The clear and present consequences of this is that feeling does have to do with sex and in speaking about sexual orientation you have a presupposition. Is this something that people are plainly turning a blind eye to? When I say "I like carrots, they taste good" I carry at least 12 or more presuppositions in the back of my head at all times, for instance I know that carrots are orange, what they taste like, what their consistency is, that they go well with ranch, what it tastes like to eat a carrot, and so on. Note that I am well aware of how carrots work. Not only this, but when I speak of my feelings for carrots, I have correlated memories to speak of carrots with, or at the very least, I have seen pictures of carrots and from others what carrots taste like.
To say that one can speak of their SEXUAL ORIENTATION and not have the mechanics in mind and presupposed is foolish, plainly, flatly, foolish. It is in fact, impossible.
My prayer is that we may begin to open our eyes and lovingly preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to a world that believes that sexual orientation has nothing to do with sex, and that feelings have nothing to do with sex.
For A Glorious Gospel,
R.D. Thompson
