Recent comments by former Arkansas governor and one-time presidential candidate Mike Huckabee seem to have caused quite a stir in certain political circles. His comments have been criticized as “insensitive” and even pushed to the level of abject ignorance. But is that really the situation. Being a man there are certain issues that go on in a woman’s life that I will never be privy to but, being familiar with human anatomy and physiology and biology, I can’t help but raise the question, was he putting his foot in his mouth or was he putting his finger on the problem?
For decades now it seems that feminists and their male compatriots have tried to stir women into believing that they are somehow deprived–historically, there has been some manner of deprivation–of something that they should have: sexual freedom. To this end, they have encouraged women to live promiscuous lives that have resulted in tremendous poverty and deprivation, as well as death (approximately 55 million, at last figure, through abortion of which 1/2 are female). Women have not been freed through this promotion, rather they have been enslaved to cycles of abuse and neglect. Rather than falling, rates of violence against women have been climbing steadily, but I notice that they increase with each surge of “freedom” that women seem to attain. Women, once considered a protected class of citizen by being denied access to certain venues, have had opened for themselves a passage into a world of cruelty.
Now, someone might say that I am merely being sexist, but I am a realist who, quite frankly, says, “So?” A realist, like myself, has no choice but to look at issues at their basest sense, to look beyond some ideal to the facts of the matter. So as a realist I examine the problem: sex.
Sex is seen as a commodity to be traded, rather than a jewel to be treasured. Let’s be clear, I like sex, I enjoy sex, but it can lead to abuse. One of the fastest rising personal addictions is sexual addiction. And, since we are being honest here, isn’t anyone else alarmed by that? The proliferation of pornography, even “soft” pornography is alarming. If I remember my numbers correctly, at one time the first time a person might be exposed to it was 13, now the age is somewhere around 9–nine years of age! Our society is teaching sex to kindergartners, in effect grooming them for sexual predators and, in some cases, turning them into sexual predators themselves. Is no one alarmed by this? As long as they’re getting “free” contraceptives–which is another issue in itself–who cares, right?
I think that Gov. Huckabee was putting his finger on the problem: that there are some people who, rather than taking responsibility for themselves and their actions, they want to insist that they have a right to partake in certain interpersonal actions, and that government–in the United States that’s you and me, the taxpayers–have no choice but to fund their exploits. Let me be clear, I’m not saying that they shouldn’t do what they want to do–even though, if they had any common sense and sense of personal dignity, they know they shouldn’t–I’m merely stating that whatever sense of empowerment they were after is being diminished by depending on the government.
Well, what about those poor women who can’t afford it, what about them?
Where I’m from, there’s a pretty simple rule of thumb that pretty well, I believe, answers the question both sensibly and compassionately: if you can’t afford something you don’t get to buy it or participate in it. Freedom, true freedom, comes from paying a price. If you want to be free to take part in certain activities you have to be able to pay your own way. The constant message of those that drive for a libidinous lifestyle is “get out of my bedroom”. They don’t seem to realize that what they are doing IS giving the government a path to do just that, ultimately govern what does go on in the bedroom.