sex?

[KindredSoul]

The question about sex could be valid, in some way, if for the purpose of genuinely seeking the motivations behind the different views and conceding that those views may be motivated by Truth…however, even then it must be approached with sensitivity. You have to give thought to the fact that to Christians/Catholics, and other religious people as well, sex is sacred. It’s not something to be discussed nonchalantly with strangers, and many people can and do get offended if it’s treated like a subject in which it’s okay to take it lightly.

Does that mean you should never be able to ask this question under any circumstance? No. Understandably, you’ll have a different take on what’s sacred; but you must approach questions of this nature under the assumption that everyone you ask finds sex to be sacred and reserved for marriage. Not everyone will see it that way, but if you word it carefully you can’t go wrong (those who don’t see it as sacred aren’t going to be offended that you were careful, while the opposite isn’t true). For example, I wouldn’t nonchalantly ask a practicing Orthodox Jew what he thought about eating pork. If I must have him answer me that personally (instead of just looking it up, which I would personally rather do) I must find a way to word it that won’t offend him; that’s my duty as a civil person, and if I’m going to ask him such a thing, I owe him that much at least. It’s all about tact, when it comes right down to it; I say this sincerely and not angrily, it will help you in future endeavors.

All that said, to answer your Original Question, I believe that sex is a gift from God to be used in the context of marriage, for the uniting of a Man and Wife, for procreation, and for loving pleasure. To use sexuality outside of marriage or to deliberately block its purposes in the process of sex is to misuse the gift; it’s not the gift in itself that is bad or sinful, but it’s misuse is so. Sex is certainly not the only thing that works that way.

 

[Other_Eric]

homosexuality is a part of sexuality, and yes sexuality is the meaning of this thread, so would you please kindly answer the question

Homosexuality is not a part of sexuality, it is a corruption of it. The principle philosophy behind same-sex marriage is one that intends to reduce a life-giving fruitful bond between two complimentary halves into a sterile arrangement based on sexual hedonism. It is not only a blasphemy and crude mockery of marriage, but an abuse of the sexual faculty.

 

[reborn_pagan]

Homosexuality is not a part of sexuality, it is a corruption of it. The principle philosophy behind same-sex marriage is one that intends to reduce a life-giving fruitful bond between two complimentary halves into a sterile arrangement based on sexual hedonism. It is not only a blasphemy and crude mockery of marriage, but an abuse of the sexual faculty.

okay so basically what your saying is ’ if your not having kids, don’t get married’ when marriage is a ceremony to celebrate to people’s love…and i know two lesbians who have been married for 15 years, and yet people who are straight have divorces in less than a year, now whats mocking marriage…two gay people…or divorces ?

 

[LilyM]

okay so basically what your saying is ’ if your not having kids, don’t get married’ when marriage is a ceremony to celebrate to people’s love…and i know two lesbians who have been married for 15 years, and yet people who are straight have divorces in less than a year, now whats mocking marriage…two gay people…or divorces ?

That’s why the Catholic Church looks askance on divorce as well (especially if followed by remarriage to a different partner).

Marriage celebrates people’s COMMITMENT to each other, not just their love. I may love my dog or my motorbike, I’d never marry them. And willingness to share the job of raising children if they should come along is part and parcel of that commitment.

 

[Other_Eric]

okay so basically what your saying is ’ if your not having kids, don’t get married’ when marriage is a ceremony to celebrate to people’s love…and i know two lesbians who have been married for 15 years, and yet people who are straight have divorces in less than a year, now whats mocking marriage…two gay people…or divorces ?

That those with opposite-sex attractions are prone not to live up to the standards of marriage in no way justifies the debasement of the sacrament by two individuals with same-sex attractions. Neither is resiliency of the practice of such an evil an appropriate defense.

Moreover, you must dispense with this puerile notion that marriage is a mere “celebration of love.” Marriage is much more. Legally, it is the codification of a relationship that bears the responsibility for begetting and raising the next generation. Spiritually, it is the bond of two souls in a lifelong commitment of complimentary service and self-sacrifice.

