We Should Punish Premarital Sex, Says Family Research Council

Family Research Council leader took to the radio to say that we ought to punish premarital sex like we used to… because young people were never given the “right” to have sexual intercourse outside of marriage.

While guesting on Washington Watch Monday afternoon, FRC senior fellow Pat Fagan argued that the 1972 Supreme Court court case Eisenstadt v. Baird, which overturned a Massachusetts law banning the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried people, is quite possibly “the single most destructive decision in the history of the Court.”

In Fagan’s mind, that Court decision effectively told all single people that they have “the right to engage in sexual intercourse.” Never mind the fact that, well, they kind of do have the right — you know, consenting adults and whatnot — because Fagan remembers when society used to have laws forbidding such sin.

“Society never gave young people that right,” he continued. “Functioning societies don’t do that, they stop it, they punish it, they corral people, they shame people, they do whatever. The institution for the expression of sexuality is marriage and all societies always shepherded young people there, what the Supreme Court said was forget that shepherding, you can’t block that, that’s not to be done.”

By giving an implicit seal of approval on premarital sex, Fagan said, the Court was “brushing aside millennia, thousands and thousands of years of wisdom, tradition, culture and setting in motion what we have.”

Favorite

2 members favorited this

Get Embed Code

Tags:

Comment

You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!

Join 12160 Social Network

Comment by Maria De Wind on March 16, 2013 at 10:29pm: Read More ... at your own mental health risk

Comment by Tara on March 16, 2013 at 11:14am: Haven't these arseholes figured out that if you punish or make laws against most anything, including pre-marital sex... you get more of it? It's called the forbidden fruit syndrome. It hasn't worked out too well for priests because they can't even get married or have sex at all.

And what will the punishments be for such a sin as pre-marital sex? And who will be in charge of handing down the punishments? I agree KingofthePaupers... they are sick fuks for even toying with the notion. 9 times out of 10 these holier than thou folks are the biggest fornicators, perv's and sexual deviants out there. Just saying...

Comment by KingofthePaupers on March 16, 2013 at 6:05am: Jct: The anti-tootoo-tickling dinosaurs making trouble again. I bet they'd love to start punishing masturbation again! The tootoo-tickling police. A tootoo-tickling squad. This must be a joke, no one could be this stupid. Maybe they've got a punishment fetish, on the sadist side. Are they going to get to do the punishing? What sick f*cks, an expression I so rarely get to appropriately use!

Comment by Genevieve Fosa on March 15, 2013 at 11:06am: It isn't the societal mores, it's the economy. People can no longer afford to get married, but the biological imperative to reproduce is still with us. On the other hand, children still need homes and families that want them and will take care of them. We all need homes where we are wanted and valued.

The extended family, whose business it was to take care of all its members, was effectually killed in the early Twentieth Century. For thousands of years, young couples have lived with one set of parents, or the other, helping them as they aged, and in turn being helped by them, as the children were born. However, for various reasons, this became anathema during the early Twentieth Century. Now, with the majority of people living on next to nothing, we, as a society, are flailing, trying to figure out how to live reasonable and dignified lives.

Comment by DTOM on March 15, 2013 at 6:59am: “Functioning societies"? LOL...yeah, a society where the rights of the individual are crushed by self appointed oligarchs, authoritarians and mindless braying sheep.