T
TedDC
Guest
Better still to ditch the entire idea that you’re going to burn in hell forever because you overate once.
- Status
P
Podo2005
Guest
From a purely natural perspective the purpose of sex is procreation
Masturbation never results in procreation
Therefore Masturbation is objectively disordered
T
TedDC
Guest
Procreation is obviously one purpose of sex; in fact it’s pretty clear that it’s the principal purpose - but where is the evidence that it’s the only purpose? Where is the evidence that self-gratification is not a natural purpose of sex? The mere fact that it’s possible to obtain sexual pleasure without a partner suggests it’s part of our design. Masturbation does not inherently preclude subsequent reproductive sexual activity.
You might as well say that, since the principal purpose of eating is nutrition, any eating for pure enjoyment is “disordered”. But in fact it’s possible to do both - as long as one doesn’t fill up with junk food, one can enjoy an occasional non-nutritious treat.
P
Podo2005
Guest
True… another purpose of sex is unity which presupposes that another person is involved, thus ruling out masturbation since masturbation is done alone. Procreation while not the sole purpose of sex is still one of the purposes of sex.
Sexual gratification is not a purpose of sex… at least not a moral reason for having sex. To have sex with someone with the sole purpose of sexual gratification is lust…i.e. using someone as an object for your own sexual desire… it may be ***natural ***for men to fall into lustful tendencies but it doesnt take away the fact that it is selfish to do so.
T
TedDC
Guest
Once again, you’re simply referring to the Church’s declaration on the purpose of sex. That’s not objective evidence.
OK, the first part of that statement can’t be proven. The second part is entirely dependent on what moral code you subscribe to, and that’s fine. I’m not trying to tell you or anyone else what your morals should be; if you believe somthing is immoral, then obviously you shouldn’t do it. My only point is that there isn’t any objective reason to consider masturbation wrong - it all depends on your moral judgment.
Yes, I agree. In fact I would say it’s objectively wrong and inherently selfish, even without considering religious teachings, because it risks emotional harm to the person being exploited. But we’re not talking about sex with another person - the topic is self-gratification.
I
Ignatius
Guest
What would be an objective evidence that something is a sin? So, is Jesus an objective standard in your opinion?
In fact, the only objective determination of sin is God or one designated by Him. Jesus God said in Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me and the One that sent Me.” and in Matthew 16:19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
That makes The Church the objective standard of what is sinful and what is not.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Even a Darwinist would be able to tell you that the purpose of sex is reproduction, and that non-reproductive sex is, as they would define it, “unsuccessful” sex - that is, does not conform to what they would call “Nature’s design.”
Hence, “unnatural,” and “disordered.”
Darwinists and Catholics don’t always agree, but on this, we agree.
T
TedDC
Guest
And it’s just as clear that the purpose of eating is to obtain nutrition. So is eating a non-nutritious snack for pure pleasure “unnatural” and “disordered”?Even a Darwinist would be able to tell you that the purpose of sex is reproduction, and that non-reproductive sex is, as they would define it, “unsuccessful” sex - that is, does not conform to what they would call “Nature’s design.”
Hence, “unnatural,” and “disordered.”
Darwinists and Catholics don’t always agree, but on this, we agree.
T
TedDC
Guest
Yes, the Church certainly is the objective authority for what is sinful, because “sin” is a Church-defined concept.
What I was looking for - I think the point got lost somewhere along the way - is objective evidence to support a poster’s claim that masturbation makes one selfish. And more generally, objective evidence that the practice is wrong, other than “because the Church says it’s wrong”.
C
chazk728
Guest
It will never be possible to “prove” this particular point, just like it is impossible to “prove” the existence of God or the reality of Christ in our lives. For the issue of sin cannot always be reduced to a scientific argument. The Church declares masturbation to be a sin because of the moral sense of the faithful. It feels selfish because it is seeking an unjustifiable pleasure. And such a sense is predicated on a broad but deep and long-standing understanding of the purposes of man and his life. I will not deny that certain individuals feel no remorse with this particular sin - but I might also submit that these individuals would be hard pressed to argue that this action is in accordance with God’s will for their lives. The moral sense of the faithful is clear, and it provides peace.
J
Janet_S
Guest
It’s not hard for me to accept the Church’s teaching about sex and masturbation because I look around and see that the modern culture is totally obsessed with sex, and what do we have to show for it? Out of wedlock births have skyrocketed, STD’s are common, porn is everywhere, the divorce rate is near 50%, and parents struggle to preserve their children’s purity. And more importantly sex, which should be something special, is not a big deal anymore–just another recreational sport like bowling or golf.
So, if you’re happy with the way things are going, keep doing what the modern culture prescribes: pursue your sexual pleasure with yourself or anyone else or with any animal or object you want to. But if you get disenchanted with the way things are going, take a lot at what the Church has to say.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_en.html
So, if you’re happy with the way things are going, keep doing what the modern culture prescribes: pursue your sexual pleasure with yourself or anyone else or with any animal or object you want to. But if you get disenchanted with the way things are going, take a lot at what the Church has to say.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_en.html
L
Lexagmor
Guest
Hey Ted, I think when you say “objective” proof, it can mean anything for them. Church teaching is objective for Catholics. You have to emphasize what you mean by objective or you won’t really get the answer you’re looking for. I’m guessing you mean something along the lines of scientific or psychological evidence as to why masturbation is harmful?
