Support First Things by turning your adblocker off or by making a  donation. Thanks!

So right after mentioning her new book in the post below, I noticed that NRO has posted a fine interview with Mary Eberstadt , in which she implies that, just as the medical facts about cigarettes’ harm eventually came to be undeniable, so will the sociological facts about the sexual revolution’s harm.

An exaggeration for rhetorical effect, no doubt. Because we are never going to be able to return to an era where non-marital sex is looked down upon in the (quite double-standard-governed) way it was pre-1966. And no democratic governments will ever again try to ban contraceptives the way Connecticut’s did ( Not that there’s anything Unconstitutional about that! )prior to Griswold v. Connecticut . That toothpaste is out of the tube, and so the incentive for denial about the sociological evidence will remain high.

But all that is besides the main point. On the basis of her devastating 2008 essay in FT, “The Vindication of Humane Vitae,” which is less about the papal teaching than a comprehensive review of the now-overwhelming evidence of the sexual revolution’s net harm to humanity, I’m willing to bet her new book is an essential read.

You should at least read the FT essay.

Comments are visible to subscribers only. Log in or subscribe to join the conversation.



Filter First Thoughts Posts

Related Articles