Church Militant reported on an “experiment” in Sexual Revolutionary Germany in the 1970’s-1990’s. Child welfare agencies placed homeless children in foster care with known pedophiles. The “experiment” was to see whether the children thrived in the care of such “loving parents.” They asked for my comments. I let them have it.
Jeffrey Epstein, Harvey Weinstein and Theodore McCarrick operate(d) in different sectors of society, have different marital statuses and sexual preferences and profess different religions. What do these disparate men have in common? A belief system that claims that sex is an entitlement. They operate according to the tenets of the most powerful ideology currently at work in the world: the ideology of the sexual revolution.
Epstein, the millionaire financier and admitted sex offender who pleaded not guilty July 9 to charges of sexual trafficking, allegedly got away with sickening crimes for a long time. But it would be a serious mistake to succumb to cynicism. “What do you expect? Wealthy guys like him have always gotten to do what they want. It is not fair to blame the sexual revolution for their abuses.”
That is, at best, a partial truth. The rich and powerful have always been able to buy their way out of problems that would crush an ordinary person. But the widespread acceptance of the sexual revolutionary ideology smooths their path. To an unprecedented extent, the reigning secular religion of our time enables sexual abuse, disarms victims and empowers predators.
“You don’t want to be a prude, do you?”
“You want to be ‘sex positive,’ don’t you?”
“Sex is nothing to feel guilty about.”
“You just have to take off your clothes and let him look at you. It is nothing be ashamed of.” (That’s one of Epstein’s contributions to the pick-up-line genre.)
“You were born this way.”
“God made you gay.”
Of course, the rich and powerful have always been able make promises to entice a sex partner into giving “consent.”
Hollywood mogul Weinstein promised his victims that he’d make them stars. Epstein offered modeling careers. McCarrick promised advancement in the Church. The sexual revolutionary ideology provides the predator added advantages, including aborting unwanted pregnancy and undermining nosy neighbors and other witnesses.
Epstein’s alleged network spanned the globe. It must have been supported and propped up by numerous people, some who actively participated and benefited. Others looked the other way, such as the superintendent of the apartment building where he housed his teenage “models” and the “modeling agency” staff and the pilots who flew his private jets that were fully decked out for his orgies.
The sexual revolution conveys the unmistakable message that everyone is entitled to do whatever they can get away with. Prosecutors say Epstein has three active U.S. passports and owns multiple jets and houses around the world, including his own private island. Witnesses and victims feared Epstein’s retaliation and blackmail. This is a man who appears to get away with a lot.
This ideology relieves people of nagging consciences. Epstein’s conscience is malformed, to put it mildly.
In 2011, he told the New York Post, “I’m not a sexual predator; I’m an ‘offender.’ It’s the difference between a murderer and a person who steals a bagel.” He once allegedly received three 12-year-old girls as a birthday present. He doesn’t need an ideology that justifies or excuses his actions.
However, the sexual revolutionary ideology weakens the already vulnerable. The Miami Herald’s investigative report into Epstein’s activities showed:
Most of the girls came from disadvantaged families, single-parent homes or foster care. Some had experienced troubles that belied their ages: They had parents and friends who committed suicide; mothers abused by husbands and boyfriends; fathers who molested and beat them. One girl had watched her stepfather strangle her 8-year-old stepbrother.
One of Epstein’s victims who was 14 when she was first recruited said, “We were stupid, poor children. We just wanted money for school clothes, for shoes. I remember wearing shoes too tight for three years in a row. We had no family and no guidance.”
Yes, rich and powerful men love this concept that sex is an entitlement.
The magisterium of the Catholic Church stands in direct opposition to the sexual revolution. The secular #MeToo movement is trying to combat sexual abuse. But the movement’s advocates do not seem to want to surrender the intellectual framework that enables it. They seem to be counting on a combination of legal action and periodic public shaming to stop predatory behavior. I believe this will never be enough. The power imbalances are too many and too severe.
The Catholic belief system tells us no one is entitled to sex. Children are entitled to a relationship with both of their parents. Women and men are entitled to the love and loyalty of their spouses.
