Anti-sexual attraction pill

[detrockcity3]

Akron,

From what I have heard, it’s called “saltpeter.” I have also heard that some college cafeterias used to put it into the food.

• Liberian

I’ve heard that’s a myth.

As for the pill…it seems like it isn’t natural to be able to do that. That’s my initial reaction anyway.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

If science invented a drug that greatly reduced sexual attraction and preocupation, would it be licit to take per Catholic morality?

I think this is a side effect of some SSI antidepressants, but I’m talking about taking one for the sole purpose mentioned above.

That kind of pill is just what we need!! But why do you always got to say " concupiscence"? Can’t you just say “sex”? Ditch the fancy words, OK?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Perhaps the most important reason is because treating sin as a medical condition is not only incorrect but it does not profit a person seeking the life of holiness because it does not give that person the opportunity to habitually practice the virtue of chastity which will lead them to greater virtue - holiness.

Amen!!!

Chastity is a virtue, an internal trait that guides one’s behavior. “Not thinking sexual thoughts” does not make a person chaste, just as “not experiencing fear” does not make a person courageous. It is (quite possibly) dangerous to never experience sexual attraction, just as it is dangerous never to experience fear.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

Amen!!!

Chastity is a virtue, an internal trait that guides one’s behavior. “Not thinking sexual thoughts” does not make a person chaste, just as “not experiencing fear” does not make a person courageous. It is (quite possibly) dangerous to never experience sexual attraction, just as it is dangerous never to experience fear.

how’s that?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

how’s that?

Why could it be dangerous? Because, as we were created to have a sex drive, it is unnatural for us (during the middle portion of our lives, at least) to not experience attraction. Emotions exist for a reason. If someone never experienced anger, at all, this would be an imbalance – some things ought to inspire anger. Just so, some things ought to inspire attraction.

Experiencing the attraction, we are given the opportunity to exercise the virtue of chastity. If we have no such experience, then we cannot enact the virtue, and we are the poorer for it.

 

[mosher]

Why could it be dangerous? Because, as we were created to have a sex drive, it is unnatural for us (during the middle portion of our lives, at least) to not experience attraction. Emotions exist for a reason. If someone never experienced anger, at all, this would be an imbalance – some things ought to inspire anger. Just so, some things ought to inspire attraction.

Experiencing the attraction, we are given the opportunity to exercise the virtue of chastity. If we have no such experience, then we cannot enact the virtue, and we are the poorer for it.

This leads us to the central error that is being expressed in this thread. The idea, which can be said to be a result of Puritan influence, is that emotions and emotional responses are evil in some way. This, however, is not correct. Rather, the emotions are intrinsic to the human person and are created good. Yet, through the effects of Original Sin the emotions (passions) are disordered to some degree. It is through the faculty of reason that the emotions are once again ordered to the Good. This is the practice of virtue itself, ordered the passions by the faculty of reason. Now, if we fear the emotions so much that we are willing to deaden them through medication then we are not acting as a complete human person in that we are not allowing the higher function of the soul - reason - to act in its proper role.

We must not fear the passions but rather we must order them by reason to the Good - God Himself.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

PLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!! on all sexual passions!!

 

[AndyF]

I assume you are talking about for persons who are not in the proper situation to be able to act on sexual attraction, like all single people?

Now, would this eliminate all attraction, which would make it difficult for single people to find marriage partners if that is their vocation?

I can see the benefit for teenagers that are out of control, or for people who have a really bad track record for keeping themselves from temptation.

I can’t see why it would be immoral to take it, not anymore than plucking out your eye, like Christ suggested for someone who couldn’t control lust!

Agree. Wouldn't such pill come by the grace of God anyway? 
I was holding back this response, but can't resist since you opened up on plucking body parts. :thumbsup: 

Perhaps castration and ovarian removal would help for those who are certain of their commitment, but I heard this is effective for cases where the first act was never realized, otherwise it is something like 90% effective. 

 Andy

 

[Flopfoot]

Many here correctly point out that sexual drive or attraction in a natural thing. However, too much of a natural thing can be a bad and even unnatural thing.

Consider this parallel. Emotions are natural. Some emotions are going to be sad emotions. But yet, depression is a disordered thing - because it is too much of sad emotions. So we have anti-depressants to counter the disorder. AFAIK (as far as I know), we also have pills to counter too much of the other kind of emotions, to reduce the manic / high of people who are bipolar or manic depressives.

