Sex in the Bible Belt

I don't know what it is, but it seems to be spreading from Florida to Georgia -- or maybe it's the other way around and it's just been dormant in Georgia for a while.

It seems as though everyone is noting this story, although few are actually commenting on it.

First off, the sentence in this case was ludicrous, almost as ridiculous as the prosecution of the two teenagers in Florida for taking pictures of themselves having sex.

We're talking about heavy red, Bible Belt states here. But when you also add in this story, you start to get an idea of how sadly warped these people are. The comments on the article are illuminating. Nowhere does anyone advance the idea that there might be something missing in these lives, although one or two do hint at the possibility that traditional Christian teaching, as it seems to be understood by this group, doesn't have all the answers. Actually, in light of the fact that the comments overwhelmingly blame outside forces -- society, the devil, Rick Warren -- it's obvious that they aren't even asking the right questions.

I've said this before, but I really do have a complete inability to understand the mindset here. I mean, I understand the idea of resisting temptation -- I do it every time I pass up a chance to have a fudge brownie -- but to cast the entirety of human experience -- or at least those parts you think you should disapprove of -- into the realm of "temptation" strikes me as somewhat off-base. Just a little.

But then, of course, you get to blame everyone else, with the additional perk that, if you sincerely repent, you are forgiven for being human. It's like you don't have to learn anything from experience -- it's all taken care of.

And that, of course, is the mindset that gives us things like the attempt to legislate consensual sexual behavior. Sure, I understand protecting kids, but I am also in complete agreement with Romeo-and-Juliet laws. The law simply can't prevent kids from experimenting, and I don't think that's the appropriate context for any punishment that could be due. If there is going to be prevention, or if there is going to be retribution of any sort, it is the parents' duty and right. Two teenagers having sex is not in the same league at all as an older person using the power of significant age difference to have sex with a minor, and yet we have a point of view that just says "Eek! Illicit sex!" ("illicit" being purely arbitrary) and lumps it all together with no sense of the realities.

I'm not advocating an anything goes philosophy here, but I do hope for some sense of compassion and even more, a sense of what is appropriately the government's purview and what is not. The whole idea of legislating morality is repugnant, because morality itself is fluid, outside of the basic standards of behavior we need to be able to live together (i.e., "it's not nice to kill the neighbors"). I can certainly see the sense in age of consent laws -- that's to protect children, who need protection -- but when they start to creep into regulating the minutiae of what acts are permissible and imposing harsher penalties depending on whether the legislature approves of certain behaviors, then they go outside the pale.

Nor do I favor mandatory sentences. I think it's important the judges, who have the opportunity to examine the elements of each individual case, have the discretion to be sure that the sentence actually fits the crime. Legislatures deal in the general, and so that kind of specificity is impossible for them. That sort of thing is just an illustration of the worst aspects of the mindset.

OK -- that's today's rant.