Birth Control and the Advent of Boundary-less Sex

I am not someone who would teach or insist that Birth control is always wrong all the time, though admittedly someday I might be. Still, when looking into the history of the advent of Birth control one can’t help but wonder if the trajectory we are on now, with the creeping legalization in state by state of sodomite marriage, was started with the legalization of birth control.

Of course, as others have noted, what Birth Control accomplished was to divorce sex both from marriage and from procreation. This had the effect of turning sex away from the intimacy sustained in the family that sex itself created. This divorcing sex from marriage and procreation also had the effect of straining stability and fostering personal irresponsibility. Separating sex from marriage and procreation turned sex into a entertainment function and created a casualness that did not previously exist. Birth control sex turned into a entertainment function that could be participated in as a cure to boredom for singles thus opened the door to other kinds of sex that could likewise be pursued as merely entertainment and with casual aplomb. With the 20th century marketing of birth control by Margaret Sanger and others we find the inevitable beginning point of all where we’ve arrived today in our sexually chaotic world. What putatively began as control for family size is now pursued in destruction of the whole idea of Christian family. The acceptance and even popularity of sodomy, lesbianism, bisexuality and any number of other perversions might legitimately be traced back to the advent of marketed birth control.

It is interesting that following the 1930 Lambeth Conference, where the first Christian denomination (Anglicans) made allowance for the usage of Birth Control the Washington Post wrote, when viewed in hindsight, an amazingly prescient and prophetic on what the implications of Birth control would be on a societal level.

“Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee’s report, if carried into effect, would sound the death-knell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be “careful and restrained” is preposterous.”

The Washington Post, March 22, 1931

What I’ve noted above was seen even by “secular” Journalists when it was first approved.

How far our ability to connect the dots have fallen.

God’s Character Cleared In His Appointment Of Genocide For The Canaanites

Concerning Israel preforming genocide on the inhabitants of Canaan per God’s explicit instructions we would note that the total destruction of the inhabitants of the land is criminal only if the Deity who calls for such a measure is not worthy of all honor. If God’s worth is not so great that those who reject him have committed a crime that cries out for thorough and infinite justice, then the zero-tolerance policy against the people of the land is nothing but a brutal, unjust, and egomaniacal atrocity.

But God’s majestic character is not like the character of mere men whose character could never warrant the wholesale righteous slaughter of their opponents. The ban on the wicked Canaanites heralds the infinite majesty of the justice of God, whose holiness demands perfect loyalty of all creation, and whose worth is such that anything but absolute allegiance is worthy of immediate temporal and eternal death. The conquest of Canaan enacts the Glory of God’s justice against those who look to vain and worthless things to be for them what only God can be for them, and who in the looking to vain and worthless things attempt to de-throne God and enthrone themselves as God. The conquest and genocide of Canaan also displays God’s mercy inasmuch as God allowed them many generations of life despite their rebellion against His majesty. Also, the conquest revealed God’s mercy because in cleansing the land He was rescuing His people from the deleterious effects that the Canaanite putridness would have had on Israel.

And “no,” that supposedly evil God of the Old Testament Canaanite slaughter did not become a user friendly God in the New Testament. In point of fact the New Testament reveals God’s wrath with far more intensity than the Old Testament does. In the Old Testament God never poured His wrath out on the innocent and the righteous as He does in the New Testament.

What does the Canaanite genocide teach us then?

1.) It teaches us that those who sin against God deserve the greatest punishment because the greater the majesty against whom crime is committed the greater the punishment is exacted for the crime. God, having the greatest majesty and glory visits sustained rebellion and conspiracy against His majesty with exacting punishment.

2.) The genocide of the Canaanites is a picture of God’s intent to eternally destroy all His enemies who refuse to turn from their rebellion. The Canaanites did not Kiss the Son, so they perished in the way.

3.) The genocide of the Canaanites teaches us to repent for if God dealt with men of old who did not have the light of revelation we have, how much greater will His dealings be with a generation who has had the revelation of His light for hundreds of years.

