More Recent Sexual Idiocy
Posted: Friday, October 02, 2009
by Joel Hendon
http://hebronics.org/index.html
Just four days ago, I posted an article here on Searchwarp entitled "Is The U.S. Becoming a Sex-Crazed Nation?" Now today I'm moved to write another simply for proving my point, I suppose.
You'll notice a reference in that one to one even further back entitled "Nine arrested in the upstairs male restroom at Sears" I stay constantly astounded at the number of people who will risk their jobs, their families and careers for a little gratification. I once heard a wise old farmer once make the remark that he loved to eat when he was hungry, but he tried never to let his stomach run his life or business. I thought it was funny (as he intended it to be) yet the more I thought about the more I realized how wise that was and it also applies to sex.
From another story, I learned that the extortionist is a man named Robert Joel Halderman, an employee of CBS, producer of "48 hours". He has been terminated from CBS.
The next item, this one from the New York Daily News tells of a book by Stacy Parker Aab due for publication in January, says she had a close call, sexually, with then president, Clinton. She was employed as a political staffer in the White House. The name of her forth coming book? "Government Girl: Young and Female in the White House". Sounds much like a ruse to sell books to me. Clinton would never do such as she claims, "touchy-feely".
I did not mean this to turn into a gossip column article, but I'm trying to bring out a serious point. That which I dealt with in the article mentioned in the first paragraph. But as I browsed for confirmation on the above items I also ran into one where Elizabeth Edwards is again threatening to divorce John after she heard of allegations of his being unfaithful with more than one woman. This article in "Politics Daily" sounds like a gossip column to me and says Elizabeth warned him if she found this to be truth, she would have to divorce him because then he'd be a serial cheater'. This is also supposed to be revealed in a book now proposed by Andrew Young, a former aide to Edwards in his campaign. John denies the allegations.
To somewhat repeat what I said above, what flabbergasts me is the prominent people who jeopardize their families, their reputation and career, so carelessly. The characters mention here ar only a drop in the bucket. Go read these two articles: swa549217 and swa267646 .
Just place the number in the search window above.
This Article has been viewed 247 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (5 total)I think we are more of a sexually repressed nation, where sexual misconduct is the normal reaction to repression. It's like wine in France. If you can drink it, why abuse it?
American society has a lot of institutional hang-ups, and sex is way up on the list. If we take sexual, religious, and creative repression to the extreme, you know what you get? The Taliban.
-GWell Gregory, history proves you to be wrong. In the 30's through 50's sex was for more repressed than today, yet there were fewer, by far, illegitimate children for the government to have to support, veneral diseases eventhough there were less medications to keep them down, far fewer suicides, especially among youth. There was far more respect for the opposite sex than there is now. Only a tiny fraction of divorces per marriages than there is now. So where is the the Taliban mentality from that?People who feel they are the ones who decide right from wrong, can never give the value achieved by that stance. I failed to mention that there were far less mental problems per capita back in those years.I do appreciate your reading and commenting however, and I am thankful that we can still disagree in this country without reprisals.Joel, you are so right!People just can't seem to see the correlation between the increase in sexual immorality and many of the social problems we have today. They poo-poo the whole idea of monogamy and sexual abstinence until marriage. However, if everyone practiced such a lifestyle, AIDS and other veneral diseases would be virtually wiped out within a generation. And there would be no more illegitimate children! Gee, what a bummer that would be, huh?Instead, most Americans today see nothing wrong with homosexuality, fornication, multiple sex partners, temporary marriages, heterosexual couples shacking up without being married, or schools handing out condoms to teens. And some of those who favor this kind of stuff the most are same ones who scream the loudest when an older man has sex with a teen? That smacks of hypocrisy to me.Thank you Terry, I agree with you completely. You need to drop on down and read Paul Shroeder's approach to the subject. He and Gregory as well, are advocates of the problems.
You sound oddly prudish and naive and somewhat strident for whom I see as a most astute man;the blind ,mindless ,DNA-hard-wired sex drive is,as freud succinctly stated,the single most important human drive and human need,far exceeding the human needs for food or shelter,for example,However disturbing and unsettling that seems,to you and many others, sexual madness and excess has ALWAYS been the case throughout the long epoch of human history,on Earth,in every time and every civilization,not merely today ,in America. Sexually transmitted iseases are simply more resistant;pregnancies less hidden and more made public. Perhaps your appetites don't rule YOU,but the world chafes under the inglorious restraints of religion and,yes,even common sense, on this most human overwhelming hormonal drive;I'm frankly surprised that you're surprised;paul schroederThank you Paul, for your comments. But, my friend, you say that you are surprised that I am surprised. The reason I am surprised is that I have lived over 79 years and never in my lifetime has there been such shameless sexual exhibitionism by people who hold positions of public trust or otherwise prestigious positions. I am referring to the history of the U.S., not the history of the world, where conditions have been much worse. I may be outdated in my philosophy, but it seems very stupid to me, that people will risk their reputations, families, career and such simply for sexual escapades. That is about all I was trying to convey. I don't understand why that would sound prudish or naive to anyone.
Really?With much respect,I beg to strongly differ;The more recent disclosures of JFK's and Rockefeller's sexual excesses ,while in office,are the mere tip of the political iceberg ,of self-destructive exhibitionist sexual behavior by people who held positions of public trust or otherwise prestigious positions,in our government.All throughout our history(E.G.:President jefferson's sexual liasons with almost all of his female slaves) our leader's behavior,while in office,was for the most part, totally replete with such uncontrollable rabid sexuality.The mounting evidence of the most recent disclosures reaffirm this prevalent most human inclination,despite your being agog;You are most fortunate,personally,not to suffer from the ravages of the lusts most men struggle with,daily.paul schroeder
Joel, a young woman recently laughed that "Just say no" would not work for anything. I said, "Well, it did when I was growing up." All of my group of friends said no, yet we were leaders in our school and we had lots of fun and participated in pranks, dances, and sports. Some guys teased us that we were repressed, but we just said no. We grew up, married, and had no fear of pregnancy or diseases. "Sexual repression" is also called self-respect and other positive things. There is definitely a place of pride and respect for that "Just say no" view. How much grief can be avoided, we later learned from others who had no backup at home or among friends for looking out for their own best interests before marriage. The sense of betrayal and hurt among young people today is huge, for they see an adult society not looking out for them. They hear from grown ups: "Well, everyone is doing it." They do it, get dumped, and go through what no one young should have to endure, including shame, fear of teen pregnancy, remorse, and/or guilt. Who is looking out for these young men and women, teenagers, that deserve to know there is a better, free-er way? Intelligent grownups need strong backbones and no "go-along" moral views regarding teen sexual behaviors. All of us should feel no need to apologize for saying it when something is wrong and in the worst interests, in the life-long view, of the young, male and female.Thank you Jean, what a wonderful comment. Your comment is better than my article and I appreciate your additional information added to it.
I dont advocate the problem;what is the matter with you?you choose to misunderstand.I simply stated facts,Clinton,like jefferson,like JFK were men.You might just as well complain about the constant rain in Seattle as a pernicious American ailment;just because I remind you that it ALWAYS rains there, does not mean that I advocate precipitation;c'mon Joel:paul schroederO.K. I apologize. I honestly thought you were defending the loose morals. But on the other hand, the case here and case there you mentioned cannot compete with the daily news, almost every day. I'm sorry I misrepresented you.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.