Same-sex unions, by their very nature, deny the fruitfulness of the sexual act and spurn sexual complementarity in favor of an insular, sterile arrangement. Spiritually, it is a vainglorious lifestyle that seeks to turn the imagery of seeking and loving the other into loving that which is a proxy for oneself.

 

[KindredSoul]

okay so basically what your saying is ’ if your not having kids, don’t get married’ when marriage is a ceremony to celebrate to people’s love…and i know two lesbians who have been married for 15 years, and yet people who are straight have divorces in less than a year, now whats mocking marriage…two gay people…or divorces ?

The thing about love is that, from a Christian standpoint, love and sex are totally separate things in and of themselves. To say that sexual love is the most powerful and intimate form of love is actually rather inappropriate. Sex in and of itself serves the purpose of lovingly uniting two people who, in an ideal state, would potentially cause the miracle of new life, biologically speaking, as a result of the loving act. One need only look at nature and the very characteristics of sex to see the (at least potentially) procreative purpose in it.

Now, you may ask, “But what if two men/women love each other deeply?” I say, fantastic! All people should ideally love *all *other people as deeply as possible. But again, love and sex are not the same thing. Love should be a part of marriage (and therefore sex, which should be in the context of marriage) but love is not limited to sex; nor is love bound in sex superior to love without sex. To say that two men must marry (and/or have sex) or two women must marry (ditto) to express their love is to say that sex and the highest form of love are one in the same. That simply isn’t true. I can love anyone of my own gender just as intensely and every bit as much and meaningfully as I would love a spouse; I for one don’t have to attach it to sex to give it meaning. Nor does anyone else.

For the record, our society does mistakenly equate love with sex too often, which has caused a lot of problems, for heterosexuals as well as those who struggle with same sex attractions–it’s very easy in our culture to believe that if you love anyone deeply, man or woman, that applying sexuality to it is the only way to express it fully. It’s tragic, but even the most innocent-intentioned have suffered this impression at times. It has also done much to damage friendships, since people often think non-sexual relationships are somehow inferior to sexual ones…

 

[reborn_pagan]

glad to see someone who is christian actually says “yes” to sam sex attractions, now im going to admit im not your poster boy of a hetrosexual male, i am straight but i am comftorable with my sexuality enough to say “hey that guy actually looks kind of attractive”…

and there has been reserch done that alot of homophobes are exactly what they are homo-phobes…they fear gays because they don’t understand it

now im sure that almost everybody here has had atleast one gay thought right?

 

[KindredSoul]

glad to see someone who is christian actually says “yes” to sam sex attractions, now im going to admit im not your poster boy of a hetrosexual male, i am straight but i am comftorable with my sexuality enough to say “hey that guy actually looks kind of attractive”…

and there has been reserch done that alot of homophobes are exactly what they are homo-phobes…they fear gays because they don’t understand it

now im sure that almost everybody here has had atleast one gay thought right?

I’m not sure if this was to me…but if so, re-read my post; I don’t mean to cause you disappointment if you thought otherwise, but I’m not saying “Yes” to same sex attractions. I say yes to all people loving each other deeply. My point was the opposite, that love and sex should not be confused, and that just because two men or two women love each other doesn’t mean it has to be sexual. If any thing, my point was “Yes” to deep and dedicated love, between any two people, but “No” to sex outside of the context of marriage between a man and a woman.

Sorry if I misrepresented my point.

 

[teachccd]

glad to see someone who is christian actually says “yes” to sam sex attractions, now im going to admit im not your poster boy of a hetrosexual male, i am straight but i am comftorable with my sexuality enough to say “hey that guy actually looks kind of attractive”…

and there has been reserch done that alot of homophobes are exactly what they are homo-phobes…they fear gays because they don’t understand it

now im sure that almost everybody here has had atleast one gay thought right?

