Reason why there is more sexual sin in this society

[lovemybatman]

Agree with OraLabora completely. There have been times when sexual sins were just as rampant as they are today.

We just hear of them more do to the change in technology.

Human behavior, if one studies human history, hasnt really changed all that much.

Just the technology is more advanced so we hear and see it more.

Most definitely. Roman society was very sexualized and also very violent. There’s a reason St. Paul and (further back) the ancient Old Testament writers were constantly talking about sexual immorality. You have the Marquis de Sade writing very explicit sexual stories in the 18th century, secret sex magazines which circulated in the Victorian Era, I could go on and on. The only thing that’s changed is the suppression of the behaviors by the dominant culture. They have always existed–it’s just the culture that decides whether or not it’s OK to talk about it, and obviously our culture now is very permissive. I would also say capitalism and the usage of sex to sell things has contributed greatly as well. But it’s playing to what’s already there. Humans are humans and have always been.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Also there’s a reason why prostitution is referred to as the oldest profession. True or not, it simply means its been around for a long, long time.

 

[stephe1987]

It’s sad… we talk about how “free” and “advanced” we are and yet most people today don’t have self-control; they cannot even master their own bodies. And yet we’re so evolved?

 

[Timothy17]

“While claiming to be wise, they became fools…”

“They exchanged the truth of God for a lie…”

That is “why” there is more sexual sin.

Thinking that this is merely “history repeating itself” is a non-argument. Sodom and Gomorrah are permanently burned as a testament to God’s judgement on such behaviour. People have every right to be concerned for society’s sake when sexual sin is rampant ; furthermore, the consequences of perversion are not merely in the theological order (i.e., divine punishments now or later) but clearly manifest in the natural, temporal order as well. These things are unnatural and therefore have consequences, being contrary to nature, just as any personal or social vice ultimately costs us and destroys us.

The abuse of the word “natural” itself (how often have you heard, “it’s only natural” as a reason to do or permit something unnatural or immoral ?) is evidence of the foolishness of the wise of this age.

Pax,
Tim

 

[CB_Catholic]

However there is a failure to understand that people didnt get married at a younger age in past generations for sex. They got married for security reasons. For economic reasons.

We tend to think as sex, in and of itself, as being the primary motivating influence in all of history when that is simply not the case.

Marriage is postponed now a days because a woman know she doesnt need a man to be secure. She can do that on her own.

Plus, people did not live as long. If you were 50, you were old. You needed to start early to have children. I read somewhere that the average lifespan of a woman in America at the turn of the last century was 45. There was a high infant and maternal childbirth death rate. My great-grandmother died in childbirth at the age of 27 after having borne 7 children, only one of which survived past the age of 3 (my grandfather). That type of thing was not unusual.

 

[butch3510]

You summed up excatly what I was thinking. It’s a bit eerie, actually.

Anyone who claims we live in “horrible times” and preaches hell fire and damnation about what a miserable state of affairs this is should read some basic history book.

that’s the kind of argument the muslims are saying in my country towards christians that we let our women appear in sex movies.

 

[John_of_Woking]

I absolutely agree with this. Yet the main point in my original post is that perhaps we as catholics invite more temptation to ourselves by holding marriage off until our mid-late twenties, considering that in apostolic and even medieval times men and women got married upon hitting puberty (thus decreasing the chances of fornication because they have a sexual partner).

I agree with your main argument. Although I think before 16 is not a good idea.

I think people are more scared of commitment than ever and this combined with the immodesty/ temptation in the media does make people more vulnerable to sexual sin. I married in my late twenties. I would say early twenties is a good age IMHO.

 

[John_of_Woking]

And sexual activity among the unmarried is no longer seen so widely as a subpoena for the everlasting fires of hell. From my point of view, all of this is progress.

