Viagra -- RCC's stance?

[PaulGH]

…

 

[Ahimsa]

My problem with Viagra is that I always think of it when I see a picture of Niagra (Falls)!

 

[First_of_9]

However, others seem to be concentrating on the former effect, and thus assuming that the purpose of taking Viagra is only to increase sexual desire.

Just a quick clarification. Viagra and its cousins do absolutely nothing to increase sexual desire. In fact, they do nothing until they are “activated”, so to speak. All they do is enhance a totally natural function.

 

[PaulGH]

Just a quick clarification. Viagra and its cousins do absolutely nothing to increase sexual desire. In fact, they do nothing until they are “activated”, so to speak. All they do is enhance a totally natural function.

Thanks for the clarification. I wasn’t sure myself, and there seems to be a popular perception that Viagra does, or at least can, increase desire. But if what you say is true, then it is difficult for me to understand what could be wrong with a married man using Viagra to treat an inability to perform, assuming of course that the couple maintains the correct view of the purpose and place of sex within the marriage.

 

[First_of_9]

Thanks for the clarification. I wasn’t sure myself, and there seems to be a popular perception that Viagra does, or at least can, increase desire. But if what you say is true, then it is difficult for me to understand what could be wrong with a married man using Viagra to treat an inability to perform, assuming of course that the couple maintains the correct view of the purpose and place of sex within the marriage.

I think a lot of men have this idea that Viagra will restore their youth and vitality. Ain’t gonna happen!

I, too, see nothing wrong with using a drug to help continue a God-given function.

 

[ThuribleGuy45]

No one is laying down exact ages. However, as men and women grow into their 40’s, 50’s, and beyond it’s perfectly natural to lose interest in sex. Viagra is not marketed as a means for people in their child having years with problems. It’s marketed to older men in order to accomplish something that is unnatural. Selling men erection pills and setting them lose without regards for whether their partners are even interested is immoral.

Getting older is a gift from God, a time in life when it becomes easier to distance oneself from the pleasures of the flesh and grow in personal holiness.

Golly, you really think that it’s “unnatural” for men 40+ to have or want sexual intimacy with their spouses? I think even the Church would say that the unitive aspect of marital relations beyond the usual child-bearing years, as long as relations are open to life, has a sacramental value that cannot fairly be called “pleasures of the flesh.” I think that demeans an “older” - and I don’t consider 40 - 50ish particularly “old” - couple’s sacramental relationship.

I agree with others that the advertising for these products has a whole different target, but within a sacramental marriage their consentual use I feel is neither immoral or “unnatural.” Perhaps I’m taking this personally because our last child was born when I was in my 40’s (without chemical help), because we kept our marriage open to life, and I don’t feel that I was being “unnatural” in our marriage.

 

[valient_Lucy]

This has nothing to do with the morality of Viagra. I just wanted to remind everyone that, for most men, the FIRST sign of heart disease they will ever get is erectile dysfunction. So, if you or your spouse is experiencing ED, go to the doctor!
I remember reading a letter to the editor a few years ago in Reader’s Digest, who described how her husband experiencing ED. Less than a year later, he suffered a massive heart attack walking on his driveway, and was dead by the time he hit the ground. Please don’t let that happen to you or someone you love.

 

[whatevergirl]

No one is laying down exact ages. However, as men and women grow into their 40’s, 50’s, and beyond it’s perfectly natural to lose interest in sex. Viagra is not marketed as a means for people in their child having years with problems. It’s marketed to older men in order to accomplish something that is unnatural. Selling men erection pills and setting them lose without regards for whether their partners are even interested is immoral.