Where are you going with this??

 

[LilyM]

glad to see someone who is christian actually says “yes” to sam sex attractions, now im going to admit im not your poster boy of a hetrosexual male, i am straight but i am comftorable with my sexuality enough to say “hey that guy actually looks kind of attractive”…

and there has been reserch done that alot of homophobes are exactly what they are homo-phobes…they fear gays because they don’t understand it

now im sure that almost everybody here has had atleast one gay thought right?

So? We all think of all sorts of things, especially when we’re upset or under stress, robbery, murder, suicide and so on. It’s not any argument for acting on any of these thoughts.

And no, disapproval of homosexuality isn’t always or often rooted in fear or misunderstanding. I have no fear in that sense of what anyone may do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, nor, I imagine, do I particularly misunderstand what does happen or why.

I simply have a particular idea, based on both faith and reason, of the purposes of sex and the importance of its procreative function.

 

[Sixtus]

he act is between 2 people who are married, and it is from God. it is to be between a man and his wife.

IN AN IDEAL WORLD IT IS!

What about the scenario where a woman is living in a loveless marriage, seh is emotionally and mentally abused and feels dejected, unloved and uncared for. She is ill due to the consequences. She is also by nature very tactile.

She meets a man who is also married. He is living in enforced celibacy because his wife married him for the wrong reasons. He too is feeling very dejected. He can no longer function due to the stresses in his life.

The two of them have been told by a canon lawyer they have good grounds to apply for an anulment of their respective marriages.

The two of them meet. It is harmful to their respective families to take the easy route and just divorce and apply for an annulment.

Is it still wrong for them to mutually satisfy each other?

I guess the die-hard traditionalists would say yes., I would say good luck to them

 

[Montalban]

okay i actually went out and asked abunch of people in the mall i live near about there opinions on sex. and some said it was dirty and wanted to scold me for even asking such a thing, others who are obviously christians said that it is very wrong to have sex.

But there were a handfull who said something along the lines of “sex is pleasurable and is a gift from God, but just dont abuse it”

whats your opinion?

Do you go about asking people their opinions? (I take it they were strangers)

 

[Montalban]

IN AN IDEAL WORLD IT IS!

What about the scenario where a woman is living in a loveless marriage, seh is emotionally and mentally abused and feels dejected, unloved and uncared for. She is ill due to the consequences. She is also by nature very tactile.

She meets a man who is also married. He is living in enforced celibacy because his wife married him for the wrong reasons. He too is feeling very dejected. He can no longer function due to the stresses in his life.

The two of them have been told by a canon lawyer they have good grounds to apply for an anulment of their respective marriages.

The two of them meet. It is harmful to their respective families to take the easy route and just divorce and apply for an annulment.

Is it still wrong for them to mutually satisfy each other?

I guess the die-hard traditionalists would say yes., I would say good luck to them

This depends on whether you believe in God.

 

[Montalban]

okay, maybe i should of said it was just a question i claimed i was doing for a school project. and some just walked away when i asked the question about sex…i only got about a 2-5 ratio on people who i asked that question

What sort of school sends you out to ask people such questions?

Do you ask them about other issues too?

 

[LilyM]

IN AN IDEAL WORLD IT IS!

What about the scenario where a woman is living in a loveless marriage, seh is emotionally and mentally abused and feels dejected, unloved and uncared for. She is ill due to the consequences. She is also by nature very tactile.

She meets a man who is also married. He is living in enforced celibacy because his wife married him for the wrong reasons. He too is feeling very dejected. He can no longer function due to the stresses in his life.

The two of them have been told by a canon lawyer they have good grounds to apply for an anulment of their respective marriages.

The two of them meet. It is harmful to their respective families to take the easy route and just divorce and apply for an annulment.

Is it still wrong for them to mutually satisfy each other?

