Free Speech, and idiots.

You people who keep using this as an example of when freedom of speech should be restricted please STOP using it!

Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is not an example of using free speech. Free speech is about expressing opinions, sharing ideas, and telling stories.

This "example" is just trouble making. It is the same as setting off an alarm, only using one's voice instead of a device.

Saying "Somebody ought to burn this theater down." is using free speech.

Saying "I'll give you $500 to burn this place down." is conducting business, and the business is a crime.

That said, I remind you all the free speech is usually worth every penny...

.

Freaking out about the end of the world

I don't understand why you Revelationists are always freaking out about these being the "end times."

So, what if it is? What's to be afraid of?

I would think that God told you about all these things so that you wouldn't worry about them as they happen. Like a doctor telling you what to expect during a medical procedure. "These are the things that will happen, and it'll be okay, we're expecting that..."

So, signs of the end times should just be more evidence to you that God knows what he's doing, and has a handle on things.

You do believe that, don't you? That God knows what He's doing?

Then settle down! If you really DO believe in your Bible, as you say you do, there is no point in getting all het up about things. You can't stop things like Gay Marriage, because it's a sign of the end times, and it's inevitable.

If anything, instead of freaking out, you should be feeling pretty smug.

.

The Meaning of Life.

Life is a gift. You are not a body with a soul, you are soul with a body.

Life was given to us for the same reason you give a a gift to a friend. Because you think they will enjoy it, and use it. There is no other purpose or meaning to it.

Don't keep your life in the closet, wear it and use it. See what you can do with it. Taste, smell, see, hear and touch things. Talk to other souls in other bodies. Ride roller coasters, climb up on rocks. Paint pictures.

Every body comes with a slightly different "kit". Find out what your kit is. You might have the Mountain Climber kit, or the Philosopher's kit, or the Mother kit. There are millions of different kits. If you have the Philosopher kit, you will have great difficulty being a Mountain Climber.

The only way to figure out what kit you have is to try things. Some of us know what kit we have from an early age, some of us don't figure it out for a long time.

Figuring out your body's abilities, and developing new skills is fun! Using these abilities to see how much you can do with them is fun, too. Enjoy your life. When the body finally wears out, and we have to go back to wherever it was we came from, we can go to the Person who gave us the life, and say, "That was great! I really enjoyed that life!"

And the Person will smile.

.

Jeffry Leonard harassed by the media: thoughts

The one video clip I watched pissed me off so much, there were so many things wrong with it. It's a great example of the demonizing of pedophiles. He's not a frickkin demon, he' just a nasty old man. Probably a nasty old man who needs watching, but just a nasty old man.

I'm going to start with the thing that pissed me off the most, that no one else seems to be questioning.

"His victims have a life sentence."

Part of what is happening with the demonizing of pedophiles is the weakening of its victims. Yes, being molested can be devastating. Yes, it can be a traumatic experience. It can also screw up one's self image. It can also be put behind one.

There are many people who were abused as children, sexually or not, who have overcome the damage done. They have grown, healed, and moved on with their lives. Now, the media would ask them to go back to being damaged, to satisfy their creation of monsters.

Why should a survivor of sexual abuse come forward, if they are going to be treated as "damaged goods" for the rest of their lives?

In the current climate of fear, it would seem best to shut up about it.

An autonomous adult, competent and forward looking, does not need people coming up to her and saying, "Oh, you poor thing!"

I am not a poor thing. The crimes committed against me are not my identity. The person who committed those crimes is not a demon. He's just a sicko. I would not like to meet him on the street, but I won't run screaming if I do.

.

The molecule dance

Oxygen atoms dance in the atmosphere. They don't really like to dance alone, so you will usually find two dancing together, arm in arm. (O2)

Picture a charming couple, two oxygen atoms, making a molecule. They swirl with the other couples in the atmosphere, and the sun calls the tune. Hotter, faster, up! Up! Cooler, slower, down, down.

They dance happily along, and spot a crowd of other molecules close together. Something interesting is happening! They take a closer look. Suddenly, swoosh! They are swept with the crowd into the dark cabaret of a pair of lungs. They catch a hemoglobin shuttle in the blood stream, and are carried off into the hugest party ever.

Our oxygen atoms get separated at some point, as they investigate the goings on. One helps out in the liver, where gangs of carbohydrate and protein molecules are distributing sun energy into the body. The other joins up for a while with a group of molecules to form an antibody, and fight off a virus gang of party crashers, intent on making trouble.