Getting older is a gift from God, a time in life when it becomes easier to distance oneself from the pleasures of the flesh and grow in personal holiness.

excellent insight! I agree that they are promoted in a very amoral way–so am I supposed to read between the lines to see the morality in them? lol No…I just think that this society is obsessed with remaining like we are 18…from plastic surgery to erection pills…where does it end? Movie stars who are 60…dressing like they are 20…I am told I look younger, but it’s not because I spend hours in the mirror or on youth promoting things to get that effect. Nothing wrong with wanted to sabotage wrinkles, etc…but taking a pill with such harmful effects so one can appear manly to his wife…is well, rather vain, in a way. Aren’t we supposed to be careful about vanity?

PS For the poster who is talking about bonding though…yes sexuality is also for bonding so true. But what did our ancestors do? Did they have erection pills to keep their bonding afloat? I think more of what is at the root of this issue is that it just feels awful for a man to lose his ‘manhood.’ AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. But, buying it in a bottle, does this somehow restore it? That’s all I’m saying. I think we should stop dancing around the big elephant in the room…and say, yes, a man uses this because he doesn’t want to feel like a)he cannot please his wfe…b)he is losing his manhood…but what many don’t realize is that MANY MANY men are using this and a)having affairs and b)are NOT married. It’s a drug that has allowed older men to relive their youth…in a very false kind of way.

Ok…I’m done for now.

 

[whatevergirl]

This has nothing to do with the morality of Viagra. I just wanted to remind everyone that, for most men, the FIRST sign of heart disease they will ever get is erectile dysfunction. So, if you or your spouse is experiencing ED, go to the doctor!
I remember reading a letter to the editor a few years ago in Reader’s Digest, who described how her husband experiencing ED. Less than a year later, he suffered a massive heart attack walking on his driveway, and was dead by the time he hit the ground. Please don’t let that happen to you or someone you love.

I didn’t know that at all. Thanks for that info Lucy!!! See? Do doctors examine this, or just hand a guy a script for these things…?? The commercials do NOT say anything about that…so, that is good to know!

 

[whatevergirl]

To add…in discussing it with my husband…whenever we see these ads (he is now 48, I’m 38) he said…‘I wouldn’t want to take something that would give me a false sense of performance.’ Not that he sees anything horrible with those pills, but he said…there comes a time when a man should allow his body to do what it does…naturally. He doesn’t see anything different in that, than a woman using a vibrator. He said if the RCC has a problem with masturbation…why doesn’t it have a problem with men using pills to perform? He also said…men in their 20’s and 30’s…by and large are not using these pills…it’s typically used by men past their 50’s who want to recreate something…that just isn’t going to happen again. If two married people want to have sex into their elder years…there has to be some cognizance in realizing that it’s not going to be the same as it was 20 years ago.

Words of a man, not mine.

 

[CCM08]

I think the problem here is that sex between a husband and wife isn’t merely the ‘pleasure of the flesh’. It is the renewal of the sacrament of marriage, the complete gift of self that is the supreme expression of physical human love. I don’t think it’s right to say that married sex is something that should be discarded in favor of ‘holiness,’ because that sounds like sex and holiness are mutually exclusive things–when this is farthest from the truth.

The ECF’s certainly thought differently. Martial fasting is part of the fast, which if one follows the Orthodox fast would be roughly half a year. I’ll admit my wife and I didn’t do it and probably won’t for a while. Just because your married doesn’t mean sex is never problematic. In many ways this new line of Catholicism is simply reactionary to protestantism’s new ideas on sex which are in turn a reaction to secular criticism that Christians think sex is evil.

Of course the way Viagra, Cialis etc. are marketed is often entirely inappropriate (if not completely disgusting, when it comes to the laundry list of possible ‘side effects’), and the target audience does not seem to be married couples wishing to express their love for one another. But I don’t think that this means that a married couple, still feeling called to share of themselves in sex but unable to because of age-related impotence, should be prevented from seeking a medical remedy to that situation.

In many ways it’s a private matter between couple and spiritual father. However, I think any good spiritual father would be questioning the need to take unneccessary drugs that include some nasty side effects.