Every human person is entitled to be born as the result of an act of love between their mother and father. This act of love is an icon of the love of God and that God’s love is the ultimate source of everything that exists. All of Catholicism’s prohibitions (for which we are ridiculed) are aimed at protecting these positive values.
Yes, our belief system makes us Public Enemy No. 1 of the sexual revolutionaries. We are a big problem for those who believe they are entitled to unlimited child-free, problem-free, guilt-free sex. Not only do we tell them they are wrong, but also our belief system equalizes people. The poorest girl from an unknown family is encouraged and supported in refusing sex to any man of any station, in the same way a daughter of a billionaire would be encouraged likewise.
Faithful Catholics despise clerical sex abusers not only for their crimes, which are bad enough. We hold them in contempt because they disgrace the one philosophical system that has a prayer of finally combating this toxic ideological soup in which we are all swimming.
The Epstein Network, surrounded by enablers or those who turned a blind eye, sounds all too much like the network of clergy abusers. Society does not yet have a full accounting of either system. As faithful Catholics, we want the same kind of reckoning for both kinds of abuse. We want a full investigation of both Epstein and clerical abusers. We want punishment for the guilty and restitution for the victims. We want protection for the innocent and the whistleblowers.
Be not afraid, believers! We are on the right side of history on this issue.
Originally published at The Stream on January 8, 2019, reprinted here with the exact tagline that appeared with the article.
Tucker Carlson is right. But his method is wrong.
Tucker Carlson’s monologue on January 2 set off a firestorm of negative commentary. I want to say for the record: I agree completely with Carlson’s closing statement, “If you want to put America first, you’ve got to put its families first.” I also want to say for the record: I disagree with the wrappings in which Carlson presented his important message.
The Sexual Revolution of the sixties is portrayed as a rebellion against the Establishment. It was a spontaneous love fest that allowed youth to do their own thing in an atmosphere of serendipitous freedom. Women were liberated from past oppression. It set in motion other movements that advanced ever greater sexual freedom.
BarbWire picked up the Ruth Institute’s story about the first man to enter the Miss Universe contest. Originally published December 24, 2018.
The center of attention at this year’s Miss Universe Pageant wasn’t the winner – a young lady from the Philippines, who was barely noticed by the media — but Angela Ponce from Spain, a “transgender” man who believes that competing as a woman is a victory for human rights.
Ponce was hailed as the first “transgender” contestant in the pageant’s 67-year history. He said he was there to proudly represent “my nation, all women, and human rights.”
“How can a man who ‘identifies’ as a woman represent ‘all women,’” asked Ruth Institute President, Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse? “What’s called transgenderism is fostered by the culture and advanced by the state, to the detriment of individuals, families, and society.”
In The Sexual State, I wrote about the Managerial Class and its commitment to The Sexual Revolution. Without their support, I argued, there would be no divorce on demand, no abortion on demand, no “gay marriage.”
Today, I see yet another aspect of our post-human future being created by the Managerial Class: gene editting.
A Chinese scientist defends his use of gene editting, the process which “works by using “molecular scissors” to alter a very specific strand of DNA – either cutting it out, replacing it or tweaking it.”
The technocratic elite seems comfortable enough with the process. At a major conference in Hong Kong, George Q. Daley, the dean of the Harvard Medical School is already endorsing the use of gene editing. The Chinese scientist who is being criticized just did things a bit out of order, but we are ready for “responsible” clinical use of gene editting.
Further along in the twitter feed, we find this observation: Conflict of interest, anyone? Even further down the twitter thread, “The way this was done seems premature in practice, but not in principle.”
Do you understand what’s happening here? The head of one of the top medical institutions in the United States, and therefore the world, is arguing that we should start editing human genes, and stop talking about whether or not it’s moral to do so. Because trust Harvard.
Let us give this a more specific name, more specific than even “conflict of interest.” This is the technocratic, managerial global elite, playing God. Assigning themselves monstrous power over other people. At least some professionals recognize the dangers:
“If true, this experiment is monstrous. Gene editing itself is experimental and is still associated with off-target mutations, capable of causing genetic problems early and later in life, including the development of cancer,” Prof Julian Savulescu, an ethics expert at the University of Oxford, told the BBC.