They dance with many other atoms, and see many things. The slow chess games of calcium atoms in the bones, and the swift, shocking dance of the nervous system. Eventually our two oxygen atoms meet up again. What a wonderful time they have been having. A handsome carbon atom tells them that, if they think this is fun, they ought to try out a plant party. There's a whole different set of adventures there!

So the three of them link arms (CO2) and catch the nearest vein to the lungs. Whoosh! They are back in the atmosphere, off to new adventures.


-------------------

Amazing Ancient Feats

.

Really. I am impressed by "Amazing Feats of the Ancients", but I am not amazed.

People write and talk about things like Stonehenge, the Pyramids, the Mayan Calendar, as if there is something mysterious about their construction. "How did they do this? Where did they get their information?"

There's nothing amazing about any of it. It's impressive, but not amazing.

First, feats of construction:

The only people who are amazed live in industrialized parts of the world. They have forgotten just how much can be done with plain brute force. They also underestimate how strong people used to be.

The people who built the Pyramids, and who raised the stones at Stonehenge, did physical labor all their lives. They not only had the muscle and bone, they had the physical knowledge of how to use it efficiently. You can meet people like that today. Here in New Mexico, you can go to the Pueblos, and meet people who have done traditional farming or herding all their lives. They are like living rocks. They can snatch a fleeing 200 pound sheep with one hand and stop it short. They can pick up 50 pound bales of hay and toss them around like nothing. And they can do this ALL DAY.

Get a bunch of well built people like this together, and you don't need mysterious forces to raise great hunks of stone. Add one person with some ideas on how to focus the energy of a group of people and you get Chichen Itza.

Astronomical Feats:

Some people are amazed by the accuracy of ancient calendars and astronomical information. These calendars are all produced by agrarian cultures who depended for their lives on accurate predictions of the seasons. They were motivated to have accurate calendars.

What does it take to have an accurate calendar? Careful observation and recording. That's all. These people had unpolluted skies, undimmed by artificial lights. It does not take a telescope to observe such skies.

Why should one be amazed, then that these people had accurate calendars?

I think these attitudes are based in the idea that "primitive" cultures are stupid.

Just because they did not have the advantage of hundreds, or thousands of years of previous research and design, does not mean they were stupid.

As I said, I am impressed, but not amazed.
.
.

I am sometimes asked, "Do you believe in Evolution, or in Creation?"

"Evolution" is usually meant, in the question, to mean that the universe just happened, and is how it is now purely by chance.

"Creation" is usually meant to mean that God made everything, and nothing happens by chance.

That's why people see a conflict. There are many people who see no conflict. God made everything, and the process of evolution is just how he made it. This view makes the answer to the question, "Yes!"

I see things yet another way.

I see a higher power, but not outside the universe. It's not so much that the power created the world, but that it IS the world. The changes over time described as evolution are its movements. It's making things up as it goes along. There is no ordained Master Plan. Galaxies spin, planets revolve, mountains rise and sink. It's a dance of joy. We can tune into it, and dance along, or we can resist, and spend our whole lives trying not to fall down.

This view makes the answer to the question, "No." There is no outside power, and it's not all chance, either.

.

Bumper Stickers

I don't really understand the appeal of expressing one's opinion on the back of one's car.

I kind of understand putting something witty on your bumper. It's sharing a joke.

But the political and religious ones just seem rude. It's as if the owner of the car thinks they can change someone's mind with a random remark. "Abortion stops a beating heart".

Why, yes, so it does. And you are telling me this, why?

I don't think anyone should put anything on a bumper that they would not wear on their shirt everywhere they go.

..

Gay Marriage

There are two kinds of people who oppose making changes in the law to allow same-sex marriages.

There are the people who just don't see what all the fuss is about, since there are other legal ways of being partners.

And, there the the people who see it as homosexuals trying to legitimize their evil ways.

Today, I am going to slap around the second group.

-

People who think that gay marriage is about making gay sex "okay" hold a couple of world views I find disgusting.

First of all, they think marriage is about sex. (I suspect this is behind the high divorce rate.) A marriage license is not a sex license. The courts really don't care who is fucking who. A marriage license is a court document recognizing the merger of two individuals into a household, with shared responsibilities and liabilities.