Similarly, while sex drive is a natural thing, too much or too little of it could be unnatural or disordered. So, then there is nothing wrong with having pills to counter this disorder. Of course it’s not for people who have normal sex drive and can deal with temptations and situations on their own with some strength, just like anti-depressants aren’t for people who just suffer normal sadness and can get through it without the pill, but there could be some people who can’t deal with their excessive sex drive so easily.

 

[Michael_Heinzen]

Any God willed and created thing can go astray in our weakened flesh. Sex and love addicts (compulsives) usually don’t chose their emotional challenges and pain in their struggle to control destructive sexual behavior (acting out); they want more than anything to be sober. 12-step programs like Sexaholics Anonymous as well as Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous do wonders to help sex addicts stay sober and not engage in lustful behavior which endangers themselves, spouse, other family members, other personal contacts, etc. Sex is good, but compulsive and out-of-control sexual behavior is selfish and against God’s will that we truly “love” our neighbor. 12-step members still struggle terribly to stop their lusting, self-eroticism (masterbation), and promiscuity, even with the psychological support of their groups. It would be a blessing to have medication to work in conjunction with group therapy, just as it is wonderful for persons suffering from clinical depression to have medication in conjunction with psychological therapy.

BTW, most doctors and psychologists I’ve talked to refuse to prescribe anything to dampen the sexual appetite. They seem to feel that auto-eroticism is normal and healthy, which it may be as long as it’s not compulsive. Compulsive behavior can ruin a marriage as well as push one into self-destructive and selfish (unloving) behavior. This is not God’s will. I’m sure He would not be against a compulsive using medication to quell a problem in this area.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I’d have to go through my notes, but I’m pretty sure one of the early councils dealt with the subject of people who made themselves eunichs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, taking Christ’s words literally about better to loose one part than to have your whole body go into ghenna. Anyway the council decided that those who castrated themselves couldn’t be priests. I might be wrong though.

I_A_;1502412:

I believe one of these is the citations:

**THE CANONS OF THE 318 HOLY FATHERS ASSEMBLED IN THE CITY OF NICEA, IN BITHYNIA.

CANON I.**

IF any one in sickness has been subjected by physicians to a surgical operation, or if he has been castrated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy; but, if any one in sound health has castrated himself, it behoves that such an one, if [already] enrolled among the clergy, should cease [from his ministry], and that from henceforth no such person should be promoted. But, as it is evident that this is said of those who wilfully do the thing and presume to castrate themselves, so if any have been made eunuchs by barbarians, or by their masters, and should otherwise be found worthy, such men the Canon admits to the clergy.

ANCIENT EPITOME(1) OF CANON I.

Eunuchs may be received into the number of the clergy, but those who castrate themselves shall not be received.

BALSAMON.

The divine Apostolic Canons xxi., xxii., xxiii., and xxiv., have taught us sufficiently what ought to be done with those who castrate themselves, this canon provides as to what is to be done to these as well as to those who deliver themselves over to others to be emasculated by them, viz., that they are not to be admitted among the clergy nor advanced to the priesthood.

fordham.edu/halsall/basis/nicea1.txt

Canon 1: On the admission, or support, or expulsion of clerics mutilated by choice or by violence

1. If anyone has been operated upon by surgeons for a disease, or has been excised by barbarians, let him remain in the clergy. But if anyone has excised himself when well, he must be dismissed even if he is examined after being in the clergy. And henceforth no such person must be promoted to holy orders. But as is self-evident, though such is the case as regards those who affect the matter and dare to excise themselves, if any persons have been eunuchized by barbarians or their lords, but are otherwise found to be worthy, the Canon admits such persons to the clergy.
(Ap. cc. XXI, XXII, XXIII; c. VIII of the lst-&-2nd.)

holytrinitymission.org/books/english/councils_ecumenical_rudder.htm#_Toc34001967

First Things
December 20, 2005
Richard John Neuhaus writes:

Moreover, Mr. Woodward fails to see that the priesthood requires more than “affective maturity.” It demands that the protective and procreative zeal that a man would have had toward his wife and children is transposed to his spiritual family, his parish. As early as the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325), which forbade the ordination of voluntary eunuchs, the church has very much relied on the spiritual exercise of its priests’ heterosexually oriented eros. For the priesthood is husbandry in the strict sense, not mere celibacy: it is spiritual fatherhood, not professional bachelorhood.

firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=119

I hope that provides the needed supports and citations.

Your Brother In Christ, Michael

 

[Ridgerunner]

At my age, that pill would be the very last thing I would need.

Sorry to be lighthearted about a serious subject, but I just couldn’t resist.

 

[Hudson_Gillette]

If science invented a drug that greatly reduced sexual attraction and preocupation, would it be licit to take per Catholic morality?

