Questions about sexuality and morality

[f00dl3]

A few pressing questions I have been wanting to have answered but were afraid to ask someone in person…

1. Which is worse of a sin? Looking at and getting “release” from pornogrohpy, or being engaged in premaritial sexual activity?
2. Since it is possible to get aroused by females in bikinis (and since bikini calendars are considered pornogrophy), is going to the beach considered a sinfull practice? Are bikinis and swimsuits immoral?
3. Didn’t god create us in the nude? Wouldn’t our lives be filled with, what we considered, pornogrophy if it were not for Adam sinning and eating the apple?

 

[ridesawhitehors]

I’ll take a crack at this test.

1. Both are bad. Maybe the second is worse, because you are also causing someone else to sin.
2. Bikinis and swimsuits are not sinful. If going to the beach makes you think impure thoughts - that is a place you should avoid because you can fall into an occasion of sin. The beach is not an immoral place.
3. God created us without clothes on of course. If Adam and Eve would not have fallen, we would not have original sin in the world like we do now and nudity wouldn’t cause occasions of sin.

How’d I do everyone? I want a grade. 5 stars?

 

[Scott_Waddell]

f00dl3:

A few pressing questions I have been wanting to have answered but were afraid to ask someone in person…

1. Which is worse of a sin? Looking at and getting “release” from pornogrohpy, or being engaged in premaritial sexual activity?

Both are gravely wrong. The extent of the sin would be in the person’s culpability. That’s the lay answer. As an academic theological excercise some might be able to answer the which-is-worse scenario. But as far as actual living goes, one should not do either.

1. Since it is possible to get aroused by females in bikinis (and since bikini calendars are considered pornogrophy), is going to the beach considered a sinfull practice? Are bikinis and swimsuits immoral?

I’m not aware that bikini calenders are necessarily pornography (although I’m sure it is possible.) If one is easly given to impure thoughts from females in bikinis then going to a beach could very well be what we call a near occasion of sin and thus to be avoided.

1. Didn’t god create us in the nude? Wouldn’t our lives be filled with, what we considered, pornogrophy if it were not for Adam sinning and eating the apple?

Yes God created us naked. No, our lives would not be filled with pornography without the Fall, because disordered sexuality is an effect of the Fall.

 

[f00dl3]

So are we not all conceived under sin and as sinners? If we are sinners, there is no point in being perfect. If we were perfect, we would be gods - and we would be worshiping false entities. Why not accept us as what we are - sinners? Admit - we all have sins and that nobody is perfect except god. God created man who created sin who created sex drive and sexual desire - so didn’t god create man knowingly to be sinners? Isn’t that why the catholic church incorporated the sacrement of reconciliation?

 

[Scott_Waddell]

f00dl3:

So are we not all conceived under sin and as sinners?

We are all conceived with a deprivation of sanctifying grace, so yes.

If we are sinners, there is no point in being perfect. If we were perfect, we would be gods - and we would be worshiping false entities.

Well, we have Christ’s explicit command: be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect. So, apparently He does not subscribe to the idea that being so would make us gods, etc.

Why not accept us as what we are - sinners? Admit - we all have sins and that nobody is perfect except god.

I believe we do at every Mass starting at the Kyrie. The exception to nobody’s perfect would be Mary in her Immaculate Conception.

God created man who created sin who created sex drive and sexual desire - so didn’t god create man knowingly to be sinners?

Probably, which is an incredibly difficult concept beyond the scope of this thread.

Isn’t that why the catholic church incorporated the sacrement of reconciliation?

Reconcilliation is mainly for restoring sanctifying grace due to its loss through mortal sin.

I’m not sure what you are driving at. Are you suggesting that everyone just fornicate and hope God recognizes that it is kinda His fault and gives us a free pass?

Scott

 

[LilyM]

f00dl3:

God created man who created sin who created sex drive and sexual desire - so didn’t god create man knowingly to be sinners? Isn’t that why the catholic church incorporated the sacrement of reconciliation?

