Wednesday, September 12, 2012

The sin and depravity ideologues (#1321)

Strictly as an example, the Christian Bible talks about this in Genesis, when Adam and Eve realized they were naked and became ashamed. For me it is good to realize something however to ascribe shame to what is real is beyond normal. We are what we are and no amount of subterfuge or illusion will ever take that reality away. Yet we as a civilization and more specifically as the American society have found a way to cover our reality with guilt. The guilt then becomes the practical mores and the acceptable norms of behavior. Debating the finite points of whether it is good to be real or whether real is actually immoral is confusing at best. Too much of the conversation ends up being about conflicts with religious implications and our own insecurities with what reality actually represents. Like all things that effect the human experience, time and logic have the best chance of keeping our minds out of fear of what we may do as to acceptance of what we really are. If we are going to allow for our human evolution into the future to have the best of outcomes, we must remove the artificial restraints we place upon on ourselves. I realize that out of respect for others we must not act as animals and place our crude inhibitions on display for ulterior motives, contrarily, nor should we restrict our natural behaviors to unnatural bindings designed to negate examples of honest and innocent expression through misgiven unnatural mores. There is a line to be observed when it comes to what is real and what is acceptable behavior in a society. That being said, the notion that an anti-prurient agenda is an ideal to strive for is over-stated and instead a moderately acceptable approach of real individual self expression should be promoted.

No comments: