Masturbation...why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter billcu1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Extreme examples?

Homosexual “marriage” used to be considered extreme. How much longer will the others be “extreme”? 🤷

Comparing water and sex is absurd, and the effects of sexual activity that disregard Catholic morality and natural law speak for itself: destructive behaviors that harm individuals, society and that it’s advocates need to made excuses to cover-up the consequences.

The whole “sex in moderation” claim only applies to those in a valid marriage who conduct sexual activity appropriately.

That is the gift of sex, not masturbating to internet porn because of stress, having a same-gender relationship, or playing house.

:tiphat:
Homosexual marriage should of never been considered in extreme(I am speaking for a civil law standpoint) Two human beings loving each other and forming a partnership creates benefits for society and harms no one. Masturbation has virtually no physical harm(unless one uses extreme force etc). Yes, it can become destructive if it consumes the person’s life but that usually happens to repressed people and not those who have a healthy relationship with sex.
 
The gods of the Romans were very quick to anger and would kill people on a whim. The God of the old testament also was very quick to anger etc. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the stories used similar attributes. Humans also personify their gods with attributes of the current culture and surrounding cultures.
Of course. That explains all those Psalms where Yahweh is described as “clumsy and merciless, quick to anger, full of wrath, and abounding in retribution.”
 
There are Christian Churches that disagree but anyway, there are over 2000 laws in the old testament. Most of these were left behind or disregarded. I don’t know why I keep getting labeled as gnostic.
 
I don’t know whyyou are attacking Liberals and I don’t think you read my comment closely or carefully.Also, I don’t agree with your implied definition of liberalism When did I advocate for anyone to become a porn star? I clearly state that obsession with sex is just as dangerous as repression. Both cause great harm! I healthy relationship with sex is needed just like a healthy relationship with food is needed or else one becomes obese. I am also a Catholic:)
Not sure why a porn star would be called “obsessed” with sex. It’s a job, however distasteful
😉
 
Homosexual marriage should of never been considered in extreme(I am speaking for a civil law standpoint) Two human beings loving each other and forming a partnership creates benefits for society and harms no one. Masturbation has virtually no physical harm(unless one uses extreme force etc). Yes, it can become destructive if it consumes the person’s life but that usually happens to repressed people and not those who have a healthy relationship with sex.
What does “recovering catholic” mean? Goes it mean “currently an atheist”? Because if you hold the view that the rights and wrongs of acts rest entirely upon consequences you adopt a principle of atheism and one the Catholic Church absolutely rejects.

And why if SSM is good civilly, ehy should it not fit the religious context? Are you saying the religious context is just arbitrary myth - nothing more?
 
The issue with them being bottom feeders isn’t completely accurate. Yes, many of them did become sick, possibly because of being allergic and you know back then they didn’t know about t allergies. So it was easier to ban it. Other tribes did enjoy said bottom feeders.
 
What does “recovering catholic” mean? Goes it mean “currently an atheist”? Because if you hold the view that the rights and wrongs of acts rest entirely upon consequences you adopt a principle of atheism and one the Catholic Church absolutely rejects.

And why if SSM is good civilly, ehy should it not fit the religious context? Are you saying the religious context is just arbitrary myth - nothing more?
I thought I told you in another thread. Currently I am going to both a Roman Catholic Church and a Catholic Episcopalian. You might be wondering why don’t I just convert. Well, I do love the Roman Catholic Church.It brought me to God( my religious journey is a long one)regardless of how we disagree.
 
You countered with extreme examples and therefore it seems like you didn’t read my post at all. Water in excess is dangerous, the same goes for sex but just because in excess it is dangerous doesn’t mean it always is dangerous.
Not only the quantity of something can be harmful, but also when used for a purpose other than it is intended.

One cup of water you drink is harmless. One bucket of water you throw over your head will wash you. A pool of water is good to unwind. But take any of these quantities and inject into your bloodstream, and you’ll suffer harm.

Same for sex. A married couple, trying for a baby, may get to have more sex than is common, but they are not harming each other - they are swimming in the pool.

But a married man that decides to sleep with another woman for fun, “just this one time” is already harming himself - he is injecting a cup of tap water into his bloodstream.

Sex has a purpose. Anything outside of that purpose is potentially harmful, both to body and soul.
 
Not only the quantity of something can be harmful, but also when used for a purpose other than it is intended.