 

[CCM08]

I do think that there is some truth to this statement. However, if you mean to take this statement so far as to completely condemn the use of Viagra and to downplay the value and benefits of marital relations for older married couples, then to me that sounds like a rather Gnostic attitude toward sex and marriage. (But perhaps I am reading more into your statement than what you meant, and if so, I apologize.)

A gnostic attitude towards sex and marriage would be to avoid and condemn both, no one has done that. Nor have I said there’s anything wrong with older people having sex, provided they both want to. What seems problematic is the notion that sex is so important in a marriage we should be using unneccessary drugs with horrible side effects just to make it possible. Sex is a part of marriage, but marriage is not about sex.

I think one issue that deserves clarification here is that the people posting on this thread seem to have two different views as to what Viagra does. One view is that it increases sexual desire above whatever level is natural for a man of a given age. The other view is that it renders a man capable of performing the marital act, which he is physically incapable of doing without medication. I am concentrating on the latter effect, and saying that it is this effect which can be both good and permissible for a married man.

Being Orthodox I would defer whether something is allowed or good to one’s spiritual father as opposed to making blanket statements. The issue at hand is whether the viagra culture has anything to do with helping a marriage, and the answer is no. It’s marketed as a vanity drug which allows men to regain their youth in a culture which pushes strongly the notion that we should be shagging like rabits from the teen years to the grave. Any time unneccessary drugs are involved great care should be used.

 

[whatevergirl]

CCM – you said exactly what I have been trying to say…only you’re better with explaining it here!

Excellent points…

 

[Priscilla_Ann]

No one is laying down exact ages. However, as men and women grow into their 40’s, 50’s, and beyond it’s perfectly natural to lose interest in sex. Viagra is not marketed as a means for people in their child having years with problems. It’s marketed to older men in order to accomplish something that is unnatural. Selling men erection pills and setting them lose without regards for whether their partners are even interested is immoral.

Getting older is a gift from God, a time in life when it becomes easier to distance oneself from the pleasures of the flesh and grow in personal holiness.

As men and women grow into their 40’s and 50’s, it is also perfectly natural to retain their interest in sex. My husband and I are 49 and 48, respectively; and we enjoy a happy, active sex life (without Viagra). Actually, sex seems to get better for us as the years go by. Perhaps that is because the other aspects of our relationship are thriving as well. We would have no problem with the use of Viagra if it became necessary.

My parents are in their 70’s, have been happily married for 50 years, and still enjoy an active sex life.

Sex doesn’t make a marriage, but it certainly is an enjoyable part of marriage…sort of like the frosting on the cake! God made sex enjoyable…it’s not just for procreation!

 

[whatevergirl]

As men and women grow into their 40’s and 50’s, it is also perfectly natural to retain their interest in sex. My husband and I are 49 and 48, respectively; and we enjoy a happy, active sex life (without Viagra). Actually, sex seems to get better for us as the years go by. Perhaps that is because the other aspects of our relationship are thriving as well. We would have no problem with the use of Viagra if it became necessary.

My parents are in their 70’s, have been happily married for 50 years, and still enjoy an active sex life.

Sex doesn’t make a marriage, but it certainly is an enjoyable part of marriage…sort of like the frosting on the cake! God made sex enjoyable…it’s not just for procreation!

yes we agree …but what we are trying to say is that when it starts to wean down…it isn’t the end of the world, to the point where you put your health in potential jepoardy by taking harmful drugs. I too hope that my husband and I continue to have an active sex life into our elderly years.

that’s all. thanks for sharing your comments…if nothing else, everyone’s comments have been very diverse and interesting on this topic!!!

 

[Convert_in_99]

Yeah…and then, shortly after those commercials…you’ll see commercials for condoms and oral birth control. Hmmm…we live in a bizarre society.

There already ARE commercials for those things! They make the pill look sexy by saying it takes away your acne and helps you keep a trim tummy by not having kids.