I guess the die-hard traditionalists would say yes., I would say good luck to them

What are you thinking? Marriage is a sacrament. There are THREE people in that relationship - the couple and God. And whether or not they love or like each other at any given time doesn’t alter one whit their obligations to the third and most important party.

I’ve been on both sides of the coin, having been in a long-term relationship a while back (not marriage, but serious nonetheless) and since then celibate for nigh on ten years. Not for lack of men I’ve been attracted by or attracted in my own turn, but simply because I chose to please God (which total celibacy outside of marriage and total fidelity in marriage does, and nothing else) instead of gratifying my own physical desires.

Of course it requires a major adjustment. And it’s forced me to analyse the way we in this culture are conditioned to think about sex and relationships in general, not to mention the chinks in my own armour in regard to temptations to lust. And it’s the most liberating thing in the world when you stop letting your hormones make your decisions for you.

Ten years ago I’d have thought like you. My family, nieces and nephews and exes can vouch for the fact that I am a very tactile person indeed. I wouldn’t have even considered the possibility of celibacy really. But (and it sounds cliched but it is true) if you truly have, know and love God all your other needs and wants really do become very much secondary and more manageable as a result.

 

[rayne100]

sex is sacred.

Is not marriage sacred and sacraments? We talk about them all the time. We are not doing them a disservice by talking about them. Likewise, we are not doing sex a diservice by speaking about it.

 

[rayne89]

If you had come up to me I would have simply walked away. I no interest in talking about sex with teenager in the middle of the shopping mall. Personally I think you were looking for their reactions more than information. Kind of getting you kicks freaking out the “old” people.

 

[rayne100]

If you had come up to me I would have simply walked away. I no interest in talking about sex with teenager in the middle of the shopping mall. Personally I think you were looking for their reactions more than information. Kind of getting you kicks freaking out the “old” people.

I heard no mention of old people and they live in today’s society, I think they would be unshockable at this point

 

[maryjk]

If you had come up to me I would have simply walked away. I no interest in talking about sex with teenager in the middle of the shopping mall. Personally I think you were looking for their reactions more than information. Kind of getting you kicks freaking out the “old” people.

I would have walked away as well.

It would have just had me questioning the school system once again. A “school project” about sex and what people thought?

You are lucky that someone didn’t report you or ask if you had the permission of the mall to be there.

 

[KindredSoul]

Is not marriage sacred and sacraments? We talk about them all the time. We are not doing them a disservice by talking about them. Likewise, we are not doing sex a diservice by speaking about it.

Read that whole post…I simply meant to talk about it carefully, not to not talk about it at all ever. Sacred things simply can be mishandled in conversation. For instance, God’s name is sacred and can be taken in vain; someone could speak of the sacraments in an irreverent way and it would be offensive; blasphemous at worst or at the very least distasteful.

In today’s sometimes oversexed society, if a person (even a well-meaning person of the most traditional Catholic ethic) isn’t careful when randomly asking people about sex, those people can get the impression that the said individual doesn’t have the proper respect for sex in its context of marriage; *completely regardless of whether or not *that’s true or fair, if one wants random people to do the favor of answering a question, the least one can do is make sure to ask the question in a way that fits the sensibilities of those being questioned. That was my point.

If a random stranger asked me what I thought about sex nonchalantly, I too would have to hesitate as to whether or not he/she would be seriously interested in my answer or was just going for shock value. Even if I thought it was for a school project, I’d question exactly what that project was trying to prove. So many people take sex lightly these days (and that’s undeniable) that I’d wonder if my words might be twisted or misused to try to advocate “free love” or to “prove” the “evils of conservative religious prudes” or something…sad but I could honestly expect it, and no one can deny that possibility in our sexually liberal culture. This suspicion might be softened or undone altogether with the properly sensitive wording. If some random stranger wanted such info from me, being sensitive to that is the least he or she could do. I would do likewise if I was asking someone about something that could be sensitive to them. That’s not being too cautious–it’s being courteous.