Also, they think homosexual relationships are about the sex. They aren't about the sex any more than straight relationships. Sure, there are some people who just get the hots for each other, and that's all they want from each other. These people don't want to get married. People who share a deeper relationship than sexual are the ones who want to get married.

It "erodes the sanctity of Matrimony". We are not talking about a religious ceremony here. We are talking about a court document. You can still have your church wedding, and the sacrament of Matrimony, and it is still different and separate from secular marriage. If non-standard marraiges erode the sanctity of Matrimony, worry about all those Buddhists, Muslims, Athiests, Agnostics, Unitarians, Pagans and other people who are getting married outside your perceived blessings of God.

Again, I think the cure is to just get to know people.

People I have met who are against "gay marriage" don't know any gay couples.

Anyone whose mind is not calcified by dogma can see when two people are a "couple" and not just sex partners.


..

Pride Day is coming up

And once again, I am going to have a booth at the fairgrounds, selling my artwork.

I encourage everyone to go to these events. Call me idealistic, but I truly believe the best cure for prejudices is for people to get to know each other.

I have been trying to explain transgender to someone I know. He insists that a t-girl is just "a man pretending to be a woman". I think, if he met my transgendered friend Julia, that he would see that she is indeed a "she", no matter what's under the skirt.

I can try to explain eight ways till Tuesday, how Julia is not pretending to be something she is not, but being what she really is. Bob won't get it. But Julia herself is a simple explanation. Spend a few hours with Julia, and it makes sense. She doesn't even have to talk about transgender.


..

What amuses me about the creation/evolution debate is that those are not the only two options.

Someone once asked me "Do you believe in Creation or Evolution?" and the only honest answer I could give was, "No."

To say that "God created the Universe" is to posit a God who is separate, and outside of it. This Deity would then either use something existing outside Itself, or part of its own self, to make a universe.

If it used something outside itself, this would imply that the God and the Universe are still separate things. As if a man were to build a house. He could live in it, but not BE it.

If the Deity used its own self for this creation, then it would BE the creation. The act of creation would be shaping itself. This would be something more like body building.

The idea of the Omniscient Being who knows every detail of every atom would require that the Deity BE the universe, not be outside it somewhere.

In that case, the fossil record would be signs of what the Deity has been in the past. What we see now is the Deity. So, what are we doing when we breed animals for specific traits?

No, we are not doing anything unholy. If the Deity is the universe, it is also us.

So, what we do every day is an act of God. What kind of life you have depends on that kind of God to decide to be.

----------------------------

Intelligent design thought exercize, part 2

We have a drinking glass. "Obviously" created by a deliberate act of an intelligence, namely, Man. I take this glass to the top of high building, hold it out over the edge, and let it go.

Does the theory of Intelligent Design make any predictions about what will happen?

Does anyone reading this doubt that the glass will shatter to bits? How do you know this? Will the pieces be in any kind of order?

Who is responsible for the resulting arrangement of shards, glass powder, and concrete chips?

I'll drop the watch from Part One over the edge, too.

Now what do we have? "Natural Forces" which, according to Intelligent Design, were ordained by God, have been allowed to act freely on these objects.

Is God's design to reduce everything to Chaos?

Dropping these objects from a height was a deliberate act of Man. To what degree is the chaotic result of the action God's work, and to what degree it is Man's?

Intelligent design thought exercize.

Let's take a look at the concept.

There are formal logical flaws all through it, but let's play on their level.

Part 1:

The idea is that, if one looks at the workings of a watch, the complexity and inter-connectedness of it leads one to conclude that it "obviously" was man-made, or created by an intelligence. Then, one looks around at the universe, and sees complexity, and inter-connectedness, and concludes that it too, was made by an intelligence.

Okay.

What about a drinking glass? Surely, this is just as "obviously" man-made. Yet, it has no complexity or inter-connectedness. What do the watch and the glass have in common that we see as evidence of their intelligent origins?


The quality is orderliness. The glass is smooth, clear, homogeneous, and has a regular shape.
The watch parts fit together neatly. The gear teeth are evenly spaced, the metal is smooth, and also homogeneous. THESE are the qualities that cause us to conclude that they are man-made.

Why do we see these qualities as evidence of intelligent origin? Our perceptions of man-made versus natural (God-made) are based on our accumulated experience moving through the world.
Man made things have order and purpose, naturally occurring things do not. (or if they do, we can't perceive it)

So, using the same sloppy logic as the original premise, it falls apart. Our perception of intelligent creation is based on how things are NOT like the universe at large.