One cup of water you drink is harmless. One bucket of water you throw over your head will wash you. A pool of water is good to unwind. But take any of these quantities and inject into your bloodstream, and you’ll suffer harm.

Same for sex. A married couple, trying for a baby, may get to have more sex than is common, but they are not harming each other - they are swimming in the pool.

But a married man that decides to sleep with another woman for fun, “just this one time” is already harming himself - he is injecting a cup of tap water into his bloodstream.

Sex has a purpose. Anything outside of that purpose is potentially harmful, both to body and soul.
I actually agree with you. A man who cheats is harming and betraying his wife therefore that is wrong. However, if he and his wife engage in oral sex why is that considered sinful? 🤷
 
However, if he and his wife engage in oral sex why is that considered sinful? 🤷
Because it would harm their bodies and their souls, unless the oral sex is just a part of foreplay and it all ends in vaginal sex (I’m just guessing what some people are going to say). 😉
 
I actually agree with you. A man who cheats is harming and betraying his wife therefore that is wrong. However, if he and his wife engage in oral sex why is that considered sinful? 🤷
Because it removes the unitive and procreative aspects of the sexual faculty.
Because it is sodomy, which does not operate within the sexual complementarity of man and woman.
 
I actually agree with you. A man who cheats is harming and betraying his wife therefore that is wrong. However, if he and his wife engage in oral sex why is that considered sinful? 🤷
about 50 years ago it would be considered something only prostitutes would do. Why are these sex acts considered normal now?
 
about 50 years ago it would be considered something only prostitutes would do. Why are these sex acts considered normal now?
Because Daddyo and Mommyo want to have “free sex and love mann”. And smoke dope like the other beatnecks.

LOL
 
I actually agree with you. A man who cheats is harming and betraying his wife therefore that is wrong. However, if he and his wife engage in oral sex why is that considered sinful? 🤷
I’m leaving the harm to the soul apart from this, as it seems that you want to know the “tangible” (quantifiable, measurable, study-able, existential…) harm.

It always start with trivialization - this, by itself, is dangerous.

It is one act, seemingly inoffensive, that we will say “It hurts no one”. What we don’t see is the harm this idea causes to the act of sex as a whole, but we will get there. Moving on.

The couple decides to do some other different things as well. What harm is there in some other practices, after all? There are many a couple can do, with no added harm. At first, they are open to life, finishing the act as it is supposed to; the new activities are only adding some spice to the relationship.

Then, an accident: this one time the man can’t finish in the proper place.

We can discuss philosophy here: did he sin? Didn’t he? He had the intention of finishing in the way that was open to life, after all. Was the act sinful? Wasn’t it?

See how blurred the line already is? How confusing it got?

As it was an accident, he is not responsible by the result…

Or IS he??

After all, he knew the risks. He knew there was a chance he wouldn’t be able to do it right. He sinned not by “missing the shot”, but by putting himself, time and time again in a situation of RISK. That alone is already a sin.

Say, if I were to play Russian Roulette. Even if I don’t shoot myself, I am consciously choosing to put myself at risk, just for the thrills.

Another point by which both are harming themselves: what if they find out they prefer other activities?

He simply loves oral sex, while she finds it demeaning. He might get addicted to that which, while “inoffensive” enough, will be harmful to their relationship.

She might decide that, since other - BETTER - options are open, penetration can be left out. She feels uncomfortable (it happens, many do), and doesn’t want to do it, so both decide to leave that out for now.

When they decide to have babies, she will do it with reluctance, he will do it halfheartedly, if at all; instead of working out their problems with “copulation”, finding out how to better THAT practice, they were too busy having fun. Now, having babies is a chore.

And it all started with a small exception, a dismissing of what sex really is about. Now we have a confused couple, that doesn’t understand when all went wrong. She doesn’t understand why she can’t make him as pleased with anything other than oral sex; he doesn’t understand why she hesitates when he wants to try vaginal sex.

Seems a bit over the top, right? “As if all this would happen!”.

