There is hardly a more controversial subject than God’s view of sexuality. What is it, anyway? What does God think of all this? What does God want?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Wednesday is Question and Answer Day on the blog…a time for exploring many of the questions that people have recently asked about the nine Conversations with God books and the New Spirituality. Here’s this week’s entry…
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Question: Dear Neale: There was one part of CWG where I saw red flags going up, and those were the things said about “going out and enjoying your play thing.” When you look at society and the sad state of affairs that using sex without deep love and commitment has manifested in heartache, violence, and despair, it was hard to figure the reasoning there.
I was a pregnant teenager at seventeen, at eighteen a mother. This fall, that child’s father and I will have been married fifty years. We are among the blessed. The story could have turned out to be another American tragedy. The poor souls who come to earth via the one-night stand and grow up bitter and hungry for a home and love, have changed their outlook on life completely.
Can you comment on this subject? M., Astoria, OR.
Neale’s Response: Dear Marian, I do not believe that CWG in any way indicates that sex should be used without a sense of responsibility. It merely states that it should also not be used without a sense of celebration and joy and, yes, playfulness, as life itself is best approached with a good bit of healthy playfulness.
Marian, the point I see the book making is that so many people are embarrassed or ashamed about the experience of sex, and there is no need to be either. I thought God made a telling point when She observed that we think nothing of putting raw violence and wanton killing on our movie and TV screens, but become ardently self-righteous at the appearance of joyful sex. In this we may very well have our priorities a little backwards. It is when we allow society to think better of making love than of making war that we will have at last evolved as a species.
God’s invitation in CwG to celebrate our sexuality is, I think, a wonderful idea. I think we should enjoy the hell out of sex. And I mean that literally. I think we should enjoy the “hell” right out of it.
And speaking of questions, every human being has asked, at one time in his or her life…Why am I here? What is the purpose of all this? What is my function, beyond survival? What happens when this is over? Is it possible for me to happy – truly happy – while I am here? What could make that happen?
Now, in a most unusual program in a most unusual setting (8 days and 7 nights aboard the magnificent cruise ship Oosterdam), your most persistent questions about life and God, the soul’s purpose and about eternity itself, will be explored.
This will not be a lecture or a stand up talk. This will be a quiet, gentle conversation, including some highly focused interchanges with those in the room. The point of this extraordinary dialogue will be to open you to your own highest wisdom and innermost truth, clearing away, at last, any final internal confusion you may have about your reason for being with a body, and connecting you in a profoundly powerful and deeply personal way with the God of your understanding.
I invite you to grab one of the final staterooms available for The Alaskan Conversations with God program, when I will share with you what I consider to be the most significant messages and life-changing revelations of my 10-year conversation with God.
Just follow this link for more info…
http://nealedonaldwalsch.com/cruise.cfm
(Ask Neale may be accessed on a daily basis in the Messengers’ Circle at Neale’s personal website: www.nealedonaldwalsch.com. Each week Neale selects a question from those posted there and publishes it in this blog.)
NOW, FOR TODAY’S POLITICAL COMMENTARY…
Conversations with God says “politics is your spirituality, demonstrated.” Because I know that to be true, I see nothing — absolutely nothing — inconsistent in my functioning as a spiritual messenger (we are all that, by the way — sending a message TO life ABOUT life through the way that we LIVE our life!)…I see nothing inconsistent in my functioning as a spiritual messenger and a political commentator. I know that there are those among my readers who think that one should preclude the other, but I don’t agree with them.
Yesterday a nice lady named Phyllis posted this entry in the COMMENTS section of this blogsite…

I don’t know if you can hear me on this one. I know you are passionate about electing Senator Barack Obama, but if you could leave the hurtful/hateful comments and accusations about other candidates to the TRULY political bloggers/haters it would be great. I don’t know if it’s possible.

I would love to know, Phyllis, just exactly what “hurtful/hateful” comments and accusations you are talking about. I have not published a single commentary that would fall into that category — and, with gentleness and respect, I would challenge you to post here which one or ones you are talking about…
…unless, of course, you mean any commentary that is critical of one candidate or the other. I do not recall writing a single thing that could be considered hurtful, and certainly not hateful, but I sure have said some things that were critical. And now I am going to say another…
Former President Bill Clinton on Monday was talking about his wife’s campaign for the Democratic nomination, and he was complaining about the way, to paraphrase him, his wife was being pushed out of the race before it is over. Then he said something that she, herself, has said as well. What’s the big rush? Or, as Hillary put it a few days earlier…
“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know I just, I don’t understand it.”
I want and need to point out now that, once again, Hillary & Co. ignore all the facts, and tell only half the story. The REASON that so many top Democrats have been urging Hillary to end this thing already is because the campaign has been going ON for so LONG — much LONGER than those two other races that Hillary keeps mentioning as having gone into June.
Look at this: Washington Post opinion columnist Eugene Robinson points out…

In 1968, the Democratic race kicked off with the New Hampshire primary on March 12; when Robert Kennedy was killed, the campaign was not quite three months old. In 1992, the first contest was the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 10; by the beginning of June, candidates had been battling for about 3 1/2 months — and it was clear that Bill Clinton would be the nominee, though he hadn’t technically wrapped it up.
This year, the Iowa caucuses were held on Jan. 3, the earliest date ever. Other states scrambled to move their contests up in the calendar as well. When June arrives, the candidates will have been slogging through primaries and caucuses for five full months — a good deal longer than in those earlier campaign cycles.

And THAT’S the point, Hillary. Comparing this year to those other two years without mentioning that this year’s campaign has run on months longer is more than simply disingenuous. It is outright misleading. It is like signing an AGREEMENT that the votes in Michigan and Florida will not count…and then insisting that they SHOULD count, in the name of “true democracy” — when the truth is, you were ready to dismiss them completely when you thought you were going to have the entire race wrapped up on Super Tuesday…
It was Hillary — not Barack Obama, but Hillary Clinton — who told New Hampshire Public Radio last Fall…

“It’s clear this election [that Michigan is] having is not going to count for anything. I personally did not think it made any difference whether or not my name was on the ballot.”

Now, you be the judge. Is it “hurtful” and “hateful” to publish such stuff? Or is it fair to point out when a person is being hypocritical when it serves their own needs?
As an ABC News commentator put it: “It is as if Barack Obama is on the 99-yard line and in the final moments of the game Clinton wants the football field extended from 100 to 120 yards.”
Yes, this is called cheating.
Sorry, that’s what it’s called. It’s called “forget about what I said last Fall. Forget about the Agreement that I signed. None of that serves me now. I want this nomination, and I’ll change any words I previously spoke, and demand to change any rule that I previously agreed to, in order to do it!”
That’s what this is called. And I am still waiting for a Hillary supporter — indeed, I am challenging any Hillary supporter — to tell me in the Comment Section below why Hillary should not be called on her duplicity and her change-the-rules-in-the-middle-of-the-competition demands here.
And Hillary, tell it like IT IS….your husband had the nomination wrapped up three and a half months after the primary campaigning season officially started. Given that we started THIS year’s campaign in early January, that would mean you should have gotten out of the race some time in April. Or surely in mid-May. Compare apples and apples, Hillary. I know it hurts, but make a fair comparison. Don’t rely on your hope and wish that people will not remember that those earlier campaigns you keep referring to started many weeks later.
People will remember, Hillary…and you will look, once again, like a manipulative person who deliberately misleads. We all know, of course, that you are not that. So why listen to your advisers and allow yourself to look that way…?