Sugarless chewing gum

  • Thread starter Thread starter PeterJ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PeterJ

Guest
In recent decades an abomination of mastication has crept unnoticed into our society, a perverse product so impure that even the mention of its name brings shame to a man. Sugarless chewing gum.

Certain perverse individuals have created this contemptible gum with the specific intention of allowing one to take pleasure in the act of digestion whilst at the same time rendering the natural end of this process - that of nutrition - fruitless. Why do we as good moral people continue to overlook this? We must warn others of this nefarious foodstuff, lest God smite us all!

On a serious note, why do people continue to use this same, clearly fallacious argument against masturbation? Other arguments in defence of the prohibition of masturbation are welcome.
 
Using your gum analogy, would you say that chewing gum that belongs to your neighbor is the same as having sex with his wife? I think that your analogy lacks the moral implications that accompany the misuse of our sexuality. And remember that when you are done chewing the gum you spit it out. Masturbation is just as empty since the love received in the marital embrace creates a lasting unity…That’s my :twocents:…teachccd
 
teachccd said:
Using your gum analogy, would you say that chewing gum that belongs to your neighbor is the same as having sex with his wife?
Click to expand...
No, the analogy was referring to the ‘perverted faculty’ argument in particular, I was not claiming that chewing gum and sex are of comparable moral status.
 
PeterJ said:
In recent decades an abomination of mastication has crept unnoticed into our society, a perverse product so impure that even the mention of its name brings shame to a man. Sugarless chewing gum.

Certain perverse individuals have created this contemptible gum with the specific intention of allowing one to take pleasure in the act of digestion whilst at the same time rendering the natural end of this process - that of nutrition - fruitless. Why do we as good moral people continue to overlook this? We must warn others of this nefarious foodstuff, lest God smite us all!

On a serious note, why do people continue to use this same, clearly fallacious argument against masturbation? Other arguments in defence of the prohibition of masturbation are welcome.
Click to expand...
It is a flawed analogy. The gift of sexual power is not morally equal to digestion.
 
PeterJ said:
In recent decades an abomination of mastication has crept unnoticed into our society, a perverse product so impure that even the mention of its name brings shame to a man. Sugarless chewing gum.

Certain perverse individuals have created this contemptible gum with the specific intention of allowing one to take pleasure in the act of digestion whilst at the same time rendering the natural end of this process - that of nutrition - fruitless. Why do we as good moral people continue to overlook this? We must warn others of this nefarious foodstuff, lest God smite us all!

On a serious note, why do people continue to use this same, clearly fallacious argument against masturbation? Other arguments in defence of the prohibition of masturbation are welcome.
Click to expand...
There is something to your argument. For example, to chew and enjoy large amounts of food, only to spit it out after the enjoyment, would, I think, be a mortal sin of gluttony. However, in the case of the gum chewing, there could be a reason such as cleaning one’s mouth or teeth, which perhaps would mitigate any evil gluttonous intent.
 
PeterJ said:
In recent decades an abomination of mastication has crept unnoticed into our society, a perverse product so impure that even the mention of its name brings shame to a man. Sugarless chewing gum.

Certain perverse individuals have created this contemptible gum with the specific intention of allowing one to take pleasure in the act of digestion whilst at the same time rendering the natural end of this process - that of nutrition - fruitless. Why do we as good moral people continue to overlook this? We must warn others of this nefarious foodstuff, lest God smite us all!

On a serious note, why do people continue to use this same, clearly fallacious argument against masturbation? Other arguments in defence of the prohibition of masturbation are welcome.
Click to expand...
It is helpful to remember that many teachings come to the Catholic Church from Jewish tradition. Here’s an article that explains some of these teachings from the Jews:

ccli.org/nfp/morality/bible.php
 
PeterJ said:
In recent decades an abomination of mastication has crept unnoticed into our society, a perverse product so impure that even the mention of its name brings shame to a man. Sugarless chewing gum.

Certain perverse individuals have created this contemptible gum with the specific intention of allowing one to take pleasure in the act of digestion whilst at the same time rendering the natural end of this process - that of nutrition - fruitless. Why do we as good moral people continue to overlook this? We must warn others of this nefarious foodstuff, lest God smite us all!
Click to expand...
It is helpful to remember that many teachings come to the Catholic Church from Jewish tradition. Here’s an article that explains some of these teachings from the Jews:

ccli.org/nfp/morality/bible.php
On a serious note, why do people continue to use this same, clearly fallacious argument against masturbation? Other arguments in defence of the prohibition of masturbation are welcome.
Click to expand...
Well for one thing, people don’t feel the need to hide when they are chewing gum.
 