Fact is, many already have this mentality, many are already corrupted by the “trivialization” up there in orange, and many already suffer with all this confusion. So many couples need therapy because “sex life turned boring” (translating: we think sex is about fun, we want MORE fun!) or “he/she won’t do what I like” (translating: sex is about me; pleasure ME!). Most of the ‘options’ (oral, anal, etc) are so self-centered in one of the partners that people have difficulty balancing their ‘times’, of pleasuring their partners. Again, instead of making the one unitive act pleasurable to both, they waste their time practicing acts that focuses on one person more than the other…

TL;dr: trivializing is bad. It makes you think something (sex) is harmless, making you use it carelessly. You end up forgetting what sex is about, redefining its purpose and getting confused in the process. (just like the USA did with the word “marriage” recently)
 
The gods of the Romans were very quick to anger and would kill people on a whim. The God of the old testament also was very quick to anger etc. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the stories used similar attributes. Humans also personify their gods with attributes of the current culture and surrounding cultures.
The God of the New Testament wasn’t so slow to anger either! Think about him whipping those ungodly moneylenders in the temple. Our God is going to divide the goats from the sheep when He comes again. Sometimes I really think God is so angry at humanity he is ready to destroy it again right now, through global warming.

Don’t you dare think God is just a little namby pamby god. He is full of righteousness and anger, though he has mercy and pardon for those who repent.
 
The God of the New Testament wasn’t so slow to anger either! Think about him whipping those ungodly moneylenders in the temple. Our God is going to divide the goats from the sheep when He comes again. Sometimes I really think God is so angry at humanity he is ready to destroy it again right now, through global warming.

Don’t you dare think God is just a little namby pamby god. He is full of righteousness and anger, though he has mercy and pardon for those who repent.
Sometimes when I read comments like this, I think I made a mistake in coming back to a church. :eek:

I should just become a Buddhist…
 
Sometimes when I read comments like this, I think I made a mistake in coming back to a church. :eek:

I should just become a Buddhist…
Well Thor, you did choose your Church carefully. You chose one that would appear to lessen the grounds for God to be cross with you! 😉
 
In other words:

By thinking that sex is about having fun, they will be disappointed sooner or later.

Food has both a **tasty **and nutritive nature. (and I feel silly typing this :ehh:)

If I start to believe that I am allowed to eat only because of the taste, I might refuse foods that, while very nutritive, taste bad. I might also indulge in foods that are very tasty (candies! snacks!), but with no nutritive value.

If I believe that the nutritive > tasty, I will not enjoy what I eat. As healthy as I might get, I will become one Miss Sour Pants. All broccoli and no candies, as the saying goes…

Sex has both a **unitive **(pleasure of the couple) and procreative (babies!) nature.

If I start to believe that I am allowed to have sex only for the unitive aspect, I might close myself to a possibility that, while being able to give me the great gift of having a child, is burdensome. I might also indulge in acts that are very pleasurable, but that do not add anything to my spiritual growth.

If I believe that procreative > unitive, I will neglect both me and my partner. Even if I get many divine Gifts in the form of kids, I will not be improving my relationship with my spouse. Since I will also be a Lil Miss Sour Pants, I will probably neglect the kids too. So much for that!

Separating or prioritizing one nature over the other is harmful to us, as we are both flesh and soul. If one action can bring more than 1 good thing, we should get them all, instead of closing ourselves to one or the other. Doing that is just dumb.
 
Sometimes when I read comments like this, I think I made a mistake in coming back to a church. :eek:

I should just become a Buddhist…
Why bother with religion at all? Why not just join the Democratic party?
 
I have problems with lust and slothfulness. I don’t know what to do except start praying the rosary. I haven’t been to Mass for probably a year, and when I go to confession it doesn’t last long. I am in deep right now. 😦
When I was young, I did it because it felt good. Now, when I do it, it’s because it’s a compulsion. I’ve been actively trying to overcome it for around three years now. Like you, I frequently find myself failing, almost weekly. My confessional promises don’t stick for very long, and after each failing I feel terrible.
You need to be in a 12 step program. It is an addiction.

sa.org/

There are three parts to overcoming this addiction;
  1. psychologists help with the underlying causes of acting out,
  2. The sacraments and our spiritual life keep us strong.
  3. Accountability to someone who will hold your feet to the fire.
Sobriety starts with accountability. Your sponsor is someone to whom you are accountable, someone someone who can look you in the eye and tell you the truth when you BS yourself. There will be a group of guys who have walked your walk and know exactly where you are, whom you can call when you are tempted to act out.

This is the way. I speak from experience.

-Tim-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top