I think this is a side effect of some SSI antidepressants, but I’m talking about taking one for the sole purpose mentioned above.

AkronPonderer, thanks for posting this compelling and original question.

My thinking is it could be a sin or not, depending on the individual. You can take drugs to correct your hormonal imbalances, so you can be healthy. In some cases you probably have a duty to yourself and others, if you are a serious case. But most drugs can be abused by those who only wish to exploit their effects. This would be the same. Some people may need something like this.

As crazy as it sounds, I think most people would actually prefer to not have any sex drive. Esp people who are not likely to get much sex anyway, for whatever reason. If you could eliminate it, you would be freed up from lots of anxieties and the liklihood of making bad choices over this urge - particularly SINFUL ones. But if God meant for us to simply not have urges (hence not be tempted to sin) then what is the virtue in that? What if Christ was not tempted at all by Satan in the desert? What would be his victory then?

I see major abuse potential here for a spouse wanting to get the upper hand in a marriage, by putting themselves above the need for the act, leaving the other in a desperate position. The fruits will be infidelity, or the other spouse using the drug also to even up. The result will be more divorce, and/or less birthrate. God meant for us to get married and bond this way, as much as possible, I think, with certain exceptions. If the cornerstone of civilization is the family, then sex drive is the cornerstone of the family. There needs to be basic, uncontrollable reasons for husbands and wives to need to be together. After a fight, isn’t it great sometimes to make up and then embrace?

This is messing with gunpowder.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

I see major abuse potential here for a spouse wanting to get the upper hand in a marriage, by putting themselves above the need for the act, leaving the other in a desperate position. The fruits will be infidelity, or the other spouse using the drug also to even up. The result will be more divorce, and/or less birthrate.

This is messing with gunpowder.

The way I see it, it’d be a small price to pay to protect morals, after all, a real Catholic makes sacrifices, right?

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

The way I see it, it’d be a small price to pay to protect morals, after all, a real Catholic makes sacrifices, right?

Catholics also believe that the body is given by God, and especially that sexuality is a gift from God.

Castration or chemical suppression of sexual desires is not compatible with the dignity of the person. Admittedly there is a grey area where excessive sexual thoughts may be said to be pathological. In fact this is an area wide open to abuse. Medical doctrs do not have such a strong professional ethic that they can be trusted to separate genuine medical interventions from that which may be convenient.

Website:
personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm

Catholic pages and book reviews, programming goodies, freeware, books.

 

[AndyF]

Many here correctly point out that sexual drive or attraction in a natural thing. However, too much of a natural thing can be a bad and even unnatural thing.

Consider this parallel. Emotions are natural. Some emotions are going to be sad emotions. But yet, depression is a disordered thing - because it is too much of sad emotions. So we have anti-depressants to counter the disorder. AFAIK (as far as I know), we also have pills to counter too much of the other kind of emotions, to reduce the manic / high of people who are bipolar or manic depressives.

Similarly, while sex drive is a natural thing, too much or too little of it could be unnatural or disordered. So, then there is nothing wrong with having pills to counter this disorder. Of course it’s not for people who have normal sex drive and can deal with temptations and situations on their own with some strength, just like anti-depressants aren’t for people who just suffer normal sadness and can get through it without the pill, but there could be some people who can’t deal with their excessive sex drive so easily.

Makes sense to me. !

Andy

 

[mosher]

Similarly, while sex drive is a natural thing, too much or too little of it could be unnatural or disordered. So, then there is nothing wrong with having pills to counter this disorder. Of course it’s not for people who have normal sex drive and can deal with temptations and situations on their own with some strength, just like anti-depressants aren’t for people who just suffer normal sadness and can get through it without the pill, but there could be some people who can’t deal with their excessive sex drive so easily.

Very true. Now, the question would be is this practical. By practical I mean being able to to practice in an ethical way or do we get a lot of over medicated people such as all the kids diagnosed with ADD and ADHD these days. We seem to use medication as a solution to a much deeper problem or even a more simple problem. Here is where we find the danger. Further, who defines a healthy sex drive. We all have a disordered sex drive to one extent or another so where are the lines drawn. Also, what if a law is passed (as has in my city) where the government can force a person deemed to be mentally disordered to take medication? These are all serious questions especially when dealing with the passions.

12-step members still struggle terribly to stop their lusting, self-eroticism (masterbation), and promiscuity, even with the psychological support of their groups. It would be a blessing to have medication to work in conjunction with group therapy, just as it is wonderful for persons suffering from clinical depression to have medication in conjunction with psychological therapy.