 

[Celtic_FC]

Okay–that makes sense. I’m still tired of the commercials though–I think they are too intrusive.

Yes, I hear you on that one. I boycott Hardees for their commercials. Heck I don’t watch tv hardly, but when I do and I see these it makes me truly sad.

 

[aurora77]

No one is laying down exact ages. However, as men and women grow into their 40’s, 50’s, and beyond it’s perfectly natural to lose interest in sex. Viagra is not marketed as a means for people in their child having years with problems. It’s marketed to older men in order to accomplish something that is unnatural. Selling men erection pills and setting them lose without regards for whether their partners are even interested is immoral.

Getting older is a gift from God, a time in life when it becomes easier to distance oneself from the pleasures of the flesh and grow in personal holiness.

What? Why do you assume that the wives of men who use Viagra aren’t interested in sex? Why would you say that sex after a certain age is unnatural?
While it’s true that interest in sex may decline as we get older, it doesn’t go away entirely. Sex is part of a normal, healthy marriage, it’s not something dirty, to be ashamed of, when it’s in its proper context.

 

[aurora77]

Honestly, if you have been married for nearly 30 years and can’t think of any way to express love without sex you’ve got more than a few problems. It’s really sad when people have no clue that marriage isn’t about sex. And yes, when you spend your whole day thinking about sex that would tend to be a sign of obession. When it takes that long to become aroused a reasonable person might think their body is trying to tell them something.

Sex isn’t what makes a marriage, I feel sorry for anyone that thinks it does. I know the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that garbage either.

You aren’t married, are you? I think you simply don’t understand what Cat’s saying, so you’ve misinterpreted her whole post. Sex is a beautiful part of married life. If sex isn’t important, why doesn’t the Church allow a man who is completely impotent to marry? If a marriage isn’t consummated sexually, it’s not a valid marriage. I don’t think anyone here is saying sex is what makes a marriage, but it is a part of that one flesh union we are called to have with our spouse.

 

[Cat]

There’s a lot of talk on this thread about “allowing nature to take its course.”

I assume that all who believe this would not submit to being treated for conditions like diabetes, cancer, heart disease, stroke, ALS, MS, IBS, yeast infections, strep throat, etc.

All of these are “nature taking its course.” If your pancreas goes haywire and stops making insulin, why should you inject insulin into yourself, risking insulin shock and infection from the injection site?

If your breast or prostate or uterus or brain gets a big old cancerous growth, that’s just nature. Enjoy.

Let’s say your heart goes flip flop, even if you’ve been moderate in your diet, exercised faithfully, and tried to control your stress. Nature.

Or a blood vessel pops in your head. Let nature take its course.

ALS and MS–most treatments are experimental. You’re going to die from it. Why prolong it? (Research–bah. Eliminate it all. Let nature take its course.)

IBS–so your bowel fills up with gas and hurts like crazy and you can’t eat anything or be around people much. That crazy ol’ nature!

Yeast infections. Hey, what did women DO before antifungal drugs came along? My guess is that they eventually died, screaming in pain, of systemic mycosis after the yeast broke through the inflamed vaginal walls and into the bloodstream. But hey, it’s a death with dignity, instead of subjecting a woman to something unnatural like shooting a syringe of white creamdrug up themselves.

Strep throat–again, what did people DO before antibiotics? They died of Strep throat, that’s what they did. If you don’t believe me, read Little Women.

I hope you get my point. If it’s not OK for a married man to treat his ED because it’s “against nature,” then it’s not OK for him to treat any of these other conditions.

BTW, someone else mentioned this, and I think it’s worth a second mention. Often ED is a symptom of another life-threatening condition in men. That condition might be something physical (heart disease, High blood pressure, a tumor), or it might be something psychological, like depression. People with untreated depression are statistically at extremely high risk of suicide, so depression can truly be considered a life-threatening condition.

For pro-life Catholics, it is a sin to deliberately court our death by ignoring a deadly health problem in our bodies.