Viagra

[Phemie]

The church has allowed aphrodisiacs in the past, including chocolate (which was originally thought to be of that class) when it was discovered back in the 16th century. The new kinds shouldn’t be treated any differently.

But Viagra is not an aphrodisiac. Contrary to popular jokes, it doesn’t cause arousal, it just prevents the production of an enzyme that causes loss of erection – that’s when it works. They don’t mention in the ads that it doesn’t work on ~25% of men, much to their & their wives disappointment.

The jokesters don’t seem to know that many men in their 20s have problems with ED (perhaps because those who suffer from such don’t talk about it) and that can be very difficult in a young marriage.

 

[Leopard]

I observed that there is a direct relationship between viagra and cardiac arrest! I may be wrong, but that is what I have observed! Prove me categorically wrong if you wish!

Yes, you have said this, but for the umpteenth time You have not said what this relationship is. Nor have you compared this with cardiac health in non-viagra users, correlated with age and other health factors, etc.

Your statement carries about as much weight as if I were to say there is a link between baldness and a tendency to be in car accidents, since I have observed bald persons who were in car accidents.

 

[pyropam]

I’m not even sure that ED is a disease that needs treating. Seems to be a natural part of aging.

If this drug is for merely recreational purposes, is it morally licit?

If it is for the purpose of conceiving children, then is it?

If it is for pleasure only and not procreation, then isn’t that separating the procreative and unitive functions and just as immoral as artificial birth control?

I don’t know, just askin’. Not relevant to my life personally.

This is probably one of the saddest posts I have ever read.

ED is a disease that needs treating. Has nothing to do with aging! Just because a person grows older, that doesn’t mean that he looses the ability to have an erection.

(P.S. Check medical resourses…people don’t lose their memory just because of natural aging either… they only lose the ability to do natural things if a physical problem exist.)

By your post above, it seems that you think people should not have sex once children can no longer be conceived. Just because a woman has already gone through menopause doesn’t mean that sex is now out of the question.

God created sex to be pleasurable between a man and woman. Many couples get married and are not able to have children, this doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have sex with each other.

Depression is a serious disorder that can lead to many physical problems. If a person who has ED becomes depressed (and they do), then their physical health will decline as well.

Drugs like “Viagra” are wonderful and work great for some people. I’m proud for any person who can take them. I’m sorry for those who for some other medical reason can’t.

 

[whatevergirl]

I would like to know if our church has any tell about Viagra, or any sexual stimulation.

Good question–I don’t think anything specific…like others have stated. The problem I have with it…is if you have the misfortune of having the commercials in your face at all odd hours of the night, while you’re trying to watch a family program, and you happen to notice at the bottom of the screen it states…‘does not prevent HIV, or sexually transmitted diseases…’ it just leaves one to thinking it’s being used in a dating situation, and not in marital intimacy (although portrayed that way in the commercials). Why would someone need to be concerned about contracting HIV, if he was in a monogamous relationship with his wife?

So–I agree with the poster who said as long as it’s used and not abused…meaning used by men who are dating, and not married, then it should be considered ‘moral.’

 

[agangbern]

Yes, you have said this, but for the umpteenth time You have not said what this relationship is. Nor have you compared this with cardiac health in non-viagra users, correlated with age and other health factors, etc.

Your statement carries about as much weight as if I were to say there is a link between baldness and a tendency to be in car accidents, since I have observed bald persons who were in car accidents.

So you want the relationship to be “baptized”, to be given a name?I am not interested in the name to be given to that relationship. Baldness and the tendency to car accidents? It appears a very far comparison. If viagra, when taken in, causes hardening of an organ of the body, the pennis, how sure are we that it would not at the same time harden another vital organ of the body, the heart?

 

[Phemie]

So you want the relationship to be “baptized”, to be given a name?I am not interested in the name to be given to that relationship. Baldness and the tendency to car accidents? It appears a very far comparison. If viagra, when taken in, causes hardening of an organ of the body, the pennis, how sure are we that it would not at the same time harden another vital organ of the body, the heart?

We’re sure because Viagra doesn’t ‘harden’ the penis, it prevents the production of an enzyme that softens the penis.

There seems to have been a high number of heart attacks in patients who take Viagra but it hasn’t been demonstrated that Viagra was the cause – rather, many who take Viagra suffer from conditions that make them more prone to heart attacks. Just because A happens during B doesn’t mean that B caused A.