God created man and gave him free will, knowing that man could sin, not necessarily being certain that he would. Smallish but important difference.

The sacrament of reconciliation is not to be taken lightly either - forgiveness is not automatic, but conditional on genuine repentance and a desire and sincere attempts to ‘go and sin no more’. ‘Presumption’ - taking confession and absolution for granted - is in itself a mortal sin.

 

[otm]

f00dl3:

A few pressing questions I have been wanting to have answered but were afraid to ask someone in person…

1. Which is worse of a sin? Looking at and getting “release” from pornogrohpy, or being engaged in premaritial sexual activity?

Theologians may split hairs over whether or not one is worse than the other. Both are an a buse of the gift that God gave us in our sexuality and either can be seriously problematic as they both tend to have reprecussions well into the future.

f00dl3:

1. Since it is possible to get aroused by females in bikinis (and since bikini calendars are considered pornogrophy), is going to the beach considered a sinfull practice? Are bikinis and swimsuits immoral?

There are swimsuits and then there are excuses for swimsuits. I suspect that the bikini calendars you are referring to are similar to Sports Illustrated Swimsuit collection. Those aren’t swimsuits, as one could not comfortably and reliably swim in one of them without fear of losing one or both parts. They are so small they wouldn’t even make a good hanky to blow your nose in. They are specifically designed to show off the female body in the most provocative way; and having said that there is probably not one female in 500 who could wear one in a provocative fashion, as they do not have the provocative figure for it; they would just look silly. There are also many bikinis that are not designed to be revealing, and are completely safe for swimming.

If a male is overly stimulated by the average swimsuit (or modest bikini - e.g. one from Lands’ End), then that male has a problem, not the woman wearing the suit.

f00dl3:

1. Didn’t god create us in the nude? Wouldn’t our lives be filled with, what we considered, pornogrophy if it were not for Adam sinning and eating the apple?

No, our lives would not be filled with pornography. They would be filled with the beauty that God created; pornography is the abuse of what God created good, for wrong purposes.

 

[Zahmir]

f00dl3:

A few pressing questions I have been wanting to have answered but were afraid to ask someone in person…

1. Which is worse of a sin? Looking at and getting “release” from pornogrohpy, or being engaged in premaritial sexual activity?
2. Since it is possible to get aroused by females in bikinis (and since bikini calendars are considered pornogrophy), is going to the beach considered a sinfull practice? Are bikinis and swimsuits immoral?
3. Didn’t god create us in the nude? Wouldn’t our lives be filled with, what we considered, pornogrophy if it were not for Adam sinning and eating the apple?

1.) I think in the range of mortal sins… and deciding which one is “worse” you have to decide for yourself. But in reality, BOTH affect other people… just ask your future spouse. Also, by watching pornography you are permanently affecting how you might relate with other women. … I wouldn’t say go and test it out for yourself, but just perform a little thought experiment. If you watched pornography for two hours, are you going to see women in the same light? I didn’t think so…

2.) Bikini’s are somewhat immoral in themselves… it’s kinda a violation of modesty, etc. I mean, that shouldn’t keep you from having fun, but I wouldn’t plan on going to the beach to see girls in bikini’s either.

3.) As human beings, we are inclined to be sexual beings. (your parents had sex, their parents had sex, and your parents’ parent’s parents all had sex). the human body is beautiful and amazing, but we wear clothing to protect others from impure thoughts.

 

[f00dl3]

LilyM:

God created man and gave him free will, knowing that man could sin, not necessarily being certain that he would. Smallish but important difference.

The sacrament of reconciliation is not to be taken lightly either - forgiveness is not automatic, but conditional on genuine repentance and a desire and sincere attempts to ‘go and sin no more’. ‘Presumption’ - taking confession and absolution for granted - is in itself a mortal sin.

Catholicism is a guide to life. I share the same beliefs, that abortion is worng. I go to church every weekend. I believe in god. I oppose this “stem cell research” which is actually abortion in disguise.

