Short Story: God Didn't Put Pen To…

Short Story: God Didn't Put Pen To Paper. - 2

Sodom and Gomorrah are held up as examples of what God will do to places which have become 'too corrupt'.

Again we are talking about man's own interpretation of what is 'corrupt'. I have this notion that if something is doing no-one else any harm, then it's entirely up to the individual what they do with their own lives, and it '...ill behoves any of us to talk about the rest of us...'

Smoking and getting drunk, for instance, are both likely to hurt others besides the individuals indulging them. The wonderful Roy Castle, with more talent than a whole theatre-full of diverse people, died of lung cancer when he'd never smoked a cigarette, because he was in night-clubs where the atmosphere was thick with others' smoking for most of his life. This wouldn't happen now, would it? Yet there are still people who think it's funny to blow smoke in your face; still people who think their home is a place where they can force their 'atmosphere' on their families.

Drinking to excess sometimes causes accidents, and aggression against friends and family. Gambling drains the resources of often already too poor people, and can also lead to violence against the innocent.

What these two doomed cities are most renowned for, however, hurts no-one. When they were burned to the ground maybe 'sodomy' was considered as much an 'unnatural' corruption as all the other debauchery which had become so rife within their walls, but God is highly unlikely to have torched them... I see Him as a scientist, therefore He would be daft to interfere with one of His 'experiments'.

I see only men of the Time making up their minds that this or that was unacceptable, and putting it down as 'the law of God', which has stood for over two thousand years in the form of the 'Holy Bible', and is therefore irrefutable.

As I said before, the Bible is one of the best guides to moral living there has ever been, and some of its precepts are absolutely unassailable, but they are the precepts of the men who wrote them, God-inspired for the most part, maybe, but God would move with the times, and it ill behoves anyone to keep Him stuck back there in B.C. where the things we know today could not be imagined.

I'm pretty sure God would no more condemn a man for his love of another man, or a woman for a woman, than He would condemn us for mutual heterosexual love. Nor do I believe it is entirely wrong to love more than one other partner; our culture dictates that it is, thus our marriage ceremony; other cultures allow a wife to have more than one husband, and vice versa. Who are we to say they are wrong? Even the Bible accepts 'concubines'. Perhaps it isn't so unnatural for us to be promiscuous, unlike some animals and birds, who cleve to just one partner.

I contend that our reason for adopting monogamy was because we began to realise promiscuity led to some pretty awful diseases being spread around...

I don't argue with the theory that overcrowding can cause homosexual behaviour, as discovered in scientific experiments with overcrowding animals. What I do argue with is that this is 'the' reason for it. If it's been going on since before Sodom and Gomorrah, then it's probably been going on since sex was invented, and has very little to do with overcrowding...

Paedophilia hurts children. It is an unacceptable perversion, but it is understandable. A man or woman unable to face possible ridicule from another adult, for their looks perhaps, or their lack of endowment, might turn to children for gratification. Watching a program about Bonobo Chimps made me realise that this is actually a natural thing for primates in general, when a baby of about a year old bounced over to the lead male and proceeded to impale herself on him, exciting him into full mating. To say I was shocked is an understatement.

The whole idea is an abhorrence for anyone concerned with the mental welfare of any child. We are no longer mere apes, we are thinking, reasoning Humans, who know what hurts and what doesn't. If a child likes being 'played with' that is natural, a part of the human sensory system which enjoys stimulation, and perfectly natural. What is most definitely not natural, is to assume the child has any understanding of the adult approach to that stimulus, and to try and exploit it in the belief that the child will go on enjoying it. Fear of the unknown was never more true than in this case, and the traumas caused are bestial in their selfishness.

Maybe I'm being insufferably outrageous in putting forward these unpleasant thoughts, but I'm pretty sure there won't be many of you who, if you're honest, haven't entertained what would be considered perverted thinking. That's what the vast majority leave it as, because we have the moral strength to consign such thoughts to the bin in disgust, or maybe use them in private fantasies at most. Which gives you an idea where I'm coming from I guess; - at least I'm honest about it... but can you see how this can lead to abuse in the weak?

Cast the first stone if you are so pure of mind that you cannot fathom this attitude. Condemn those who are self-seeking enough not to care about the horrors they inflict on the innocent, but at least try to understand that they are less than humans, because they are lacking in the normal levels of compassion and common decency that a well balanced Human possesses. I would say they are unforgivable, but that is supposed to be unchristian... isn't it?