Finding Common Ground on Sexual Morality: A Bipartisan Discussion on Abortion and Cultural Divides
Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.
Up Next
Trent Horn Analyzes Charlie Kirk's Cambridge Abortion Debate with Medical Student Kai Bevan
20:00
Father Josiah Trenham on How Marriage Became the Cornerstone of Civilization and Why We Must Reclaim It Now
1:40:05
What Charlie Kirk Said About God, Jesus, and the Bible That Many Won't Talk About
5:43
Finding Common Ground on Sexual Morality: A Bipartisan Discussion on Abortion and Cultural Divides
A thoughtful exploration of how both political sides struggle with sexual morality in modern America. Jordan Peterson examines why abortion debates miss the deeper issues and proposes that despite ideological differences, both left and right recognize sex as volatile and dangerous. From traditional conservative values to progressive affirmative consent laws, there's surprising agreement that society hasn't adapted to the sexual revolution. This discussion seeks bipartisan solutions to one of America's most contentious moral questions.
Bridging the Political Divide on Contentious Issues
Washington remains deeply divided, with members of the House barely speaking to one another across party lines. In searching for ways to bring people together, the conversation naturally turned to abortion—one of the most contentious issues in American politics. However, the real insight lies not in debating abortion itself, but in recognizing that by the time abortion becomes the conversation, a sequence of bad decisions has already occurred.
This realization points to a deeper question that both political sides might actually be able to discuss: sexual morality and the framework within which sexual behavior occurs in modern society.
Traditional Conservative Values and Emerging Progressive Concerns
The traditional right has consistently advocated for the encapsulation of sexual behavior within fairly traditional, structured marriage. Sexual taboos are common across cultures, and conservatives have long maintained that these boundaries serve important social functions.
What's particularly interesting is that the left is developing its own form of sexual regulation, albeit in a completely different framework. Radical leftist types claim on one hand that anything goes, promoting sexual freedom without traditional constraints. Yet simultaneously, they're implementing affirmative consent regulations and laws in many states, insisting that we live in the middle of a rape culture, and treating sex as a very volatile and dangerous enterprise—which actually happens to be the case.
The Unresolved Impact of the Birth Control Revolution
Society hasn't fully adapted to the birth control pill, which represented a major technological revolution. It's only been 50 years, and we haven't figured out what it means for women to have control over the reproductive function or what the social consequences of that should be.
The leftist types, especially in the 1960s, thought you could completely blow apart sexual morality because now people were free to do what they wanted. But that approach isn't working. There's a backlash against that permissiveness on the left as well, evidenced by the push for affirmative consent laws and the language around consent culture.
An Opportunity for Bipartisan Discussion
Despite the extraordinary tension on this issue, there's an accruing agreement that some deep discussion must be had about sexual morality. People are very upset about the manner in which sexual activity is occurring, especially among young people. They're upset on the left and they're upset on the right, though for different reasons and with different proposed solutions.
This shared concern—that current approaches to sexual behavior are causing harm—presents a rare opportunity. It's a place where, despite the differences, some sort of bipartisan discussion might occur. Rather than focusing solely on the abortion debate, addressing the upstream questions about sexual morality and social norms could provide common ground for productive conversation across the political divide.