However, there is good news in all this. God is patient and long-suffering. Just as he provided time for the Canaanites to fill their cup of wickedness so He provides time for man today to repent. Further, God has provided an ark from His just wrath and He commands all men everywhere to repent and so enter the Ark who is the Lord Christ & His Church to find not only safety but God’s good pleasure.

Thornwell on the Virginia Federal Court Overturning State Sodomite Marriage Ban

“They who join the unhallowed crusade against the institutions of the South will have reason to repent, that they have set an engine in motion which cannot be arrested until it has crushed and ground to powder the safeguards of life and property among themselves.”

Dr. James H. Thornwell, 1862

I quote this here because 154 years after Thornwall’s quote above we are still reaping the fruit of that baleful Yankee “French” Revolution as seen in the recent decision in Virginia to overturn a ban against same sex blasphemy.

The crushing and grinding to powder by the latter day abolitionists and Jacobins continues unabated.

One can hold, at one and the same time, that slavery was not a good idea and that the war of Northern aggression was a conflict where the troops of Revolutionary Chaos overthrew the last bastion of Christendom.

The safeguards of life and property that are being torn down in this Virginia decision is the life of those who pursue sodomy as a lifestyle (all statistics report that the average lifespan for these image bearers is considerably shorter that the overall average) and the property that is being crushed and ground to powder is our heritage and lineage. Those who choose this lifestyle steal the Heritage property of the trustee family that went before and of the trustee family that otherwise might have been.

Regarding that Federal Decision from Judge Arenda Wright Allen it is apparent that the intellectual capital of the ruling class has fallen a great deal since the time when Thornwell was a member of that class.

Judge Arenda Wright Allen, the Federal Judge who wrote the opinion in the Virginia case that struck down the Virginia ban on sodomite marriage, claimed the Constitution declares that, “all men are created equal,” which is, instead, the first line of the Declaration of Independence. Well, Federal Judges who make law from the bench can’t all be perfect.

Allen wrote, on the first page of her opinion, “Our Constitution declares that ‘all men’ are created equal. Surely this means all of us.” Who can argue with such blinding brilliance from the Bench?

For Pete’s sake, we have people serving on the Federal Bench who can’t tell the ruddy difference between the ruddy Declaration of Independence and the ruddy Constitution. WORSE YET, her clerks, who are responsible to review Allen’s legal opinion and provide supporting material for the decision apparently LIKEWISE don’t know the difference.

Next, this bimbo apparently thought that when the Declaration of Independence said “all men are created equal,” that it originally meant ONLY men were created equal with other men. She didn’t realize that “men” here was the plural noun used in 1776 to refer to all mankind.

This asinine stupidity drunk on Malt liquor and high on crack cocaine is stupefying coming from a Federal Judge.

This is the quality of your leadership America. This is the consequence of affirmative action.

Biblical Theology Snippets

Genesis 3:15

When Israel was in Egypt the crowns of the Pharaohs had a serpent prominently displayed. So, as the representative of the seed of the serpent he battled with Israel, the seed of the woman. Via the individual seed of the woman (Moses) God crushes the head of the Egyptian serpent and drowns the seed of the Serpent in the Red Sea, just as the seed of the serpent intended to drown the seed of the women in the Nile when he gave instructions to the Hebrew Midwives. This drowning of the seed of the serpent is a recapitulation of God previously drowning the seed of the serpent in the flood.

Once delivered from Egypt Israel complained against God about many things including the lack of water, and so God provides water for them at Massah and Meribah (Ex. 17:1-7). God tells Moses,

“Behold, I will stand before you there on the rock at Horeb, and you shall strike the rock,and water shall come out of it, and the people will drink.” (vs. 6).

The Psalmist, later singing this event (Ps. 78:15-20), may be inspired to understand that the struck Rock was God Himself.