-

Atheism

Someone once called me "an Atheist and a Satanist". I had to point out to them that it is not possible to be both. Satanists believe in God. They're against him, but they believe in him.

Since then I paid more attention to Atheism, and have noticed that there are three different types.



Political-Atheists: The most visible type. They are the ones who campaign to have slogans changed and signs taken down. They are in it for the reaction value. To them, it is not so much a religion, as a way to be a royal pain in the ass. The advantage of this approach is that, if you get beat up, you can claim to be a victim of religious intolerance.

If people quit getting upset about Atheism, Political-atheists would give it up and do something else for attention, like try to legalize marijuana or ban abortion.

Arguing with a Political-Atheist is like wrestling with a pig. You get tired and filthy, and the pig likes it.

Rational-Atheists: I can respect these people. They have simply thought about it, and don't see any reason to believe in any kind of Deity. It is possible to discuss religion and cosmology with them, without things degrading into chaos. (I did once convince one to allow for the existence of Chi. ) You hardly ever know about these people, because they really don't care one way or another about other people's superstitions.

Emotional-Atheists: You've met them. They really do, deep down, believe in God. But, they are mad at Him for some reason, and are trying to get back at Him by refusing to believe in Him! They are the ones who argue doctrine. "If God is Love, why does Hell exist?" is one of their favorite complaints.

I just want to shake them and tell them to stop blaming God for all their problems, and start solving them.



-

This was necessarily a quick sketch. A dog wandered into the studio while I was working with a model, and seemed to like her.

Jesus Had a Penis

Somehow, the idea that Jesus was asexual has really taken root in the Christian world.

Ask around. Jesus died a virgin! He never even masturbated!

I have a little trouble with that. Part of the sacrifice of Jesus was that he had a very Human and mortal life. He was scared spitless of what he had to do, because his Life was good. Jesus was not some emotionally untouchable Holy Being, he was a Man, and subject to the entire range of human suffering and desire.

I've read the Bible. I've read different translations of it. Nowhere can I find any reference at all to Jesus' sexuality. The Bible says nothing about whether or not He ever had sex.

I think there is a very important reason for that.

I think it is because IT DOES NOT MATTER!

There are many years of Jesus' life that are not mentioned in the Bible. What was he doing then? Probably just being a Man. Earning a living, learning about life. Experiencing what we all experience. If any of those details were important, they would be included in the Bible.

Normal human beings have sex, at least with themselves.

If we are to follow the teachings of Christ, his lesson is not that "sex is bad". His lesson is that in all things, including our sexual behavior, we should take care not to hurt anyone. If we do hurt someone, we should do what we can to repair that harm.

The Woman taken in adultery committed a crime according to her culture, but Jesus overrode her punishment. He tells her, "Go, and sin no more." Where is she going to go? Back to her husband, of course. She would go back to her husband to repair the emotional damage she had done. Killing her may have satisfied her husband's immediate anger and frustration, but would not have restored his faith in women or love. For her to go back to her husband, and the two of them, keeping in mind that neither was perfect, to work things out, was a better spiritual solution.

Jesus really understood the weakness of the flesh. Being the Son of God, he had the spiritual strength to resist all temptation. But he certainly felt the desires. There would have been no point in his sacrifice if he did not. He knew the desire to live. He knew the desire to have a family. I believe he did not have children, because he knew what he had to do with his life, and would not want to have to abandon an Earthly family to grief. That's just my belief, though, I have no evidence to support it, and I am not going to argue with anyone who disagrees with me.

But I will argue with people who say that sexuality in and of itself is a sin. If that was so, Jesus would have made a point of saying something about it.

In every action, in every Parable, in every speech, Jesus reinforces the idea that the spirit is more important than the flesh. He repeats often that it is more important to treat each other with love and respect, than to perform or refrain from performing certain acts.

So, according to the Bible, there is nothing wrong with sexuality in and of itself. The sin lies in satisfying oneself to another's detriment. That's right, practice safe sex.


-

Bible literalism

There are many debates based on the concept that the Bible is literally true, in every respect.

The Bible says that God created Man out of the clay of the earth, and evolutionary theory says that Man developed from other, earlier forms of life.

