To venable (verb): To randomly muse upon this and that.


There has been a bit of a furore recently concerning Harriet Harman’s involvement with the National Council for Civil Liberties in the 1970’s. Apparently, the organisation at that time had a pedophilia supporting group affiliated to it. If you want detail please see here. What I  want to ponder upon, in the light of all this, is the reaction to paedophilia.

Why are people outraged? One of the big implications of society’s rapid transformation in its attitude towards homosexuality is how we view sexual relations generally. Historically, there has been a moral frame in which to view sexual relations. That has been established through the biblical teaching that sexual relations are only to take place between one man and one woman within marriage. The approval and encouragement of sexual relations between those of the same sex has demolished this frame.

It is interesting how this change has taken place. From being an abomination; homosexual relations became tolerated, then they became accepted and now they have become encouraged. Which begs the question: can this not happen in other categories of sexual relations? There is now no moral reason why it should not happen. If we reason according to personal choice and majority view then we are in a very dangerous place. And that is precisely the basis for the rapidity of the change as regard to homosexual relations. And that is precisely the basis on which people can now also argue in the realm of sexual relations generally.

Lets us just run through how such developments happen:

  1. People lose a deep respect for God.
  2. People operate without any thought that there is a God who has standards that should be adhered to.
  3. People start to make up their own morality. Initially this is a small despised group.
  4. The group grows and the media starts to accept their views as being reasonable.
  5. Public opinion starts to be swayed as regards to the acceptability of such morality.
  6. A critical mass of public opinion is reached so that anyone who stands against the new morality is despised and viewed as a heretic.

So we make two points:

  • As homosexaul realtions have become accepted, the same can so easily happen in respect of paedophilia or bestiality or whatever. If a lobby for paedophilia starts to mount then there is no knowing where it will end. The demolishing of the biblical frame has removed the bulwark against such development.
  • If you accept homosexual relations, why not accept paedophile relations? We may find that a bit squeamish to think of, but there is no real moral argument against it. If you reason that homosexual relations are OK, what stops you reasoning that paedophile relations are OK?

So the assumption that undergirds the Daily Mail’s questioning the activities of Harriet Harman is evidence of a morally confused society. If you lose the foundation of biblical morality then you are on a journey with many potential destinations; all of which end in disaster for humanity

P.S. For avoidance of any doubt let me make it clear that I believe paedophile activity is despicable





Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: