Camassia has an absolutely superb post on sexuality and idolatry today. Go and read it at once.
My favorite bit, to which I give a wholehearted "amen, sister":
My own problem with the cult of Eros isn't really that it allows non-traditional relationships. It's that it hogs all of love to itself. When I read about the attributes of marriage -- love, sharing, self-giving, commitment, duty -- I often think to myself, "But aren't Christians supposed to do that with everybody?" Especially since I've been immersed in Anabaptist ecclesiology lately, I can't help noticing that describing those as special features of marriage tacitly assumes that no other relationships have them.
Back in my college Family Sociology course, one point we discussed was how in the industrial era, the family came to be viewed as a "haven in a heartless world." Previously most families had doubled as economic units, running the family farm or the family shop. But from the 19th century onward the husband would go out into the competitive, impersonal capitalist machine and then want to come back to a haven of love and peace overseen by a domestic angel of a wife. Interestingly, this view continued in a much more recent study of female abortion activists. Many pro-life women felt they were defending nurturant motherhood against a ruthless achievement culture -- the very culture pro-choice women usually wanted the right to participate in.
But both those viewpoints tacitly accept the "heartless world." Surely Christians should not do that. The call to love neighbor and enemy alike was a call to love beyond the bounds of family. Isn't Jesus supposed to transform the cruel world, and not just create a hideout from it?
(Bold emphases are mine).
Now if that isn't a corrective to both left and right, I don't know what is.