Life is Sacred
Respect for Life


1. False.  Eberstadt shows herself to be pro-woman but anti-sexual revolution.  Her central claim is that letting the culture run wild and unhinging sex from its context of marriage and family makes sex unmanageable not just free and fun.

2.  True.  The sexual revolution is responsible for the collapse of marriage. However, progressives and feminists say ‘good riddance’ to bad rubbish regarding the nuclear family. (pgs 41-44)

3.  True.  The pill and its related contraceptive technologies made it possible for people to have sex outside of marriage and commitment. As more children are born and raised out of wedlock, it becomes “the new normal.”

Humane Vitae predicted four evils if reproductive technology use would become widespread:

1. A general lowering of moral standards as seen by the rise of illegitimacy and abortion, documented by G. Akerlof (pgs 137-138)
2. A rise in infidelity.
3. Discord between the sexes as documented by the sexual revolution’s defenders, e.g.  feminists.  (pgs 145-149)
4. Coercive use of anti-reproductive technology, e.g. Chinese government, India and Indonesea. (pgs 144-145)

22.  D.  Romance is a tenderness, a caring, a “sacredness” to the physical and emotional behavior between a couple. Sex between the spouses is one of the natural ends of romance.  This end is thwarted by pornography and a contraceptive mindset because sex becomes “safe” in this mentality but sex is inherently wild and creative by nature, procreation being an aspect of that.

28.  Consider that it has to do with what people are educated with. People can be educated with spurious ideologies, including the atheist humanist presuppositions of communism. Related to this presupposition is the understanding that religion is just self-hatred and superstition. The formation of this presupposition has to do with the vested interest of our own pleasure and indulgence in combating any sort of prudent response to government or sexuality –I want “X,” be it a perfect world that has no housing shortage or food shortages (promises of communism), but without any cost on my part, such as humility, charity and interpersonal assistance… let the government manage away poverty and homelessness. Alternatively, I want all the pleasure in sex and I don’t want any of the responsibilities involved with sex, especially children.

These are both examples of delusional presuppositions that do not understand the nature of the relationships involved. There is no such thing as justice without personal responsibility (as opposed to state “welfare”) nor is there any such thing as sex without marriage and family. These are the intelligent and proper context of each. A spirited denial or even a mindless and unstoppable project or push to make it otherwise cannot replace the indispensable role of mindfulness with regard to either government or sex and family.

If you'd like to take the complete quiz, please send us an email.  If you haven't read either books and would like to start reading them as part of a bookclub, please indicate this in your email.  We'll then attempt to connect you with others in your area, and depending on the information you provide, match you with others according to your preference.