Sexual Morality: Theocracy Versus Choice
Can the ethics of sex and sexuality be understood in a way that is neither pro-choice nor ascetical?
ISIS are austere and rigorous, whereas postmodernists and sex offenders (for example) are pro-choice.
One party reduces it all to what a book says (or its expounders) regardless of the context.
The other reduces it to a personal decision which is legitimate regardless of the context.
So clearly, illiberal views of sex and pro-choice views of sex are founded on the same nihilistic and anti-empirical premises.
What path lies beyond the mutually complicit alliance of the theocrat and the pro-choice ideologue?