Date: October 06, 2010 04:08PM
B-KKK-Packer (which, when I see/hear his name always reminds me of 'fudge' for some reason) has raised the controversy to new heights.
Dictating when, where, under what conditions and manner you will and will not have sex has been a goal of many modern religions. Why? Here's my theory:
From the religion's perspective, I don't think it is as important to them that everyone actually live up to the sexual 'morality' they preach but rather that their followers believe that they should live up to it and feel guilty whenever they don't.
When a religion convinces their followers that the religion's edicts need to be followed in this very private and personal area of life that is a fundamental aspect to being human, it indicates that the followers have accepted the religion as their master and there is no area of life wherein the religion's authority doesn't reach. It's the signing on the dotted line of a contract that says, "I accept you as my dictator and substitute for my own conscience."
Any other takes or thoughts on this?