There are places in the Bible that refer to the Earth as flat, and the night sky as a tent roof with holes in it. Literalists have come up with complicated explanations of how that isn't really so.

There are many trivial passages in the Bible that seem to contradict each other, and Literalists have come up with flimsy explanations of those as well.

Then there is the book of Revelations....

Every Bible believer that I have ever encountered says that it is metaphorical. The ten-headed beast is really the government, or science, or the Roman Empire. We are not really going to see these monsters, they all represent something else.

Interesting. The Bible is literally true in every respect, except that the book of Revelations is metaphoric?

How about this. Other parts of the Bible are metaphoric as well.

The Bible really does refer to the Earth as flat, and the sky as a tent as a metaphoric way of describing the unimportance of physical settings when dealing with the spirit.

One of the Gospels says that Jesus and his followers were on their way into Jerusalem, and another says they were on their way out of Jerusalem, when Jesus cursed the fig tree. Maybe that contradictory detail is still in there because it does not matter whether they were going into town or out of town, just what happened as they passed by.

And, perhaps, the description of God creating Man from the clay of the Earth is a more elegant and poetic say of saying that he made Man through a long complicated process that involved shaping other creatures first, and then refining them over eons.


-

Marine flinging a puppy, observations.

I am both amused and disgusted by the most common response to this video.

Such a large number of people are arguing that it must be a hoax or fake of some kind. I looked at it. If it is a hoax, we have got some world class writers and actors in the Marines.

The arguments for the video being a fake are really, really reaching. The simplest, and most plausible explanation for the video is that it is exactly what it seems to be.

Maybe that makes me sound cynical about human nature. Which is worse, though? That one person committed an impulsive shocking act to see how the people around him reacted, or that a group of people planned to make a shocking and defamatory video?

I am amused that so many people are trying so hard to work out a way to look at the video and say that no one threw a live puppy off a cliff.

I am disgusted that so many people are unwilling to face the facts of life. Things like this happen. Not everyone in the world is nice. Young men in combat get screwed up.

Working hard to explain it away will not make it have not happened.

The callousness in the video is only one of many instances that happen every day. This is just a clear, uncomplicated expression of it. Many of us have had our moments of not caring, of impulsive viciousness. We just find ways to justify it to ourselves in our minds.

Tell me you have never done something you are ashamed of.

Tell me you have never told yourself: "Well, I was just a kid, and I didn't know any better. I would never do something like that now."

Emotional illness and Subculture

This musing actually started with the old question: "Do crazy people know they are crazy?"

Looking back at my twenties, I can see clearly that I was nuts. At the time, though, it was not so clear. I knew something was wrong, that I was unhappy, but that was all. Every once in a while the magnitude of my emotional injury would be clear to me... and then I would go back to not really understanding my problem.

I got to wondering why this was. Perhaps it was because I didn't have the coping skills to face my madness entirely. Maybe it was like being in a car crash. All you really need to know is that you need to go to the hospital. You don't need all the gory details. Maybe it was familiarity. I had been screwed up for so long, it seemed "normal".

Then I realized that most of the people around me were also screwed up, in similar ways.

Is emotional damage endemic in some places?

Think about how we find a comfortable social circle. We tend to gather with people who are like ourselves in some way. Not necessarily in a good way. Alcoholics and heavy drinkers hang around with other drinkers. They hardly ever meet non-drinkers. Stoners socialize with stoners. and so on. So, when you look around you, you fit in. You are "ok". Your social setting becomes "the norm".

So why not a society of damaged people? Women who think that if they love their husband enough, he will change. Men who cheat on their women. People who deceive themselves, and everyone around them. Grifters. Users. A whole culture of it.

It's not so fantastic. I lived there.

Rural East Texas in the '80's. People listened to country music songs about cheating and getting drunk. (while complaining that their kids listened to rock music that was all about sex and drugs!) They all cheated and got drunk. It seemed that nothing could be accomplished without a cooler of beer. The people I moved among married and divorced, and fought. They got busted for drunk driving. Anyone I met that was over 21 had an ex, and children. Sometimes children by several different exes. "Friends" lied about each other behind their backs, women saw each other as threats, and no one had a financial plan. All the women were miserable.

So, I would look around me, and decide that I was sane.

But, deep down, I knew better.

Bad Dreams

Not exactly nightmares, but still very unpleasant. I am tired of having these bad dreams.

