Could it be that the requirement that all acts of intimacy end in an action that is ordered towards procreation leads to sub-optimal long term results

  • Thread starter Thread starter TechieGuy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LundyLund said:
Natural reasoning, OP: sexuality is designed for procreation and unity. When you intentionally use your sexuality only for unity, it is a misuse of the gift.
Click to expand...
Along with JetteZ, I note there is an unspoken assumption that gifts that have two good ends are only properly used when both ends are intended.
 
TechieGuy said:
Along with JetteZ, I note there is an unspoken assumption that gifts that have two good ends are only properly used when both ends are intended.
Click to expand...
Is that not the case in general?

Gum is a bad analogy because it’s purpose is not to be eaten. If you were to sit down to a Gourmet meal in a Michelin Star restaurant, and then go on to chew the food until the taste was gone, then spit it into a bucket, would that not be a misuse of your faculties?
 
But the claim under examination is not that that this is mere misuse, but rather that it is a mortal sin.
 
Maybe you are trying to lose weight, are trying a strict diet for another reason, or maybe you have a health issue that precludes final consumption of this super awesome food.

When it’s food = personal preference that goes against social norms.

When it’s orgasms = mortal sin.
 
First off, athletic acts aren’t natural. They’re our invention, so the comparison really isn’t applicable.

It’s much more like what St. Paul said. Food is for the Stomach and the Stomach for food.

With that said, I do think we can overthink the act. Indeed eating involves our senses. We smell our food, we taste our food, we chew our food. This is all natural. But imagine if we obsessed so much about the sin of gluttony that we told people that they must eat as quickly as possible, that they should avoid smelling their food or prefer the blandest food in the world. Certainly, you’ll probably find some Catholics in history who DID indeed approach gluttony this way.

The point is just follow the natural design. Don’t thwart it. But do practice temperance.
 
I wasn’t the person who used that term. I was responding to the person who used that term. I think it’s strange to call it “athletic acts” as well.
 
I referenced training for running as an analogy - is that what you are talking about?
 
I referenced training for running as an analogy - is that what you are talking about?
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble following the thread. I’m not sure what I was responding to anymore.
 
Ah, here is it. This is what I was responding to.
Could it be the case that this is akin to a runner being told that all athletic acts must result in running 5000 meters?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top