16
Sep
08

All right fine, sex it is!

OK, I get the message. After putting up some decent numbers for blog visits here for well over a week, I’m hearing crickets chirp today. Thirty-five visits, and 20 of those by people who got here searching for images of “fuzzy boots” or “hot anime girls” and who probably left five seconds after realizing those posts weren’t what they hoped they’d be.

I understand. I posted another installment of my novel recently, and there are probably all of three or four science fiction fans reading that here. I posted a “drive-by scripture,” which isn’t as meaty or irreverent as some of my stuff. Then I post a Two-fer Tuesday post on a strange topic, “sorcery.” (Hey, you try coming up with good one-word topics that me and Miz Pink can tackle while mostly ensuring we won’t repeat each other.)

I get it. You’re all wondering, where’s the sex? It’s been a while. You’re saying, “Deac, damn it man. Your name is Deacon Blue. Not Deacon Blue Balls.” Or maybe not. In fact, maybe you’re all just depressed about the stock market. In any case, sex does sell, I admit. Always has. So it’s probably time, even if I have to force the issue. But, what the hell to talk about? I’ve already covered the major sex topics I can think of with a religious bent. Or, frankly, that don’t have a religious bent. But hey, let’s just flip through the lexicon of sex topics here…hey, there we go! Sex toys!

The Bible doesn’t mention sex toys. Frankly, I wouldn’t expect it to. But it does talk about “unnatural affection.”

For this reason, God delivered them to degrading passions as their females exchanged their natural sexual function for one that is unnatural. Romans chapter 1, verse 26

Frankly, I like the “God’s Word” translation a little better, as most translations do the “God delivered them” or “God gave them up to” wording, which sort of implies that God made them sin or somehow created a situation that encouraged them to sin.

And that translation goes like this:

For this reason God allowed their shameful passions to control them. Their women have exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

Still a little odd-sounding, but closer to the idea that God let them do what they already wanted to until they might realize just how sinfully degraded they had become.

What does this have to do with sex toys? Probably nothing. Maybe they were using hand-carved cypress-wood dildos from Turkey and God didn’t like it at all. But somehow, I doubt it. But the agonizing thing is how vague “unnatural affection” is. I think it’s used elsewhere in the Bible and usually as code for homosexual sex (right after the verse above, to be honest). Some say the term means sodomy. I think it just means (at least in the context of the passage above with the women) sexually misusing your body.

Maybe the women (and the men) were just slutting around. Maybe they were committing incest or child sexual abuse. Maybe they were doing it with animals. I don’t think it was all about same-sex couplings.

Trouble is, people do get the idea that things like back door sex and use of sex toys is sinful. And I’ve seen the “unnatural affection” argument used to decry the use of vibrators, plugs, dildos and the like. I guess because they aren’t attached to your spouse’s body except by possibly some straps, so they aren’t “right” or “natural” in the eyes of the “Church Lady” types. But really, fornication is the sin. What you do to yourself, by yourself, regardless of what tool you use or what orifice you choose to put it in, isn’t sinful. I’ve been over this before, here and here, but masturbation isn’t a sin, folks. I just can’t see how it could be. So, sex toys or not, go for it. In fact, especially for the ladies, sex toys are probably just what you need for a lot of those solo sessions.

As for couples, well, the marriage bed is a place where damn near anything goes, and toys can be fun. They were fun as kids, and we’re supposed to be young at heart and remember our youthful love with our spouses throughout our lives together, so get yourself a toy box for some age-upgraded playthings.

Bottom line, there is nothing or unnatural about sex toys. I don’t think it falls into the “unnatural affection” category. Unless the Bible writers were being prophetic and referring to man-made materials like plastic, vinyl, rubber and latex. Pardon me, I think I need to go shopping now.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “All right fine, sex it is!”


  1. September 16, 2008 at 8:23 pm

    i just painted my nails! I can’t type like i want! i agree with ya. being unmarried and sexually active, i rationalize fornication. i think any relationship that violates yr spirit is fornication.

  2. 2 Deacon Blue
    September 16, 2008 at 11:19 pm

    Kellybelle, I totally feel honored that you risked your nails to type that much.

    I rationalized my share of fornication, too…thankfully, most of it ended up being committed with the woman I ultimately married.

    I really don’t get down hard on anyone who has sex outside of marriage. In the end, it’s just one more human thing…I’m always more concerned about the health of the relationships for the people involved.

    Still, being a deacon and all, I have to remind people of that marriage thing.

    Don’t know how long you and Mr. Belle has been together, but the way you talk in your blog, I daresay you’re common-law by now. 😉

  3. September 17, 2008 at 6:17 am

    Yes… the f word. I’d love to hear you chase that rabbit for a post or two…Is the issue, from God’s viewpoint,the lack of ceremony? level of commitment? perspective of the heart? what about remarriage? I, too am sexually active, and not married according to the laws of my land. according to some denominations, every piece of ass I get from now on will be adultery… that doesn’t exactly motivate me to run down the aisle. And would you speculate on consequences? Is a lifelong monogamous relationship without a license or certificate sin, in God’s eyes? when you “daresay you’re common-law by now.” are you condoning? and if so, would you condone it to your pastor?.
    I’ve noticed a marked differenced in how closely I scrutinize some verses, since my divorce.

  4. 4 Deacon Blue
    September 17, 2008 at 9:20 am

    Well, Chris, you may indeed have just given me another post or two’s worth of discussion. Because I admit I was thinking that very thing after Kellybelle’s comment: What defines a “married” (i.e. non-fornication-type) relationship? Don’t know that I have an answer, but I may have some interesting thoughts on it. Stay tuned.


Comments are currently closed.

Deacon Blue is the blogging persona of editor and writer Jeffrey Bouley. The opinions of Jeff himself on this blog, and those expressed as Deacon Blue, in NO WAY should be construed as the opinions of anyone with whom he has worked, currently works, or will work with in the future. They are personal opinions and views, and are sometimes, frankly, expressed in more outrageous terms than I truly feel most days.

Jeff Bouley

_________

Jeff Bouley

To find out more about me professionally, click here. To find out more about me generally, click here.

_________

E-Mail

You can reach Deacon Blue/Jeff Bouley at deaconbluemail@gmail.com.

_________

LinkedIn

For my public profile, click here.

_________

Tales of the Whethermen

My superhero fiction blog, click here

_________

Raising the Goddess

My parenting blog, click here

Copyright Info and Images

For more about images used on this site, and copyrights regarding them, as well as usage/copyright information about my own writing as posted here, click here.

Deac Tweets

Archives

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 836 other followers

September 2008
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

%d bloggers like this: