Oral sex in marriage a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fabio_rocha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think calling “Oral Sex” sex is a sham. There is nothing sexual about it, sex implies that children can be created. Doing this does anything but create children.
 
Foreplay, before the marital act (union of bodies), in the respect of natural law: that is the question ???
 
fabio_rocha said:
me and my spousee like to perform oral sex on each other. is that a sin? if not, what about when we do till the climax?
Click to expand...
For the Husband, climax must be done vaginally, inside the Wife.

For the Wife, it is important that the husband respect her and also please her, putting his own pleasure aside.

If you’re a true man, you’ll please your wife before yourself always.

Your climax as a man is important for procreation,to point out the obvious, hence having it done vaginally. To spill your seed is a form of contraception, which is against Catholic teaching.

Hope this clarifies it.

God bless and I hope you can follow this and stay in the State of Grace.
 
The answer to the original question is very simple.

Moral theologians who are obedient to the Magisterium of the Church will basically give the same answer. Oral stimulation from the husband to the wife is OK, even to the point of climax, as long is it is part of an act that is completed with ejaculation in the wife’s vagina. This answers the other question. A wife can give oral stimulation to the husband but not to climax. Ejaculating outside the vagina has always been considered by the Church to be gravely immoral as it is contrary to the marital act’s procreative and unitive purpose. For couples where conception is impossible due to menopause or infertility for other reasons, ejaculating outside the vagina still violates the unitive purpose of sex.
 
JacarandaPurple said:
Funny how these threads usually read like all the posts were written by people who discount the importance of female climax in the marital relationship. John Paul II (author of Theology of the Body) described ensuring a wife’s climax as the duty of her husband. Many, many women cannot climax from intercourse alone. You do the math.
Click to expand...
be careful with this. ‘theology of the body’ was actually a collection of talks, jp didnt pen that book. I havent read the book so i may speculate that so thing were written by our theologian, im i right?
Ubenedictus
 
fabio_rocha said:
me and my spousee like to perform oral sex on each other. is that a sin? if not, what about when we do till the climax?
Click to expand...
The Church’s teaching on the details of this revolves around natural law. If you look at the male and female anatomy and how the sexual functions work, man is designed to climax inside of the woman. Interestingly enough, the design of the woman’s body makes climaxing through intercourse at the very least difficult. The woman’s climax also works differently than a man. When a man climaxes, he returns to an unaroused state. When a woman climaxes, her body remains aroused. The climax also increases lubrication and dulls physical pain. Women also have the ability to experience multiple climaxes. Often unspoken, also, is the fact that in natural childbirth, women can experience spontaneous climaxes during birth which can act as the body’s own natural painkiller. It is a myth to believe that the woman’s climax increases her chances of becoming pregnant or serve any function of rushing sperm to their destination. The uterine contractions that rush the semen back are unfelt by the woman and are not related to the climax.

Evolutionary biology simply states that woman’s ability to climax has to do with the relation of her organs to the mans. Her sensitive organ is an undeveloped man’s organ. It simply stays about the size it was during embryonic development and never units with the urethra. As such, evoluntary biology simply sees its existance as accidental but fun.

I however do not think its just an evoluntionary accident. I believe it serves a purpose but that its purpose helps to open the woman to the man. Thus where the woman’s climax is placed within the sexual context is less important than the man’s. Believing man and woman must climax together is based on assuming woman’s sexuality is closer like man’s sexuality which it is not.
 
Golf_Zulu said:
All the talk about oral or manual sex as foreplay leading to vaginal sex with the male climaxing inside the woman — inserting tab “a” into slot “b” as one poster put it — is fine for those of us capable of the procreative act. But, without one of those Old Testament miracles, some of us have out lived our procreative days. My wife and I are both in our mid 70s but still like to use our mattress for something other than a sound night’s sleep from time to time. However, due to a medical condition and the side effects of medication, I am very rarely able to achieve vaginal penetration. When I climax, I feel the sensation deep inside me but there is no ejaculate. When both enjoy our foreplay and would be very happy if it resulted in it’s true goal but we know from experience that it almost never does. In short, our sex lives have passed beyond the procreative, but we still find them very unitive. Are we wrong in participating in foreplay that we know will probably not result in vaginal sex?
Click to expand...
I think many on this forum would say yes, but this sort of answer tends to come down I believe not from thinking critically about the principals and natural law, but on whether or not someone can think of a specific person in authority who addressed this issue as an exception. No exception from that person, there must be no exception than. There is also the issue that impotence bars someone from marrying, but its not addressed with couples who become impotent with consumated marriages.