If chewing gum causes so much concern to the point of justification of moral evil, then stop chewing gum. Might be harder than one thinks.
 
fix said:
It is a flawed analogy. The gift of sexual power is not morally equal to digestion.
Click to expand...
I was not claiming this, the analogy was used to show how absurd the ‘perverted factulty’ argument is.
 
mark_a said:
It is helpful to remember that many teachings come to the Catholic Church from Jewish tradition. Here’s an article that explains some of these teachings from the Jews:

ccli.org/nfp/morality/bible.php

Well for one thing, people don’t feel the need to hide when they are chewing gum.
Click to expand...
I like to hide when I go to the toliet. If I was to engage in martial non-contraceptive sex then I would certainly like to do that in a private place. Just because an act is shameful (public nose picking comes to mind) it does not follow that that act is immoral.
 
bobzills said:
There is something to your argument. For example, to chew and enjoy large amounts of food, only to spit it out after the enjoyment, would, I think, be a mortal sin of gluttony. However, in the case of the gum chewing, there could be a reason such as cleaning one’s mouth or teeth, which perhaps would mitigate any evil gluttonous intent.
Click to expand...
I think it’s a bit strong to call chewing gum for non- hygenic reasons gluttonous. It’s hardly excessive.
 
PeterJ said:
I was not claiming this, the analogy was used to show how absurd the ‘perverted factulty’ argument is.
Click to expand...
But that is just it, the perverted use is due to the moral dimension involved. You cannot separate the moral part out of the issue.
 
fix said:
But that is just it, the perverted use is due to the moral dimension involved. You cannot separate the moral part out of the issue.
Click to expand...
Many Catholics claim that masturbation is wrong because it uses a faculty for a purpose other than that which it was desgined for, I am referring to this argument.

I aimed to show that we use the body’s faculties for purposes other than that which they were ‘designed’ for all the time.
 
fix said:
Right. The faculty in question is a special one. Not all are equal.
Click to expand...
What is your argument? That there is some property about the faculty of reproduction that (unlike the rest of the body) makes it immoral to use it for purposes contrary to its design. This seems rather ad hoc. What is this property?
 
PeterJ said:
What is your argument? That there is a mystical property about the faculty of reproduction that makes it immoral to use it for purposes contrary to its design, unlike the rest of the body. This seems rather ad hoc.
Click to expand...
The Church teaches the gift of fertility is a personal good. That is good in and of itself. We do not alter it for pleasure or to achieve some other end.

It can be repaired because of disease, but we do not misuse it for illicit pleasure or for convenience. IOW, it is intend for use as God ordained.

I do not see this as equal to eating. There is no teaching, that I am aware of, that says we may only eat to survive or no artifical substances may be consumed?
 
PeterJ said:
I like to hide when I go to the toliet.
Click to expand...
Comparing masturbation to going to the toilet doesn’t help your argument.
If I was to engage in martial non-contraceptive sex then I would certainly like to do that in a private place.
Click to expand...
Privacy and hiding are not the same thing. Privacy in marital, non-contraceptive sex is discreet, not hidden.
Just because an act is shameful (public nose picking comes to mind) it does not follow that that act is immoral.
Click to expand...
Public nose-picking is a common occurance in public bathrooms, and seems to be acceptable practice. Masturbation in a public bathroom will get you arrested.

And here’s that link you ignored, just in case you change your mind: ccli.org/nfp/morality/bible.php
 
mark_a said:
Comparing masturbation to going to the toilet doesn’t help your argument.
Click to expand...
Why not?
Privacy and hiding are not the same thing. Privacy in marital, non-contraceptive sex is discreet, not hidden.
Click to expand...
This seems to be just semantics. I see no difference in motive, people seek privacy in both masturbation and sex for the same reasons.
Public nose-picking is a common occurance in public bathrooms, and seems to be acceptable practice. Masturbation in a public bathroom will get you arrested.
Click to expand...
So will marital non- contraceptive sex, public sex acts are taboo in this society. Masturbation in the privacy of ones own home is acceptable.
And here’s that link you ignored, just in case you change your mind: ccli.org/nfp/morality/bible.php
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, it was so long, I did skim it. From what I gathered the argument was theological, not philosophical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top