Yes, none of the sacrements are to be taken lightly; however, god already died for our sins. While we need to try to be as… sinless… as possible, we are all human and we all make mistakes at points in our lives.

To clear up one issue, I am proud to be a virgin (when I’m not depressed at my… dead… social scene). (You know how hard it is to find a catholic singles group that is for 19 to 24 year olds? All the catholic singles groups in my area are like 27 to 35 year olds that are practically old enough to be someones mom). I have never been involved in premaritial sex. Actually, I have never even dated (!). Part of this is due to religion, but most of it is due to being anti-social in high school and going to a all boys college in disguise as a technical school. However, the moral values that the religion teaches me did prevent this. However, I did (and I admit this sin - as I am only human) visit a few… objectionable… sites on the internet from time to time throughout my life. Does this make me a bad catholic? I don’t know. It may not make me a perfect catholic, but then again, we are all human and make mistakes. As long as we make a decent attempt to avoid making them again in the future.

The thing that I have a problem with is that a certain… sector… of the church - specifically this forum takes issues too seriously, calling them mortal sins, etc. While they are bad sins, it’s not like looking at pornogrophy is as much of a sin (according to the ten commandments) as adulery.

Be carefull. Being a religious extreemist group can be dangerous. (Just look at what those Muslims who are interpreting their bible to mean “kill all those americans”.)

 

[Scott_Waddell]

f00dl3:

The thing that I have a problem with is that a certain… sector… of the church - specifically this forum takes issues too seriously, calling them mortal sins, etc. While they are bad sins, it’s not like looking at pornogrophy is as much of a sin (according to the ten commandments) as adulery.

Be carefull. Being a religious extreemist group can be dangerous. (Just look at what those Muslims who are interpreting their bible to mean “kill all those americans”.)

Church teaching is unambiguous about pornography [my bolding]:

2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

Now it would be wrong for someone to say that anyone who uses pornography is automatically in a state of mortal sin. Culpability must be taken into account. But the teaching is clear: pornography is gravely wrong. And if one uses or is involved with it with sufficient knowledge of its wrongness and freely consents to it anyway, it’s mortal sin.

Scott

 

[luvmykids]

f00dl3:

The thing that I have a problem with is that a certain… sector… of the church - specifically this forum takes issues too seriously, calling them mortal sins, etc. While they are bad sins, it’s not like looking at pornogrophy is as much of a sin (according to the ten commandments) as adulery.

Be carefull. Being a religious extreemist group can be dangerous. (Just look at what those Muslims who are interpreting their bible to mean “kill all those americans”.)

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Mt 5:27-28.

 

[Cristiano]

ridesawhitehors:

I’ll take a crack at this test.

1. Both are bad. Maybe the second is worse, because you are also causing someone else to sin.

I disagrre with you. Everytime we sin we induce other people to sin. Do you think that being involved in pornography is not a sin. If we financially support pornography then we induce people into sin.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Cristiano:

I disagrre with you. Everytime we sin we induce other people to sin. Do you think that being involved in pornography is not a sin. If we financially support pornography then we induce people into sin.

Pardon me rides for defending you when I’m sure you are perfectly capable of defending yourself, but in the first place he did not definatley say one was worse than the other, he said maybe. Secondly, his post reasonably suggests that he believes as the Church does regarding pornography. Thirdly, while one might induce others to sin through the support of pornography, that is pretty abstract whereas adultery directly and objectively involves another person in grave wrongdoing. So suggesting one is worse than the other is not outrageous out of the gate.

Scott

 

[Brendan]

f00dl3:

So are we not all conceived under sin and as sinners?

Yes we are.

If we are sinners, there is no point in being perfect. If we were perfect, we would be gods - and we would be worshiping false entities.

How does it follow the being perfect requires godhood. The angels are perfect creatures, but are still creatures. They are not gods.