Or would it be a crutch as are most medications these days?

The way I see it, it’d be a small price to pay to protect morals, after all, a real Catholic makes sacrifices, right?

This would not be a sacrifice but rather it would be avoidance.

 

[Michael_Heinzen]

In my opinion it’s always better not to use medication if the problem can be controlled by other, more natural means (e.g., emotional adjustment through psychological counseling and groups, 12-step SA or SLAA) just like it’s probably better to get all of one’s vitamins and minerals from eating the right foods instead of using supplements.

However, there are sex and love addicts whose obsessions, compulsions and acting out constantly push them towards destructive action (marital difficulties, losing a job, legal issues and criminal behavior, life-threatening situations and disease, financial problems, etc.) I’m speaking here of sex addicts and not the married guy who is attracted to a new female employee at the office. “Normal” (whatever that means–it’s relative) men will be able to cope; sex addicts may obsess and act out in negative ways. Sex addicts have an illness and they need a crutch when other means fail. The question then becomes: “When am I a sex or love addict?” Passing out pills like jelly beans in over-the-counter fashion would be a mistake, but medication should be offered after competent medical/psychological evaluation.

Of course, there is another “normal” means to control sexual urges (sometimes). Masterbation can be used instead of medication, but there are moral considerations (at least for Catholics) as well as relationship and psychological issues.

I’ve discussed the specific issue of medication as relief for compulsive masterbation. The medical and behavioral professionals I’ve spoken to respond with “What’s all the fuss about?!” On the secular side, auto-erotic behavior is fun and good for you; their only preoccupation is “How much is too much?” However, masterbation is normal and healthy. (They are willing to concede a problem when “self-love” replaces one’s ability to “make love” to one’s spouse.)

If I introduce morality, a “Christian” doctor (we all know Catholics are not Chrisitans–tongue in cheek) will tell me it’s not prohibited in the Bible (not even the old Onan thing counts; besides women don’t “spill seed” when engaging in autoeroticism). If I say I’m Catholic, this means my beliefs are based on early Christian taboos against extramarital sex in order to counter the use of sex in pagan rituals. Or, my Catholic beliefs about sexual morality stem from supposedly celibate churchmen (but we all “know” they cheated anyway) who base their teaching on man-made reasoning from Medieval Scholasticism instead of Scriptural truth.

“But, Doc, I just want a pill!” Nope–not to deaden the desire to masterbate–that would be abnormal.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

In my opinion it’s always better not to use medication if the problem can be controlled by other, more natural means (e.g., emotional adjustment through psychological counseling and groups, 12-step SA or SLAA) just like it’s probably better to get all of one’s vitamins and minerals from eating the right foods instead of using supplements.

However, there are sex and love addicts whose obsessions, compulsions and acting out constantly push them towards destructive action (marital difficulties, losing a job, legal issues and criminal behavior, life-threatening situations and disease, financial problems, etc.) I’m speaking here of sex addicts and not the married guy who is attracted to a new female employee at the office. “Normal” (whatever that means–it’s relative) men will be able to cope; sex addicts may obsess and act out in negative ways. Sex addicts have an illness and they need a crutch when other means fail. The question then becomes: “When am I a sex or love addict?” Passing out pills like jelly beans in over-the-counter fashion would be a mistake, but medication should be offered after competent medical/psychological evaluation.

Of course, there is another “normal” means to control sexual urges (sometimes). Masterbation can be used instead of medication, but there are moral considerations (at least for Catholics) as well as relationship and psychological issues.

I’ve discussed the specific issue of medication as relief for compulsive masterbation. The medical and behavioral professionals I’ve spoken to respond with “What’s all the fuss about?!” On the secular side, auto-erotic behavior is fun and good for you; their only preoccupation is “How much is too much?” However, masterbation is normal and healthy. (They are willing to concede a problem when “self-love” replaces one’s ability to “make love” to one’s spouse.)

If I introduce morality, a “Christian” doctor (we all know Catholics are not Chrisitans–tongue in cheek) will tell me it’s not prohibited in the Bible (not even the old Onan thing counts; besides women don’t “spill seed” when engaging in autoeroticism). If I say I’m Catholic, this means my beliefs are based on early Christian taboos against extramarital sex in order to counter the use of sex in pagan rituals. Or, my Catholic beliefs about sexual morality stem from supposedly celibate churchmen (but we all “know” they cheated anyway) who base their teaching on man-made reasoning from Medieval Scholasticism instead of Scriptural truth.

“But, Doc, I just want a pill!” Nope–not to deaden the desire to masterbate–that would be abnormal.

Hypnotism, maybe?