LA Times Justifies Indecency with Evolution - Discretion Warning
Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! - Romans 1:22-25
One of the arguments that gain the least traction with non-believers and macroevolutionists is the link Christians see between Darwinism and the increasing character decay we see in modern society. The LA Times, of all publications, made the link for us. Please be advised the LA Times article as well as what follows is not appropriate for all readers; please use your discretion and God-given judgment.
An LA Times article reviewing a recent movie covered a trend of men ordering silicone dolls for sexual purposes. The article further recounted the story of a man who lives at home with his parents and considers himself nearly married to the realistic mannequin he owns. This is odd enough. However, the Times goes on to report that evolution explains this repulsive behavior:
“But try to look at this through the lens of evolutionary biology. Beneath the onionskin of civilized behavior, human males are inheritors of a fierce imperative to copulate to ensure the continuance of their genes. In the modern world, this primal urge has grown inconvenient, dangerous and occasionally ridiculous, as in the case of a British man who was recently charged with having sex with a bicycle. And yet we cannot doubt the power of this urge, especially when we see the craziness that results from its frustration.”
http://www.latimes.com/features/magazine/la-tm-neil.01jan6,1,3003335.story (I won’t hyperlink to this story. Sorry, if you want to read it you’ll have to cut and paste)
Not much left to say. Deviant behavior is justified through the use of Darwinian evolution.
OC
March 27 2008 03:44 am | Morality and Science
Shiritai on 27 Mar 2008 at 10:42 am #
Evolutionary biology does not justify anything; it is not a moral system. All science does is seek to explain why things are. Deciding how things should be is a matter of philosophy and religion.
Lynet on 27 Mar 2008 at 9:53 pm #
Reading that as you quoted it, I didn’t read that statement as saying that people should have sex with dolls. I read it as trying to explain why people do. One could just as easily write that God has given people the desire for sex and that therefore people sometimes look for fake versions when they can’t get the real thing.
I see from the context that in fact that statement does lead into a (joking) explanation of why people maybe should do this sort of thing more often. However, I think the fact of the male sex drive is the important part of the argument, never mind where it comes from. To be sure, it’s probably also important that the author doesn’t think God has laid down rules against this sort of behaviour — but then, where in the Bible does it say you can’t have sex with dolls, anyway?
OC on 28 Mar 2008 at 10:08 am #
Shirtai and Lynet,
Thanks for coming back Lynet - Good to have you here.
I don’t think the LA Times guys is advocating this kind of behavior but I do think he’s using evolutionary thinking to help us “understand” it. This kind of understanding, I believe, is rooted in relativism that seems to say, if it’s all right for you, that’s good for you but not for me. I think the article conveys a sense of surprise and then a sort of resigned acceptance of this aberrant behavior based on an evolutionary premise. I think it reflects a sad cynicism whereas an offensive Christian™ should be aghast that our society is flouting the morals presented in the bible.
I think the bible does not directly address this situation but it clearly opposes sexual immorality - I believe most would say this qualifies.
OC