We most certainly don’t want people marrying or commiting sexual acts under 16 although I am not sure if those burning in hell right now due to unrepented sexual sin will agree that fornication is progress

 

[Romanova]

I can’t but help laugh at the last sentence… “tired of work and want an easier job”. I sure home you didn’t mean that being a SAHM is easier than working full time cause I’m here to tell you that a 40 hour work week is a whole hell of a lot easier than being a 24/7 SAHM and the retirement plan and benefits also are much better for a working woman.

Here, here. I’ve been both a working mother and a SAHM. I found working full-time to be a lot easier.

Someone else brought up the ever-earlier age of puberty. I think this is a huge issue… A study published this summer (as a follow-up to a 1997 study) found that in a cohort of “1,239 girls, 10% of whites, 23% of African-Americans, and 15% of Hispanic girls had breast development indicating onset of puberty by age 7.” These percentages were notably higher than in 1997. children.webmd.com/news/20100809/study-girls-entering-puberty-earlier The average age of onset of menstruation in Europe declined from 17 to 13 from 1850 to 1960.

Even if someone marries at 18, if they’ve gone through puberty before even entering their teens, that’s still many years of waiting and dealing with hormones and temptation. If, however, a girl didn’t begin menstruating until age 16 or 17 (as was often the case in years past), that’s far less time to deal with temptation.

All that said, I don’t think our generation has the only claim to sin and decadence. Ancient Rome was filled with sexual sins, as PPs noted. Sin is a human condition that is universal across all times and places.

 

[Rascalking]

What we have is a huge amount of publicity about sex thrown in our faces daily. Celebrities used to hide their affairs.No more,

I agree that it would be better if more people covered up their indiscretions, but it’s still the best time to be alive in the history of the world.

 

[AnthonyJ]

I think the main reason is that a lot of people these days don’t believe in the sanctity of marriage. Unfortunately they just want to have “fun”, use sex as a form of recreation and are afraid of any form of sacrifice which a commitment to marriage would entail.

In Christ,
Anthony

Does the fact that this generation delays marriage for the most part until the ages of 25-35 partly the reason why there is more sexual degeneracy and sin in today’s society?

I say this because as I recall the Blessed Virgin Mary was only around 14-16 years old when Christ was conceived. That means that the typical ages for marriage in the times of the apostles was 14-18. Did they have it easier than us because they were married almost immediately when hitting puberty?

As opposed to this generation which delays marriage and thus increases the chances of fornication. I’ve noticed that a lot of mormons marry young partly because of this reason to “avoid temptations.”

 

[AnthonyJ]

Yes, I agree with you. Many people today want to have sex without sacrifice and that is why they don’t get married.

I think it might be partly the opposite: People get married later because sex is available to them without marrying.

 

[John_of_Woking]

I agree that it would be better if more people covered up their indiscretions, but it’s still the best time to be alive in the history of the world.

It is the best time to be alive in the history of the world…especially if you want to be a martyr for the Faith

 

[edwest2]

I agree that it would be better if more people covered up their indiscretions, but it’s still the best time to be alive in the history of the world.

Why?

Ed

 

[Rascalking]

Why?

Ed

Our life expectancy is longer today than any other time in history. We live longer, healthier lives. We no longer die at age 60.

The amount of free time we have to spend with family, friends, on hobbies is much more than in the past. We no longer have to work back breaking labor for 20 hours a day.

I could go on, but I get the feeling that no matter what I say all people will do is complain about how bad things are now. So why waste my breath?

 

[PatriceA]

I agree with your main argument. Although I think before 16 is not a good idea.

I think people are more scared of commitment than ever and this combined with the immodesty/ temptation in the media does make people more vulnerable to sexual sin. I married in my late twenties. I would say early twenties is a good age IMHO.

