Sexology & Health

What is the significance of immorality verse (Genesis 9:4) being enclosed by procreation statements? To discuss the issue, let us first compare the scriptural passages for animal and human procreation, if there is difference in them. For animals: 15 God said to Noah, 16 “Go out of the boat with your wife, your sons, and their wives. 17 Take all the birds and animals out with you, so that they may reproduce and spread over all the earth.” 18 So Noah went out of the boat with his wife, his sons, and their wives. 19 All the animals and birds went out of the boat in groups of their own kind. ( Genesis 8:15 , TEV) In God's Words " take all the birds and animals out with you, so that they may reproduce and spread over all the earth ", is there any prohibition/condition pertaining to the act to procreate for animals and birds? None. For Human Beings:

Human genital is the central focus of sexual immorality. While other parts of the human body maybe used in " sodomy " or masturbation , still the mental focus on the sexually active individual is the genital of other person/s. In view however of the use of verb "eating" instead of "using" in the verse related to sexual immorality then obviously, it is referring  to the use of mouth as in " oral sex ".  Above proposition is logically proven by the following premises, with the subject verse stating as follows: 4The one thing you must not eat is meat with blood still in it; I forbid this because the life is in the blood.( Genesis 9:4 , TEV) First premise - the reason for prohibiting "eating meat with blood still in it" is because "life is in the blood" and not because "blood is life" or because of "blood" in meat. Second premise -if you take out "life" in blood, you consequently take out

The surrounding circumstances when immorality verse was spoken is very important in its interpretation. In brief, together with other verses, this was spoken to Noah and his sons after the flood. Although, the Book of Genesis does not specifically mention the traumatic effects of flood on the family of Noah, their fear may be seen and acknowledgement of the power of God was exhibited by Noah's acts of offering sacrifices to God. 13 When Noah was 601 years old, on the first day of the first month, the water was gone. Noah removed the covering of the boat, looked around, and saw that the ground was getting dry. 14 By the twenty-seventh day of the second month the earth was completely dry. 15 God said to Noah, 16 “Go out of the boat with your wife, your sons, and their wives. 17 Take all the birds and animals out with you, so that they may reproduce and spread over all the earth.” 18 So Noah went out of the boat with his wife, his sons, and their wives. 19 All the animals

Previously, readers were introduced to sexual immorality verse in the article entitled " Is "same-sex marriage" immoral ?". It was also asked whether the word "life"  in Genesis 9:4 refers only to "human" life. In view of the present understanding of life, which includes animal life, there is a need to revisit the subject Genesis verse in order to know whether or not the life in verse 4 includes animal life. This will further guide to the real intention why the prohibition.  The verse is restated, to wit; 4The one thing you must not eat is meat with blood still in it. I forbid this because the life is in the blood.( Genesis 9:4, TEV ) Let me discuss first on why life is material to the interpretation of the verse by way of asking question. Isn't it logical that if ever life in the verse is determined to refer only to human life, then the meat and blood being referred in the same verse belong only to human?

How do you treat " same-sex marriage " , including " oral sex " , Filipino dialect's " kumakain ng hilaw na karne " or " eating uncooked meat ", sodomy and reproductive health law in terms of morality. Do we have available bases in the scripture to help us decide?  A series of articles shall be published to  specifically touch on specific Genesis verses.  The participation of United States through "same-sex marriage" shall also be discussed. This includes the Philippine reproductive health law and its repercussions.   To forewarn, the author will be very thankful if nothing significant will happen this coming April 2014 . He has his basis but will be affirmed only at that time. When the author says April 2014, he is referring to a month and year, not hours or days. In this introductory topic, immorality will be touched by starting with Genesis verses on "eating meat with blood still in it".

Before engaging in issues between two opposing forces related to causes of Philippine calamities, it is necessary to consider the possibility of deceptions among the parties. For example, in a recent pronouncement of Lipa Archbishop Ramon Arguelles, he blames the "ungodly" laws, e.g, Reproductive Health (RH) law, as a cause of Philippine disasters. Is he honestly correct? Let us try analyze the following facts and circumstances to help a person reach into a logical decision. First premise : The subject of the blame are the recent Philippine calamities, such as, Cebu-Bohol earthquake and Yolanda typhoon last October 15, 2013 and November 8, 2013, respectively. Second premise : Reproductive Health Law was approved only last December 2012. Third premise : "Lust" is being promoted in the reproductive health law.

President Benigno Aquino III had signed into law a pornographic material. This is inside Reproductive Health Law or R.A 10354, otherwise known as "“An Act Providing for National Policy on Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health”. Also, the law modified the traditional concept of parenthood due to its letter and spirit, which include persons and their multiple same-sex partners as parents. All Filipino lesbians , homosexuals , including sexual perverts and pornographers must therefore thank President Benigno Aquino III for this benefit. Because, the President had finally proven to them that they are his "boss" too.  Therefore,instead of criticizing the President, they, including homosexual priests, should stop, as he had not only signed but also urgently made into law a health law, purposely, for the sake of their "lust" , at the cost of taxing-paying Filipino public, including Congressman Manny Pacquiao. (Only that-Congressman Pacquiao pa