"It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is"
March 19, 2005
Posted by on
This story today reminded me of the wonderful quote above, from Bill Clinton’s testimony in his sex scandal case. The article tells of a just released study which confirms something I’ve known for years, that so called “abstinent” teens have been pushing the boundaries of the definition of sex for years. In fact, a good number of the “abstinent” people I knew in high school and college were probably more sexually active than those who did not make such claims, all because of their warped idea of what “sex” actually implies. Well, to me, if it is commonly referred to using a term that has the word “sex” in it, well, it’s probably sex. In more simplistic terms, if it involves one or both parties parts that are normally covered by their bathing suit, chances are pretty good that it’s sex.
While I do not like making generalizations, most of the “abstinent” people I know are Christians, and were taking such a stance because of their religious beliefs. Being an agnostic, I do not claim to be a religious expert, but the whole “no sex before marriage” thing seems pretty clear-cut to me. I can’t see any obvious loopholes in there for things you can get away with but still be in the clear. And if you really believe that abstinence is a big deal and you might be in a whole lotta trouble if you don’t abide, it would probably be a pretty good idea not to try to wander into those grey areas of what “is” and “is not” sex. I know if I believed in all that stuff, I wouldn’t try to press my luck, because one slip-up and there is no turning back, and I wouldn’t want to argue my case because I think the judge would be pretty hard to argue with.