“This experiment exposes healthy normal children to risks of gene editing for no real necessary benefit.”
I introduced the concept of The Managerial Class in my recent book: The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies Are Destroying Lives and How the Church was Right All Along.I hold them largely responsible for the devastation of the Sexual Revolution. Not the ‘March of History’ or some impersonal forces: but the well-educated, well-connected technologically sophisticated Elites created and imposed the Sexual Revolution. They are going even further, with their plans to make the manipulation of human embryos sound humane.
There would be no gene editting without the Managerial, Technocratic Elite.
Members of the Managerial Class, I implore you: rethink your principles. You are playing with forces you cannot begin to understand, much less control. The less priveleged will pay the price of the mistakes of our class. Please. enough is enough.
Andrew Herrod reviews The Sexual State at LifeSiteNews. November 15, 2018. You can read more about The Sexual State here.
November 15, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – “The Sexual Revolution needs the State because it needs enormous amounts of power to accomplish its impossible objectives,” writes the Catholic intellectual Jennifer Roback Morse. She amply proves this conclusion in The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies are Destroying Lives and Why the Church was Right All Along, an excellent book that is essential reading for understanding today’s sexual culture wars.
Morse reviews the Sexual Revolution with its tenet that “[s]exual activity without a live baby as a result is an entitlement for men and women alike” and accordingly “children must accept whatever the adults choose to give them.” The results have been family breakdown, abortion, and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) on a massive scale. This evidences a “simple fact: the Sexual Revolution has harmed millions of people.”
Sex makes babies. Life begins at conception. People are born male or female. Marriage is for life. Divorce is not something to be celebrated. Homosexual acts go against nature.
To the informed Catholic these are obvious truths. In fact, up until the second half of the twentieth century, these were undisputed statements that most people, religious or otherwise, held as common sense.
But they are not so common today. In fact, depending on the social setting in which they may be stated, one could be shouted down, fined, or even jailed on charges of inciting hate speech. St. Anthony the Great once said, “A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad they will attack him saying, ‘You are mad; you are not like us.’” We are in that time.
On a more indirect level, I suspect there are many people in our culture who sense something is askew, “off”, not quite right about our culture, but cannot quite put their finger on it. Or they may be unhappy, anxious, and unsatisfied but cannot point to one thing in particular that may be causing such subtle duress.
But in a postmodern, post-Christian culture, communication has been severely challenged. Language has been deliberately co-opted and redefined right under our noses, and as the saying goes, whoever controls the language controls the conversation. We are not speaking the same language, sharing a common lexicon with the culture anymore.
An insightful book for our age
That is why I appreciated Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse’s new book, The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies Are Destroying Lives and Why the Church Was Right All Along. Dr. Morse puts a name to the malaise and sets forth a systematic exploration and identification of the root causes of the misery of modern life. It would be tempting to resort to strictly religious categories to explain this phenomenon (as hinted at in the latter part of the title), but Dr. Morse resists such a temptation. Instead, she begins the exploration of the problem by drawing on research in the social sciences as well as through the sketching of composites and real life examples of the victims of the Sexual Revolution, before proposing the timeless solution as it may be found in the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Dr. Morse’s contention is an observant and important one: the Sexual Revolution did not just “happen” as a social phenomenon. Rather, it was engineered by cultural elites, enabled and underwritten by the State, codified into law, and accepted as normative in the culture as a deliberate matter of course. As one may see in many of the narratives she lays out in the preliminary chapters, the intentions may have been sincere and well-meaning, but the social experiment was an abject disaster when measured against objective standards of human happiness, health, and well-being. When you invest substantially in such an experiment, when you believe your very life depends on the tenets of absolute sexual freedom, you have too much at stake to let it go quietly into the night. You fight tooth and nail against its annihilation, even when it proves to be harmful to human flourishing and a failure as a social experiment.
The pillars of the Sexual Revolution
Dr. Morse breaks down the ideas of the Sexual Revolution (which gave birth to the Sexual State) into three distinct but interrelated ideologies: The Contraceptive Ideology; The Divorce Ideology; and the Gender Ideology. Each ideology serves the functions of the Sexual Revolution and all are supported by the State.