L
Lexagmor
Guest
Good point. I’ve wondered that too at somepoint. But then I realized not everything is made for the purpose of just one thing. Food is also meant for enjoyment, not just nutrition. Otherwise, all food would be bland. Sex is also meant for more than just procreation. It’s meant to be enjoyed…but within the right context. Just as it is unhealthy for one to eat the wrong way, it is also unhealthy to release sexuality in the wrong way. Most everything in this world that is good, when abused, becomes bad. In masturbation, you’re abusing yourself…hehe let’s face it, in the end, you’re just screwing yourself!
L
Lexagmor
Guest
Here’s an interesting read on the subject. I believe it’s not Christian, so if anyone’s looking for a non-Christian reason…even though you’re in a Christian website 
here’s a little something that, although not as scientific, is still interesting:
newlifehabits.com/2007/08/07/masturbation-addiction-explained/
By the way, Ted, I have a few questions.
First off, are you sincerely seeking an answer, or do you just want to prove your point? I’m not being a jerk about this, it’s just an honest sincere question. Because if it is the latter, then I think it’s safe to say there’s no point in continuing if you’re dead-set on your position.
Second, do you currently consider yourself a Christian?
Third, If the answer to the 2nd is yes, do you find it difficult to see any connection between masturbation and lust?
I ask these just to get an idea of where you’re coming from b/c, idk maybe it’ll help any one of us to answer your question, if you indeed have a question. Hope you don’t mind.
here’s a little something that, although not as scientific, is still interesting:
newlifehabits.com/2007/08/07/masturbation-addiction-explained/
By the way, Ted, I have a few questions.
First off, are you sincerely seeking an answer, or do you just want to prove your point? I’m not being a jerk about this, it’s just an honest sincere question. Because if it is the latter, then I think it’s safe to say there’s no point in continuing if you’re dead-set on your position.
Second, do you currently consider yourself a Christian?
Third, If the answer to the 2nd is yes, do you find it difficult to see any connection between masturbation and lust?
I ask these just to get an idea of where you’re coming from b/c, idk maybe it’ll help any one of us to answer your question, if you indeed have a question.
Hope you don’t mind.
F
fugadux
Guest
@OP: The sin of masturbation is intrinsically evil, since it deforms the sexual act into pure self-gratification: it does not result either in the union of the sexes or in the pro-creation of the species. Because masturbation has an object which is intrinsically evil it is matter for mortal sin.
The sin of gluttony does not contain an object which is intrinsically evil. Thus the Catholic Encyclopedia states: “Gluttony is in general a venial sin in so far forth as it is an undue indulgence in a thing which is in itself neither good nor bad.” There is a difference between “light” gluttony (ie. overeating, overdrinking, eating snacks and so on) which is only venially sinful and “heavy” gluttony (like purposefully stuffing yourself full of food with the sole object of satisfying your senses). There is no such difference between “light” and “heavy” masturbation, since masturbation has an object which is intrinsically evil.
The sin of gluttony does not contain an object which is intrinsically evil. Thus the Catholic Encyclopedia states: “Gluttony is in general a venial sin in so far forth as it is an undue indulgence in a thing which is in itself neither good nor bad.” There is a difference between “light” gluttony (ie. overeating, overdrinking, eating snacks and so on) which is only venially sinful and “heavy” gluttony (like purposefully stuffing yourself full of food with the sole object of satisfying your senses). There is no such difference between “light” and “heavy” masturbation, since masturbation has an object which is intrinsically evil.
L
Lexagmor
Guest
wait…having a snack is bad? I always wondered, is it bad to just eat a candy bar or some other similar thing when you’re not hungry (well, normally one shouldn’t eat sugary stuff when hungry)?
F
fugadux
Guest
@Lexagmor: I would say that it’s not a sin to enjoy a cake or candy if you’re at a birthday party or some other social gathering. Let’s remember that Jesus did produce 6000 liters of wine at the wedding at Cana. There is legitimate pleasure, for sure. And I would think it is a borderline to have a snack even if you’re on your own, I would say it depends on intention and circumstances. But eating with the sole intention of entertaining the senses would be sinful, even if it in most cases would only be venially sinful, since it shows a disordered attachment to the world. Clear-cut boundaries are tough though since eating is not a matter of intrinsic evil, as the Catholic Encyclopedia states.
L
Lycorth
Guest
Very well said. One only has to look at the fruits of an overly-sexualized culture to see how wrong the loosening of the Church’s classical teachings and standards regarding human sexuality is. Where we once had strict rules in place in secular society (per obedience to Church teaching), we had no such sexual problems as we do now. Today, in the wake of the “sexual revolution”, sex is cheap, sex is everywhere, and sex is meaningless as well as a source of harm to millions.
Judge the tree by its fruits.
- Status