Annual Fundraising Appeal
 Here’s an important message from John Pilger on why the Left needs CounterPunch:
Pilger
John Pilger is one of the world’s most courageous journalists. He’s been contributing to CounterPunch for years. But as he notes, the old media establishment is crumbling around us, leaving precious few venues for authentic voices from the Left. This collapse makes CounterPunch’s survival an imperative. We’re not tied to any political party or sect. Our writers are free to speak their minds. Let’s keep it that way.  Please donate.

Day12Fixed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
cp-store

or use
pp1

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Criminalizing Sexual Desire

The Assault on Richard Dare

by RAYMOND J. LAWRENCE

Richard Dare, who from all reports is a solid citizen and quite talented, was made president of the New Jersey Symphony on January 2, 2013, and ten days later resigned in what appears to be public disgrace. (New York Times, 1-12-13) The press discovered that in 1996 he was charged with “attempting a lewd act upon” a fifteen-year-old girl. He was thirty-one at the time. Three years later, when the girl reached the legal age of eighteen he married her and they are married still. Dare himself spent 60 days in jail for his offense, spent two years on probation, and was temporarily listed publicly as a sex offender. He has been eminently successful in business ever since and from all reports is a person of good character.

On the face of it Richard Dare cannot be considered a criminal in any sense. He was a man looking for a wife, whose object of affection happened to be a couple of years under the legal limit. That legal age, in this instance eighteen, under which one is considered immature is course quite arbitrary.

A culture that now views Richard Dare as a criminal or a danger to the social order should be defined as a sexually sick culture. Laws against sexualizing youngsters in advance of their readiness for sexual relations are of course useful and necessary to protect the innocent. Richard Dare broke the law technically, and paid the penalty. But only in a most technical sense did he break the law. A male and a female found each other and built a life together for two decades. We should all rejoice at that.

Laws purporting to protect the underaged from sexual predation should not be used as a sledge hammer. Individuals reach sexual and emotional maturity at quite different ages. Enforcement of such laws should allow for such differences. There is a big difference between a six-year-old and a seventeen-year-old. Some eighteen year-old “adults” may still need some protection because of their own idiosyncratic emotional immaturity.

Through most of human history girls were married, or paired off sexually, as soon as they reached puberty, usually with males also in their teens. Current legal prohibitions of sexual pairing prior to age 18 are arbitrary and should be treated by courts and public opinion as such. Sometimes the prohibition promotes human well-being, and sometimes it interferes with legitimate claims of personal autonomy.

The continuing public energy in attempting to disgrace Richard Dare is essentially a fear and loathing of sexual pleasure itself. It is a fear and loathing inherited from Christianity. It is the dark side of Christianity, a religion that has in many other respects brought good things to the human family. The notion that sexual desire is the devil’s work continues to lay a curse on Western Christian culture. The story of Richard Dare is illustrative of the workings of that curse.

Raymond J. Lawrence is an Episcopal cleric, recently retired Director of Pastoral Care, New York Presbyterian Hospital, and author of numerous opinion pieces in newspapers in the U.S., and author of the recently published, Sexual Liberation: The Scandal of Christendom(Praeger). He can be reached at: raymondlawrence@mac.com