I dream that my husband is gone for some reason, and I have had to move back to East Texas and live in a crappy little apartment, and work in a filthy factory with no safety equipment.

It's a relief to wake up, and realize it was a dream, and I am in my nice bed, in our house in New Mexico. But the sadness hangs on.

I don't know why I am having these dreams again. Maybe because sales are bad this month, and I am behind on the studio bills. Having to return to my former life would be about the worst thing I can think of. Rationally, I know it can't happen. I have too many friends here, and more skills. I have been clean and sober for 15 years. I have so many more resources than just my husband.

Maybe the dreams must mean that my life would be crap without him.

Creationism vs. Evolution

I am amused by people who "don't believe in evolution" who own breed dogs.

Hunger Studies 1

People speak of "World Hunger", and don't realize how vague they are being.

There are three different kinds of hunger, quite different from each other.

Simple Hunger: This is what we feel when our stomach is empty. Most of us are familiar with this one, and know that it is pretty easy to ignore for a while. It is known worldwide, but can hardly be considered a problem.

Systemic Hunger: This is what we feel when our blood sugar is low. It is felt in the body in general, rather than in the stomach. This is not easy to ignore, but is not always recognized as a need for food. Systemic hunger is a problem in parts of the world where people cannot lead a regular lifestyle, and eat erratically. It can cause anxiety and hysteria.

In parts of Africa, rashes of young women being struck down with screaming fits were found to be easily cured by an injection of glucose. Widespread systemic hunger may be behind many unstable cultural situations, an unrecognized disruptive influence.

Survival Hunger: This is felt when the body's fat reserves are depleted. It is as imperative a need for food as the need for air. This hunger can NOT be ignored*. Our bodies need at least a little internal fat to get through a night's sleep without having to get up and take in more calories. Very few people in a stable culture have felt this.

People who deliberately keep their body fat low have felt it briefly. Ballerinas and fashion models report having sudden binges of eating everything they can get their hands on. Body builders sometimes find themselves skipping the protein shake, and gorging on something deep-fried.

This starvation is usually what people mean when they say "World Hunger". However, it is not something that can be solved by throwing food at it. Since the industrial era, all famines are caused by politics, not nature. The demands of survival would drive these people toward food, unless they were stopped by another deadly threat, such as the point of a gun.




*Anorexia is an emotional disorder in which the sufferer seems to ignore survival hunger. They are not ignoring it. They are feeling it as a sense of accomplishment, or in some other distorted way that allows them to continue refusing food.

Thoughts on the Abortion Issue

Pro-life and Pro-choice are two views that will NEVER be reconciled. The debate centers around whether or not a fetus has a soul. This is something that can never be determined by science, or by faith.

Even legislation will never be able settle the issue. No matter what laws are made, there will be protests, and efforts to change it.

However, I would think both sides of the issue could agree on one thing. Abortion is a tragedy.

The fact that an abortion takes place means that a pregnancy, which should be a cause for celebration and anticipation, has become a cause for fear and doubt.

From that viewpoint, wouldn't the solution to the abortion debate be to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Then, whether or not a fetus has a soul is moot.

But no, they disagree on how to do that. One side wants to teach birth control, and intelligent sex, the other wants people to wait until they are married to have sex at all.

Again, it is the battle between moral stricture, and personal choice.

Personally, I can't see why anyone who wants to see an end to abortion would want to deny people access to birth control.

"Abstinence only" ignores the well documented fact of the "weakness of the flesh". Fercrissake, it's described in their own holy book.

Why can't the approach be, "Wait until you are married, but if you DO fall to the weakness of the flesh, here is how to limit the damage."

(I have never liked the idea of keeping information from people for their own good. Separate rant on that later.)

A "good girl" doesn't carry a condom in her purse, because she does not intend to have sex. So, if does have sex, she can say, "It just happened... I didn't mean to." What a set up.

How about this concept: The good girl DOES carry a condom in her purse, as a tool to keep herself a virgin. Really! A guy who does not respect her is not going to want to use the condom. Demanding use of the condom can slow down a seduction, and give the girl a chance to regain control of the situation. Then, if the weakness of the flesh is too much, even for this, at least there is less chance of unwanted pregnancy and disease.

Sex education should include use of contraceptives, and why using them is a sign of self-respect.





Besides, to my point of view, the idea of two virgins marrying, and vowing to only have sex with each other for the rest of their lives is sort of..... kinky!