Why not accept us as what we are - sinners? Admit - we all have sins and that nobody is perfect except god. God created man who created sin who created sex drive and sexual desire - so didn’t god create man knowingly to be sinners? Isn’t that why the catholic church incorporated the sacrement of reconciliation?

God created Man to Love Him, serve Him and be with Him.

Love is always a free will gift of one’s self. As part of that, God knew that Man had the potential to Sin, and in fact would sin.

But this is the price of the ability to Love.

And as a sign of God’s Love, God forgives the Sin of all those who see the error and repent of it.

God certainly created sex and the sex drive. They are good things. But like many good things, Man can corrupt them. God’s plan for sex was as a free exchange of one’s whole person.

Man took that and made it into a demand that one recieve pleasure, that one’s partner is an object to be used to one’s own gratification.

In creating Marriage, God reestablished His gift to us, returned the ability to give oneself freely, wholely and completly to the other as a gift.

This is why sex in Marriage is a good and wonderful thing and sex outside of Marriage is a sham, a sign of selfishness.

It is also why artificial contraception is bad, as the gift is no longer whole or complete as God intends it to be.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Sin does not come from without, but from within.

“Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth. . . . What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart and this defiles a man.” -Matthew 15

Calendars themselves are not evil, nor are swimsuits, nor are human bodies. It is the heart of man, who delights in all types of evil (concupisence) that leads to sin. And, as some have said, it is the duty of man to avoid the near occasion of sin: to avoid situations which suggest to our corrupt hearts a way to deepen the rift between us and God.

 

[Flopfoot]

Scott, with regards to your post #10 with the Catechism quote. When it says what pornography is, it talks about an action - ‘removing the…sexual acts… to display them’. From my understanding, then, the ‘act of pornography’ is the actual making of pornography and that is what is a grave offence. So it is possibly a mortal sin for producers and actors, but I think I’ve heard that merely looking at it is at most venial (mostly since it unnecessarily tempts one to sin). However looking at porn can lead someone into worse sins like masturbation.

Foodl3 - In your post #9 you sound a lot like me, I’m 20 years old, cradle Catholic, proud to be a virgin, but am anti-social and have never dated. I went to an all boys school too and a lot of my friends have done things I wouldn’t do, but I’m not envious of them cause I stick to what I believe. I reckon that me having morals is part of what gives me worth and dignity. Doesn’t mean its not hard sometimes to get through life in this secular world always telling us trash and when we genuinely do want an intimate relationship. But I guess all in God’s good time, for now let’s just appreciate the state we are in. Think of it this way- not having a girlfriend = lots fewer worries (-: till I find someone anyway.

 

[Coder]

ridesawhitehors:

I want a grade. 5 stars?

---

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Flopfoot:

… I think I’ve heard that merely looking at it is at most venial (mostly since it unnecessarily tempts one to sin). However looking at porn can lead someone into worse sins like masturbation.

It seems to me to be quite the opposite. Pornography – even looking at it – causes us to lose respect for ourselves. Looking at porn seems more sinful, and certainly more harmful, because the sexual act is so intimate. Pornography resonates in our souls, and creates a (if I may say so) demonic appetite that will never be satisfied. (By the grace of God, it can be abandoned.)

 

[Flopfoot]

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say?

Except you do seem to be exaggerating the harm done by porn. People have different responses to it, some people can become addicted to it after a while but it’s not like it’s a physiological addiction or anything like that. Many can look once and hardly care, and not look again. Or whatever. What someone looks at wouldn’t cause them to lose their self respect - it’s what they do as a result of their temptation that could cause them to lose their self respect.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Flopfoot:

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say?

Except you do seem to be exaggerating the harm done by porn. People have different responses to it, some people can become addicted to it after a while but it’s not like it’s a physiological addiction or anything like that. Many can look once and hardly care, and not look again. Or whatever. What someone looks at wouldn’t cause them to lose their self respect - it’s what they do as a result of their temptation that could cause them to lose their self respect.

It’s a sin against chastity. It is objectively a grave wrong to deliberately look at it and does not require the possibility of becoming addicted to it.