I’m the opposite opinion. I didn’t marry til I was 30 and I know I was not ready for any kind of sacrifice and commitment it takes to make a marriage work before even the age of 25. I am all for one waiting until mid 20s and beyond. That’s not to say there aren’t people that are younger and ready for marriage. But I don’t think the sexualization of our society has anything to do with people delaying marriages. Our society is built on instant gratification without too many responsibilities, if any. Sexual sin is all about the selfish need for instant gratification and pleasure. If one is not mature and emotionally ready for marriage, getting married younger to fight sexual sin in our society is just adding to more of the problem because being able to have sex is not going to compensate for all the other problems that can happen in a marriage if one is not ready for that vocation. If the solution to decrease the sexual sins in our society was all about getting married earlier, how do you account for all the people that have porn addictions and have affairs after they get married? The OP’s analogy makes as much sense as the arguement that allowing priests to get married would have prevented the sexual abuse cases.

 

[Holly3278]

I attribute it to the “sexual revolution” and the advent of artificial birth control.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

The agitators were who? Anarchists and Communists. We don’t have kings or nobles walking around in robes here but only about 2% of the population controls 80% of the wealth. We have millionaires and billionaires

Look at Oprah. She is using her celebrity to try to convince people that there are many paths to God, and she is quite wealthy.

No, no. One only has to look at the number of indepently owned newspapers and magazines of the middle of the last century compared to the global media empires controlling most of the media today. It’s only a handful of people now. We can’t forget that.

These same people make certain that their causes are funded. If you or I had the money, we could buy billboards and TV advertising, like they do, for any cause we like. It’s a great responsibility. But they can and do tell people what to wear and how to behave.

And where are the parents of some of these so-called celebrities that allow themselves to be used by these people? I would be ashamed to have some of them as sons and daughters. They play prostitutes or dress like prostitutes. I look at the highly offensive Lady Gaga and think - where is her mum?

Whatever happens to the United States and the UK, we must have hope in Christ above all. While the pagan media denounces religion in general and Christianity in particular, we must present Jesus Christ anew to the world.

Recently, in Detroit, the father of a young man involved in a gunfight said, “WE need to sit down at the dinner table as a family again.” He is absolutely right. The core of society is the family, but there has been a war waged against the family and the sanctity of marriage over the last 40 years. It reminds me of many ways of what was happening in Europe just prior to the Second World War. People who believed nothing, living by stealing and indulging in whatever crossed their minds.

Peace,
Ed

Ed, for someone who likes to fantasize about the past you don’t seem to know that much about it.

World War II was not started by people who believed in nothing. It was started by people who believed that the world owed them something and that they were inherently superior to those around them (the Germans and Japanese).

As for you being ashamed of any hypothetical children, considering all the many things you disapprove of, it doesn’t seem like it would be that hard for any child to earn your disapproval.

 

[stevusmagnus]

Agreed! Society has imposed this on us. As much as we would want the mothers to stay at home and take care of the kids, its impossible! Not with a mortgage, car payments, saving for education, etc.

This is not true. It is true that women working unneccessarily has driven wages down for working fathers who need to support families.

Nevertheless there is often no need for a mother to work. Typically they do so for lifetsyle choices such as a bigger house, nicer car, fatter 401k. Catholics in the old days sacrificed luxuries for family. Now it is the opposite. Families are not willing to make the sacrifices necessary to have a mom at home, although they could. This is not helped by a lot of priests preaching to modern families what they want to hear.

 

[stevusmagnus]

I absolutely agree with this. Yet the main point in my original post is that perhaps we as catholics invite more temptation to ourselves by holding marriage off until our mid-late twenties, considering that in apostolic and even medieval times men and women got married upon hitting puberty (thus decreasing the chances of fornication because they have a sexual partner).

Holding off marriage is often morally necessary today because the key factor in a successful marriage is maturity. A 14-15 year old back in the early 1900’s much less Christ’s time was expected to act, work, behave like an adult and be responsible. Thus it was much easier for younger kids to get married and take no responsibilities of marriage.

Today we have 30 and 40 year olds who are still nowhere near mature enough to get married. 14-15 year olds today are no the level of 6 year olds in times gone by. For them to get married would be a disaster.

Nevertheless where young people are responsible and mature and the teenage has the means to support a family there is no moral reason not to get married. This is just a rare situation because one typically needs a college education or at least post-high school training to make enough $ to support a family these days.