Christian purity culture is sexual immorality masquerading as purity. There is nothing more sexually immoral than shaming people for being sexual. Religion is the most sexually abusive system of all time. Religious sexual purity teaching is psychological sexual abuse. Telling someone they should be ashamed for being sexual is criminalizing being human. Sexuality is sacred. Religious abstinence is unspiritual and perverse. Religion proclaims a message of purity and sexual morality in the very same sentence as it condemns people for having sexual desires, being gay, being sexual while not being married, masturbating. How hypocritical to say you care about the sexual health of society as you destroy people’s sex lives and spread sexual dysfunction like it’s an STD. Controlling sexuality is a sure-fire way to repress spirituality. If there’s such a thing as god, it’s the act of sex, because sex is the closest thing we have to creation. Stifle sex and you stifle the very force of life that invigorates us all. Controlling people spirituality by oppressing them sexuality is sexual-spiritual rape.
The Bible is chock full of sexually immoral teachings. The Bible teaches shame, enforced sexual mutilation (circumcision), female subservience, killing of gays, sexual repression, sexual starvation (chastity), victim-blaming, direct association of sex with hell, no sex in the afterlife, menstruation is dirty (ritual uncleanness)… and so much more! What a sexually immoral book. How could you center your moral code on this book so full of sexually immoral ideas and end up with anything but a sexually repressive ideology? No wonder we see so much sexual abuse follow religion. It is a sexually perverted system. No one who proclaims the bible to be the words of god has credibility to call anyone sexually immoral.
Religion, like laws, is made of moral decisions. The author’s morality is clear in this article, however it is based on sweeping generalizations, and mischaracterizations of many. If sex was condemned by all religions as he suggests, then Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews and Christians would have vanished by attrition or desertion long ago. The fact that religions place criteria on how sex should be practiced is far different than condemnation of sexuality in general. The specific teachings of a given religion are certainly open to criticism, but the author makes it apparent that he would rather smear with a broad paintbrush than consider the nuances that exist within religion in regard to sexual appetites and behavior. In Christianity alone there is a wide diversity of interpretation and teaching on the subject. The author’s bias in his rant clearly precludes him from approaching the subject objectively and leaves his opinions uninformed and unworthy of serious consideration.