Revisiting

I've recently seen some really good critiques of the purity movement from back in the day.  They do a really good job of balancing respect for the concept that sexual purity is a good thing, but that the presentation wasn't particularly helpful in achieving the goal.

I've been thinking about what the Christian ethic of marriage and sexuality is, and should be, and I've reached a conclusion.

I believe that the appropriate Christian ethic of sexuality and marriage is to resurrect that wonderful love child of the PCUSA, Justice Love.

The basic premise of this wonderful ethic was that virtually anything that any group of people wanted to engage in sexually was fair game, as long as it was "just".    While "justice" sounds like a slightly strange measure, in reality what they were advocating was informed consent.   Essentially, as long as all parties agreed and had equal control of the situation pretty much everything was on the table.

This ethic has multiple benefits for everyone.    Not the least of which would be the elimination of false rape claims.

There is one area of concern.  The area of who or what can appropriately consent.   Clearly this ethic would allow sexual relations between parents and children as well as sibling as long is there was no coercion or control involved.   Sex with children becomes more problematic as there must certainly be an age or level of mental development necessary for both parties to have informed consent for a just sexual encounter.   But how does one tell a 12 year old no, if they strenuously assert their acceptance of the relationship or encounter.

I'm sure that there might be some niggling details to work out before Justice Love can be broadly accepted as the appropriate ethic of marriage and sexuality for all, but I see these as being insignificant compared to the benefits that will be reaped from this much more inclusive and egalitarian sexual ethic.

My new battle cry,  Justice Love Now!

Please join my crusade.