“They remembered that God was their Rock (78:35).

Paul may well see the Lord Christ as a Christophanic Rock that was struck so that all might drink,

“And did all drink the same spiritual drink for they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them: and the Rock was Christ.”

It is not a stretch to find a picture here of God standing before the rock, Moses striking the Rock, and God / Christ being identified with the Rock out of whom / which flowed streams of living water so that God’s people might drink and live. God is struck, at His own instruction, by the rod so that His people might live.

Such a understanding provides light for later passages in the Gospels where the Lord Christ calls people to Himself in order that He might provide waters of living water wherein they will be satisfied (John 4:10-14, 7:37-39).

Finally, when being struck the Lord Christ’s side flows with blood unto His enemies and water unto His people. The water and blood throughout the Scripture being both judgment and life to both the righteous and the wicked.

Genesis should be read as a record of the ongoing battle of the two seeds.

In the covenantal structure that Genesis gives its readers, people are either the seed of the serpent, on the side of the Covenant head snake in the garden, or seed of the woman, on the side of the Covenant keeping God and trusting in His promises.

In this structure one finds the Snake’s people opposing God’s people,

Cain vs. Abel
Ishmael vs. Isaac
Esau vs. Jacob
Son’s of Israel vs. Joseph

In this structure one finds also a battle being done between collective entities. The covenant people of the Serpent vs. the covenant people of God.

Pharaoh and Egypt vs. Abraham and Sarah
Kings of the World (Sodom) vs. Abraham & his household, Lot, Melchizedek
Abimelech & Philistines vs. Abraham & his people
Abimelech & Philistines vs. Isaac & his people
The men of Schechem vs. Simeon, Levi, & Israel (Dinah)
Sons of Israel vs. Joseph

Smith & McAtee On Corporatism

I have said the blockquote below forever, to anybody who would listen that deficits in the budget of the Federal Government is not paid either by the Uber-Rich, nor by the poor, but it is paid by the middle-class. It is in the Middle Class where all the money is and so despite the lies about how the “rich are going to be made to pay their fair share,” it is always the middle class folks that are the ones that foot the bill. People have known this for decades.

I will even go so far as to insist that our current tax system is NOT a redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor but rather it is a redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the uber-wealthy. Every tax policy that is pursued in Washington is pursued in favor of taking from the middle class and giving to the uber-wealthy. They lie about that. They masquerade and cloak that. They compliment themselves on how noble they are for doing that. However, in the end the tax policy is to enrich the uber-wealthy and their political bag men and enforcer thugs. This is the essence of the Corporatism that we are currently living under where mega government and mega Corporations are in bed together to enrich themselves at the cost of the rank and file middle class.

What is most frustrating though is when the middle class is too stupid to figure this shell game out, and as such keeps pulling levers for both Democrats and Republicans who both are part of the crony capitalism that is Corporatism. Our ignorance is killing us.

But enough of me … consider how Al Smith put it clear back in 1936,

“Now here is something that I want to say to the rank and file. There are three classes of people in this country; there are the poor and the rich, and in between the two is what has often been referred to as the great backbone of America, that is the plain fellow.

That is the fellow that makes from one hundred dollars a month up to the man that draws down five or six thousand dollars a year.

Now, there is a great big army. Forget the rich; they can’t pay this debt. If you took everything they have away from them, they couldn’t pay it; they ain’t got enough. There is no use talking about the poor; they will never pay it, because they have nothing.

This debt is going to be paid by that great big middle class that we refer to as the backbone and the rank and file, and the sin of it is they ain’t going to know that they are paying it.It is going to come to them in the form of indirect and hidden taxation. It will come to them in the cost of living, in the cost of clothing, in the cost of every activity that they enter into, and because it is not a direct tax, they won’t think they’re paying, but, take it from me, they are going to pay it!”

Gov. Al Smith — 1928 Democratic Presidential Standard Bearer
1936 Speech — Betrayal of the Democratic Party