I would say such an answer is best found through prayerful spiritual direction. If we get an answer in spiritual direction that people disagree with and then condemn our spiritual director for, than I’d say that person won’t be satisfied unless the Pope makes an official statement which he probably won’t. I’d say this is an area where we need to educate our consciences in order to learn to make right judgments but realize that even the best educated conscience can still error on the side of overscruplocity or error. Its not something to stress out over, I don’t think.
 
twoangels said:
The Church’s teaching on the details of this revolves around natural law. If you look at the male and female anatomy and how the sexual functions work, man is designed to climax inside of the woman. Interestingly enough, the design of the woman’s body makes climaxing through intercourse at the very least difficult. The woman’s climax also works differently than a man. When a man climaxes, he returns to an unaroused state. When a woman climaxes, her body remains aroused. The climax also increases lubrication and dulls physical pain. Women also have the ability to experience multiple climaxes. Often unspoken, also, is the fact that in natural childbirth, women can experience spontaneous climaxes during birth which can act as the body’s own natural painkiller.** It is a myth to believe that the woman’s climax increases her chances of becoming pregnant or serve any function of rushing sperm to their destination. The uterine contractions that rush the semen back are unfelt by the woman and are not related to the climax.**

Evolutionary biology simply states that woman’s ability to climax has to do with the relation of her organs to the mans. Her sensitive organ is an undeveloped man’s organ. It simply stays about the size it was during embryonic development and never units with the urethra. As such, evoluntary biology simply sees its existance as accidental but fun.

I however do not think its just an evoluntionary accident. I believe it serves a purpose but that its purpose helps to open the woman to the man. Thus where the woman’s climax is placed within the sexual context is less important than the man’s. Believing man and woman must climax together is based on assuming woman’s sexuality is closer like man’s sexuality which it is not.
Click to expand...
Twoangels, a woman’s climax may not help her become pregnant but the link and quote below was from another posting on CAF that I thought was interesting. It has to do with how much sperm she retains based upon her spouse’s time of ejaculation before or after her climax. In this way, it could affect her chances of becoming pregnant:

From m.psychologytoday.com/article…he-orgasm-wars

“They discovered that when a woman climaxes any time between a minute before to 45 minutes after her lover ejaculates, she retains significantly more sperm than she does after nonorgasmic sex. When her orgasm precedes her male’s by more than a minute, or when she does not have an orgasm, little sperm is retained. Just as the doctors’ letters suggested decades earlier, the team’s results indicated that muscular contractions associated with orgasm pull sperm from the vagina to the cervix, where it’s in better position to reach an egg.”
 
mwncheesehead said:
Twoangels, a woman’s climax may not help her become pregnant but the link and quote below was from another posting on CAF that I thought was interesting. It has to do with how much sperm she retains based upon her spouse’s time of ejaculation before or after her climax. In this way, it could affect her chances of becoming pregnant:

From m.psychologytoday.com/article…he-orgasm-wars

“They discovered that when a woman climaxes any time between a minute before to 45 minutes after her lover ejaculates, she retains significantly more sperm than she does after nonorgasmic sex. When her orgasm precedes her male’s by more than a minute, or when she does not have an orgasm, little sperm is retained. Just as the doctors’ letters suggested decades earlier, the team’s results indicated that muscular contractions associated with orgasm pull sperm from the vagina to the cervix, where it’s in better position to reach an egg.”
Click to expand...
Your link does not work. I also was speaking of uterine contractions that rush semen up to the fallopean tubes. These uterine contractions happen regardless of whether the woman climaxes. These contractions are unfelt by women.

I did find this: fertility.choicemoms.org/the_role_of_orgasm_in_conceiving/41 which states that it may help more sperm get to the cervix. However, fertilization depends on whether the sperm gets to the fallopean tubes. No studies have been found that suggest that the climaxes increases the chance of getting pregnant.

infertility.about.com/b/2009/05/27/can-female-orgasm-help-you-get-pregnant.htm

"She says that in the early 1900s, doctors routinely prescribed female orgasm to help couples with fertility problems. The theory was that orgasm helped the semen get “sucked up” from the cervix into the uterus. They called this “up suck”.

In the 1950s, researchers Masters and Johnson wondered if “up suck” was real, and decided to conduct an experiment. They made artificial semen, mixed with radiographic dye, and placed it inside a cervical cap inside the woman. Then, they had the woman self-pleasure herself to orgasm in the lab. They then took x-rays, to see if the artificial semen had been sucked up.

