Monday, July 20, 2015

Aborting the circle of life

Urban Dictionary has a good, but flawed, definition of the Junior Anti-Sex League:

In George Orwell’s novel 1984, an organization for young people that advocated complete celibacy for both sexes. The Party intends to abolish the institution of the family, so all children will be the products of artificial insemination and grow up in public institutions. Members wear red sashes around their waists. Julia, Winston Smith’s lover, is a member of the Junior Anti-Sex League, though she does not share their ideals.

By extension, the conservative & repressive forces in society that support ideals of celibacy, virginity, purity, etc.

This definition is confused. Conservatives don’t want to abolish the family. That describes progressives with their fetish for abortion, contraception, divorce, asexual reproduction, and child commoditization. In a procreative context, chastity ensures children issued from sexual congress of man and woman are raised in marriage by a mother and father committed to each other, not outside marriage where they are vulnerable.

Orwell had his anti-creative, totalitarian society appropriate chastity for two practical reasons:

  1. To prevent conjugal love coming between state and subject
  2. To prevent marriage and family formation, giving the state justification to breed the next generation, to assume paternity, and to indoctrinate them

Chastity takes discipline. In 1984 it’s tied up in fanatical devotion to the state. Now, recreational sex is tied up in fanatical devotion of personal autonomy. Liberal society appropriates sexual liberation to bewilder the people with licentiousness, prevent marriage and family formation, and indoctrinate the next generation; to create such marital chaos that the people will beg for the nanny state to unburden them of these damn kids.

Orwell’s dystopia was technologically backward. Oceania hadn’t figured out how to disassemble man and separate sex from procreation, so they enforced chastity as part of the civic doctrine. Today’s progressives have the benefit of technology to reorder biological nature (or so they pride themselves). LifeNews.com reports:

Earlier this month, LifeNews.com reported on a high school in Seattle, Washington that is now implanting intrauterine devices (IUD), as well as other forms of birth control and doing so without parental knowledge or permission.

The IUD is known as a long acting reversible contraception, and may even act as an abortifacient. So, a young teen in Seattle can’t get a coke at her high school, but she can have a device implanted into her uterus, which can unknowingly kill her unborn child immediately after conception.

All the better to acclimatize girls to the dream of sex without children.

A society of girls who are uninterested, nay, incapable of having children—and incapable of taking care of them if they accidentally do have children—presents a humanitarian and demographic challenge that the totalitarian state eagerly positions itself to solve. If orchestrating the breakdown of the family and transferring children’s dependence from their parents to the state had been liberals’ stated goal from the beginning, how would they have gone about it differently?

No comments:

Post a Comment