For the vast majority of people – married and single, men and women, Catholics and non-Catholics – contraception is so much a fact of life that to question it is almost beyond comprehension. The contraceptive culture is in the air we breathe, the water we drink. Unless you are intentionally opposed to it, it gets into the fibers of your being like asbestos or cigarette smoke.
Similarly, the divorce culture is like sneezing – it is infectious and has the tendency to “catch on” and spread like wildfire when it is normalized, though many might concede a marriage ending as “unfortunate” but inevitable given certain circumstances.
Issues of gender questioning and gender confusion are the newest chapter of our age of moral relativism and in many cases, especially among young people, can stem from the trauma of divorce. These issues were almost unheard of fifty years ago, but are now ubiquitous and cannot be avoided in everyday life, so fast has the acceleration of the Sexual Revolution been.
Morse systematically breaks each ideology down in subsequent chapters to lay out the methods by which the ideology was created and perpetuated by elites, how it is intentionally propagated, and what the Catholic Church teaches about these issues, illustrating how it serves as the antidote to the sexual sickness. She lets the arguments and social research rest on their own merits, making the case for common-sense rationalism and traditional Catholic teaching rather than falling back on polemical and heated discourse.
The book is not dry or static in the slightest but is buoyed by examples of the victims of the Sexual Revolution that the author has encountered in real life: children of divorce, as well as spouses who sought to fight for the marriage but were ruled against in courts; college students unhappy and unfulfilled from casual hook ups; post-abortive women who were lied to and manipulated into having their children killed; teenagers questioning whether they are male or female and undergoing hormone therapy; the forty-something successful but childless lawyer undergoing IVF without a husband. We all know such people. We are all touched and affected by the rotten fruits of the Sexual Revolution.
The totalitarian tactics of the State
Such examples would be easy enough to catalog as low hanging fruit, but Dr. Morse takes her premise a step farther to illustrate the institutionalized and totalitarian role the State has played in this downward cultural spiral. She makes it clear that the Sexual Revolution needs the State to promote and advance its ideology because the premises of the Sexual Revolution are, in fact, false. “Sex does make babies. Children do need their parents, and therefore marriage is the proper and just context for both sex and childrearing. Men and women are different. The true sexual revolutionaries resent these facts.” But facts are stubborn things, and perpetuating such fantasy requires “government coercion, media propaganda, economic restructuring, and educational indoctrination (not to mention the pills, medical devices, sterilization surgeries, and abortions.” (60)
Furthermore, The Sexual State is not at all despairing but wholly pragmatic and constructive, laying out in the Manifesto for the Civilization of Love and Family very concrete steps (fifteen of them) as a way to address the failures of the Sexual Revolution, and proposing for consideration (for anyone with an open enough mind to consider its merits), the Judeo-Christian alternative to such madness: namely, that sex has meaning. Our bodies were created in a certain way for a certain purpose. Marriage is a safe haven for raising children. Men and women are unique in their differences. Fertility is a gift, not a disease.
In light of the fruit rotting at the base of the Sexual Revolution tree, the timeless teaching of the Church on love, marriage, sex, and children seems like something wholly new, wholly exotic, and wholly revolutionary, not to mention refreshing and liberating. In contrast to the strong-arm, totalitarian nature of the State to advance its culture of death agenda, claims that the Church is anti-woman, anti-freedom, anti-pleasure do not seem warranted. The subtitle for the book, ”How Elite Ideologies Are Destroying Lives And Why The Church Was Right All Along,” makes clear who the real agents of this destructive revolution are and gives the Church the last word. The Church, it would seem, was in fact right all along.
The Sexual State is a revealing and valuable instrument in the toolbox of those who want to fight back but do not know how; those who know something is wrong but do not know what; and those who want to live in reality in the midst of fantasy. Dr. Morse has sounded a wakeup call to Christians and non-Christians alike to reclaim our culture, our integrity as persons, and to protect and promote the most basic element of society – the family – from all that threatens to undermine and destroy it. We would be wise to heed her advice.