If you haven’t seen the latest reason for being atheist, you must check out Richard Dawkins’s recent article in the Washington Post Online, rationalizing his own peculiar sexual ethic. It is hard to believe he means it, harder to believe that any women involved like it, and hardest of all to believe that he found this to be a sound public argument.
We could give him credit, I suppose, for putting his rationalizations out there for public study.
His remarks should perhaps be read in conjunction with Tocqueville’s comment that the mutual fidelity of American wives and husbands was a chief contributor to the fund of mutual trust that the Americans drew upon for the vitality of their democracy.
In Europe, almost all the disorders of society are born around the domestic hearth, not far from the nuptial bed. It is there that men conceive their scorn for natural bonds and permitted pleasures, their taste for disorder, the restiveness of heart, their instability of desires. Agitated by the tumultuous passion that have often troubled his own dwelling, the European submits only with difficulty to the legislative power of the state. When, on leaving the agitations of the political world, the American returns to the bosom of his family, he immediately meets the image of order and peace. There all his pleasures are simple and natural, his joys innocent and tranquil; and as he arrives at happiness through regularity of life, he becomes habituated to regulating his opinions as well as his tastes without difficulty [Vol. I, Part II, Chapter 9; 297].