Let Us Speak of Sex, Politics, and Religion

This is a column I’m not supposed to write, and you’re not supposed to read.  For you see, I speak here of politics, sex, and religion --the three great taboos that we’re not to talk about in today’s world of censored conversation.  I’m not surprised really, that there are—or were, depending on the shape of today’s headlines—personalities drawing crowds in politics because of their ability to rail against the current ethos of non-speak about certain topics.  I’m not sure which is unhealthier:  the non-speak or the brash speak.  In any case, let’s speak about it.

First, politics.  Once upon a time, our politicians were pretty much of the same demographic ilk.  That was bad in that we missed diverse ideas, but at least we paid attention to ideas.  Now, it’s identity politics.  People vote for “their” person (what’s the Chicago line, “hey, we know he’s a crook, but he’s our crook”).   Instead of voting for the person with the most proven policy ideas, we just vote for “our guy”.   How stupid is that?    I’ve lived in countries with three or four official languages, and while that sounds clever and inclusive, it serves to divide and stratify the population—not to mention the cost.  Pick a language, whichever one makes the most sense, and let’s all just deal with it.  We ultimately seek common values. Melting is better in the old “melting pot” versus “mosaic” political assumption.  

                And here’s a political assumption that needs to be examined:  victims aren’t always thus.  In today’s world we have crybullies.  Now these would be those who seek profit they do not earn from some political situation which may have been long ago.  I’m sure the Normans must have mistreated my Angle ancestors, and I deserve retribution.  However, somewhere along the line, we must have just “gotten over it.”   A novel idea, I know.   I’m sorry my friends, but everyone does not get the same trophy just for showing up over and over again. 

                Since we speak of everyone getting a trophy, this brings up religion.  Hold on to your hats, but we cannot endlessly pretend all religious value systems are of equal value.   Some, as judged by our constitutional standards (and that would be Western or Greco-Judeo-Christian standards, by the way) just don’t get the same trophy.  Pluralism contains an inherent contradiction much as “there are no absolutes” is a blatant paradox.   In fact, the whole bent toward pluralism is an admirable, self-inflicted feature of the religion dominant at our country’s founding.  We can relate well and be respectful of others even more if we acknowledge our own history more honestly. 

                And, while we’re being honest about religion, you should know of a couple of big lies out there.  One is that war has religion as a major cause.  Of the thousands of wars fought in human history, only a relative handful had religion as a cause.  Whenever very different ethnic groups clash for whatever reason, there is a good chance they may have differing religions (and they would be expected to invoke their religion in life or death matters).   This does not make religion the reason they went to war. 

 The second lie is that somehow science sprang up as a force outside or against religion.  Scientific inquiry grew up in the Medieval church universities, an offspring of the reasoning nature of Western theology.  Despite what Voltaire and his other anti-religion compatriots labelled as the Dark Ages, the scientific and social improvements of the West during those centuries gave rise to even more discoveries sponsored by the scientists of the church.   And, lo and behold, of the top 50 scientists of the 1600 and 1700s (as identified in Isaac Asimov’s encyclopedia) all but one (Halley, of comet fame) were at least sympathetic to or in many cases devout practitioners of religion.  It is bunk that we must pretend religion is not a positive force in the fabric of Western society.

                So now this brings us to sex—and for obvious sales technique I’ve saved this topic for last.   If a visitor were to somehow parachute in from another planet, he, she, or it would think as a species we are suddenly confused as to how our race actually procreates.   Now, take it from me--and I did actually graduate from a major university with a degree in biology (and even after the cell had been discovered) --that we are sexually dimorphic creatures who reproduce by the mating of males with females (or females with males, but something tells me more the former than the latter).  So do you know then how long we can go without good old-fashioned heterosexual sex?   You guessed it:   one generation.  I hope it’s not too much to ask that we remember and respect that from time to time.

                Now, you can check the above to see if there are 800 words still left by the censors before this paragraph.  Or they might have cut the whole thing, in which case don’t bother counting.  My point is this:  there’s nothing wrong with understanding and respecting how we got here as a culture.  We do well to be able to respectfully discuss all topics instead of pretending some emperors are wearing clothes when they may be rather scantily clad.  Every now and then, let’s listen to the naïve little boy who had the courage to call out the emperor.  We might even give him a trophy-- just for showing up.   

©Copyright 2016.  John P. Harrison.  All rights reserved.