The fake semen did not get sucked up, and so Masters and Johnson declared that the “up suck” theory was untrue."
 
How many conceptions will take place when the marriage breaks down because the wife is left frustrated, disregarded, and feeling used after sex? I have a very real and serious problem with people who dismiss the importance of female climax like you are doing.

The wife has a right to the unitive aspects of sexuality too. She also has the right to be more than a sperm receptacle, which is what this insistence that she doesn’t need orgasms turns her into. Gang members call this “mayonnaise jar,” and I see no difference in their attitude from people who insist women have no need for orgasm from a religious perspective.

A man who takes his own pleasure and neglects his wife’s is a cad of the worst order. One who tries to use God’s laws to justify that should be left to contemplate his position in celibacy. >:-(
 
fpt said:
Oral sex on husband done by wife till the climax is wrong.
Oral sex on wife done by husband till the climax is wrong.

The latter is neither wrong nor sinful nor forbidden if the wife has not reached orgasm via intercourse, or if she needs to beforehand.

Oral stimulation on husband done by wife, in the context of marital act, like foreplay, is okay, I mean without the climax of husband, because it is only a natural step before the union of bodies.

Oral stimulation on wife done by husband, in the context of marital act, like foreplay, is okay. Here, wife can have several orgasms from her intimate organs that are outside, because her nature is different from male. For wife there are different types of orgasms. It is okay because it is a preparation (natural step) before the union of bodies.

If you want to have other information, you can send to me a private massage.
Click to expand...
 
JacarandaPurple said:
m.psychologytoday.com/articles/199601/the-orgasm-wars

It has to get through the cervix before it can get to the Fallopian tubes.
Click to expand...
You’re link refers to a study by Bellis and Baker that was conducted in 1993. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347283712728

In 2005, this theory was criticized by Elisabeth Lloyd.

Elisabeth Anne Lloyd (2005). The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias In the Science of Evolution. Harvard University Press. pp. 311 pages. ISBN 0-674-01706-4, 9780674017061. Retrieved 5 January 2012.

"Among the theories that Dr. Lloyd addresses in her book is one proposed in 1993, by Dr. R. Robin Baker and Dr. Mark A. Bellis, at Manchester University in England. In two papers published in the journal Animal Behaviour, they argued that female orgasm was a way of manipulating the retention of sperm by creating suction in the uterus. When a woman has an orgasm from one minute before the man ejaculates to 45 minutes after, she retains more sperm, they said.

Furthermore, they asserted, when a woman has intercourse with a man other than her regular sexual partner, she is more likely to have an orgasm in that prime time span and thus retain more sperm, presumably making conception more likely. They postulated that women seek other partners in an effort to obtain better genes for their offspring.

Dr. Lloyd said the Baker-Bellis argument was “fatally flawed because their sample size is too small.”

“In one table,” she said, “73 percent of the data is based on the experience of one person.”
…
Dr. Lloyd said that studies called into question the logic of such theories. Research by Dr. Ludwig Wildt and his colleagues at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany in 1998, for example, found that in a healthy woman the uterus undergoes peristaltic contractions throughout the day in the absence of sexual intercourse or orgasm. This casts doubt, Dr. Lloyd argues, on the idea that the contractions of orgasm somehow affect sperm retention."

The issue with believing that the female orgasm has a procreative function and because of this it is preferable for women to orgasm during intercourse or afterward is the fact that women rarely climax through intercourse. The way the woman’s body becomes aroused and what a woman must go through in order to climax goes against the notion that women are naturally designed to orgasm closely to the time the man climaxes. You have to intentionally force this to happen. This is no longer morally looking at how nature works, but merely assuming that because the male orgasm is related to procreation, the female orgasm is as well.

nytimes.com/2005/05/17/science/17orga.html?pagewanted=all
 
How to determine the morality of foreplay between wife and husband, in the context of marital act, before the union of bodies?

What are the foreplay that are moral and natural according to the catholic teaching ?

The intellectual stimulations, the mental stimulations, the manual stimulations on the body, the oral stimulations on the body, like foreplay, are they immoral - sinful - wrong - illicit - against the law of nature - ??? If yes, could you give me the reasons???

How to interpret the different steps of marital act?

How to define the true and real acception of masturbation in the context of marital act between wife and spouse?

These are the great questions???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top