It’s late April, and I’m still reflecting on “March Madness.” No, not the basketball finals, but the madness about “things sexual” that dominated the headlines last month.
To me the most troubling bit of madness was the President’s response to Sandra Fluke, the 30-something Georgetown University law student who wanted to make her case to Congress for why students’ contraceptives should be funded under Obamacare by this Roman Catholic institution in violation of the denomination’s doctrines. The legislature denied Ms. Fluke a hearing. But she was instead invited to speak before a small steering committee of sympathetic liberal lawmakers, and some media outlets treated this minor venue as if it was a full-blown Congressional forum. Without a trace of shame, Fluke asserted that 40% of Georgetown college coeds were having “so much sex” that they couldn’t afford the alleged $3000 worth of contraceptives needed to avoid consequences through 3 years of law school! The link below recounts the incident:
I was appalled when President Obama dignified Fluke’s demand for Jesuit-funded, consequence-free promiscuity by personally reaching out to her on the phone. He came to her defense because she’d supposedly been “victimized” by a talk show host who described her extreme sexual behavior with a crude term. Even more stunning was Obama’s stated motive for supporting her:
“The reason I called Ms. [Sandra] Fluke is because I thought about Malia and Sasha, and one of the things I want them to do as they get older is to engage in issues they care about, even ones I may not agree with them on,” he said. “I want them to be able to speak their mind [sic] in a civil and thoughtful way.”
Yikes! Wasn’t there a more edifying role model from whom Malia & Sasha could learn “to speak their mind in a civil and thoughtful way?” Did the President actually believe that free speech would be the only lesson his daughters learned from Ms. Fluke?
I personally don’t think the President intended to convey to his daughters that wanton extra-marital copulation is just fine. But his sympathies toward Ms. Fluke and his lack of disapproving commentary about sexual promiscuity imply such a message to his daughters . . . and to the general public. Indeed, sex education can occur by omission as much as by pro-active instruction, especially in regard to moral constraints & attitudes.
Surely the President doesn’t want his daughters engaging in risky hook-ups with multiple partners during college & beyond. And I hope he had a private discussion with Malia & Sasha to that effect after the public flap. Unfortunately the President’s defense of Ms. Fluke was a debasing sex-ed lesson for the rest of us.
Hi Linda,
Good comment as always. I would like to add, in my opinion, that Obama’s objective in the Sandra Fluke matter, had not much to do with her, Sandra and et al’s licentious lifestyles and governments mandate to support it. But, it provided an opportunity once again, to tear down and chip away the objective truth found in the institution of the Catholic Church. He has systematically declared war on her – the church. This fact is evident. If he can silence the church and those who follow Christ’s teachings and dim the light of truth, then there is no stopping his diabolic intentions (even though he believes they are good). And I am afraid to say even at the expense of sacrificing of his two daughters.
I hope your blog goes viral…great comments. This Fluke hearing was one ugly circus – but will it stop there? Here’s what’s next: 3-4 Viagra reps, seated and looking somber, will make the claim that if Obamacare doesn’t fund for male enhancements, a huge cross-section of US men will wander about depressed, aimless, looking for their lost mojo. And Gloria Allred, seated next to a tearful coed, will state that if Obamacare doesn’t cover waxing, eye-brow plucking, and monthly pedicures, the young lass will hate men and vote Republican. Yikes.
Terrific insights folks!
Yes, Janice, secular liberals in government seemed determined to stamp out the last vestiges of the religious bedrock on which our nation was founded. Without the church acting as the American social conscience, people would think they are “totally free” when indulging broadly in every type of immorality, seemingly without consequence. But in fact, they would become “slaves to sin” (Romans 6:16-20) and lose all true freedom. As in the ancient Greco-Roman world, our formerly self-sufficient, innovative people would allow themselves to become hedonistic wards-of-the-state, demanding merely “bread & circuses.” This would allow secularist rulers to consolidate & perpetuate their own power indefinitely by making people dependent on government for every need & desire.
Thanks Brian for your affirmation. Your creative “slippery slope” scenario could soon become reality for people who no longer learn about the Constitution in school, and who cannot distinguish between true needs and “frivolous wants.” (The Constitution severely limits even the “needs” government should meet). This ignorance coupled with the entitlement mentality of Fluke’s generation will bankrupt & weaken America very quickly unless we reverse current trends.
Rebelling against the Lord’s principles & demanding unlimited goodies? Yep, sounds like bratty, whiny babies to me. God forgive us, and help the U.S.A.