Did you read post numbers 10 and 29? Please read them, then reply.
Robert, I read the entire thread before I posted.
Post #10, by KostyaJMJ quotes Augustine, who seemed to think prostitution suppressed capricious lusts. Yet he goes on to suggest that prostitution and its procurement are one by a class of people
“…most unchaste in its morals;” and its very existence is *"… by the law of order, it is most vile in social condition."
*. It is rather obvious that his observation is that prostitution may reduce “capricious lust”, yet he explains that the whole scene is most vile and immoral. His observations regarding the need for prostitution is an assumption, yet his condemnation of it is categorical. If you think this somehow condones the evil of immoral sexual relations, then you need to have another think. You are, in fact, condoning others to sin.
Post #29 is all yours Robert! It is a classic case of someone putting the cart before the horse. You state that
“For whatever reason, our sexuality has become hyper-intense.”. Did it not occur to you that pornography and the relaxation of other sexual mores has actually unleashed what you call “hyper-intense” sexuality? Are you saying that men and women have more testosterone and oestrogen and progesterone than past generations? You are making a gross assumption. There is absolutely no scientific evidence of such a thing. What you are forgetting is that the human sexual drive has always been a powerful one. It is that fact that has made the human race the most successful species on planet earth at any time in recorded history. However, you are forgetting that liscentiousness and lust have always been constrained by a moral code, in all cultural situations, throughout all of recorded history. It is precisely why young couples used to be chaperoned. It is precisely why things like rape and incest have been criminalised. It is precisely why prostitution has been criminalised for much of recorded history. It is why homosexual activity has been frowned on for all of recorded history and even criminalised in various societies at various times.
Today, in our contemporary society, all the old moral codes pertaining to sexuality have been relaxed, even abolished and yet you still can’t see why human sexuality seems to be “hyper intense”. It has been let loose Robert. That’s the problem.
You also point out in
Post #29 that the world is undergoing rapid change. What rapid change are you referring to Robert? Technological change? Cultural change? Moral change? All of the above? In the early to mid 20th century people first saw electricity, flying machines, the abandonement of the horse in favour of the car, radio, TV, Jet planes, space ships and a host of other amazing inventions. The rate of change then was way faster than it has been over the past twenty years. Yet the moral code remained intact. So what is the connection between technology and morals, particularly sexual morals? Or is it the case that the latest communication technology has simply catered for all the already degenerating morality? If morality wasn’t degenerating and moral codes weren’t relaxing, the enhanced communications technology wouldn’t matter one iota.
In
Post #29 you also state we
“… must choose between permissiveness and a dangerous coerciveness.”. Just what “dangerous coerciveness” do you refer to Robert? Some form of totalitarian political system? Or do you refer to an increased reliance upon the law to enforce morality? The first is definently dabgerous. History demonstrates to us admirably the effects of a totalitarian state. The latter, however, is something that for most of human history has been the case. It is only within the past hundred years that the Law and Morality have diverged. We have allowed the individual to become more responsible for adherence to a moral code. The obvious question is “has it worked?”. The answer is equally obvious. If you think that the enforcement of a moral code is somehow dabgerous, then I’d refer you to the famed English jurist
Lord patrick Devlin. In the 1960s he wrote a book called
The Enforcement of Morals. Devlin pointed out that every successful society, empire and nation state has had a shared moral code, a common morality. he calls it the “glue” that holds a society together. He also points out that every failed empire and every failed state has had a disintergrating moral code. Others have written books on the same subject. One of the most recent is
When nations die, by Jim Nelson Black. Written in the 1990s it details the moral decline of ancient Greece and Rome and many other empires. Moral decline, the breaking of the ‘glue’ that binds us all together is a common theme and a precursor to failed societies.
Cont.d
. Does that mean that some people have more raging hormones than others? Perhaps. But I guess that those people need to figure out a way of dealing with them WITHOUT watching porn (once again, child abuse) or using prostitutes.
. Although teen pregnancy is not OKAY, we are now giving CHILDREN birth control so they can have sex WITH OTHER CHILDREN!! 