 

[agangbern]

We’re sure because Viagra doesn’t ‘harden’ the penis, it prevents the production of an enzyme that softens the penis.

There seems to have been a high number of heart attacks in patients who take Viagra but it hasn’t been demonstrated that Viagra was the cause – rather, many who take Viagra suffer from conditions that make them more prone to heart attacks. Just because A happens during B doesn’t mean that B caused A.

If it prevents the production of an enzyme that softens the penis, in effect it would lead to hardening of the penis. The same could also occur with the heart.

 

[TweetyBird]

Come on, folks. There is no moral issue with using viagra. The Church’s teaching on marital chastity is simply that the procreative and unitive ends of the act must remain intact in every marital embrace. Whether taking viagra is a wise medical decision or not is an entirely different issue.

And yes, there are plenty of morally licit medical treatments for ‘female troubles’ too. 'Nuff said.

 

[Phemie]

If it prevents the production of an enzyme that softens the penis, in effect it would lead to hardening of the penis. The same could also occur with the heart.

One thing it does do is dangerously lower the blood pressure of men who are also using nitroglycerin.

 

[rboo124]

Here’s the thing about Viagra.

What does a man say to his wife of many years after he has taken it: I’m on drugs, and I want you? Really, is that at all loving or romantic? One wonders how many women would think so, given the results of surveys of the partners of prospective users after the stuff first came out. Overwhelmingly, the ladies stated they wished the men just wouldn’t bother.

Blessings,

Gerry

But, what about a wife who requires lubrication because her body doesn’t naturally produce it adequately for intercourse?

Is the husband in some way supposed to feel less loved or romantic? A health condition is in no way a reflection of inadequacy towards the partner. The fact that the couple wants to make love to eachother disproves that.

No announcement is necessary…‘Hey sweetie…I took viagra!..wanna make love?’ lol When I have a health issue, I take my medicine…I’ve yet to announce to my wife ‘Hey sweetie…I took antibiotics to clear up my sinus infection!’ I just do it…there’s plenty of things we do to maintain our health, it’s not necessary to make a public announcement about it.

I think my wife would consider me very shallow if I had a problem with her needing to use a lubrication to make sex more enjoyable for her, as I would consider it rather shallow of her to object to me using Viagra if I was unable to maintain an erection.

We are talking about maintaining a romantic and loving relationship, aren’t we? How is taking measures due to a medical condition taking away from that? If anything, it’s improving it.

Taking a drug for legitimate medical reasons is not the same as being ‘on drugs’…that’s twisting the term to make it sound illicit, which it is not. Caring for your body as a ‘temple’ and keeping it in good health requires medicine at times…that’s not being ‘on drugs’.

Perhaps the women who participated in this survey, and were married for many years, were either not in a loving relationship or did not enjoy sex themselves, therefore would prefer that the husband’s didn’t improve their ED. If so, the problem isn’t viagra, or lack there of…the problem is within the marriage or the woman. Healthy people in healthy relationships want to participate in healthy sex with eachother.

 

[Phemie]

I think the original question illustrates people’s misconception about Viagra. People here seem to think that men take it to get turned on but Viagra doesn’t work that way.

Viagra & other similar medication allow a man’s body to work the way it should WHEN he gets aroused. A man who has no interest in sex is not going to be helped by Viagra.

 

[Leopard]

So you want the relationship to be “baptized”, to be given a name?I am not interested in the name to be given to that relationship. Baldness and the tendency to car accidents? It appears a very far comparison. If viagra, when taken in, causes hardening of an organ of the body, the pennis, how sure are we that it would not at the same time harden another vital organ of the body, the heart?..If it prevents the production of an enzyme that softens the penis, in effect it would lead to hardening of the penis. The same could also occur with the heart.

To say “if it could…then how can we be sure it couldn’t…”, without any sort of corroborating data is not an observation.

 

[mark_a]

I think the original question illustrates people’s misconception about Viagra. People here seem to think that men take it to get turned on but Viagra doesn’t work that way.

Viagra & other similar medication allow a man’s body to work the way it should WHEN he gets aroused. A man who has no interest in sex is not going to be helped by Viagra.

Finally, clear thought prevails.

I’ve seen commercials for a women’s viagra type drug.

Would anyone have any problems with that?

 

[whatevergirl]

I don’t think my sex life would be worth all the potential side effects(some sound pretty serious) that these drugs can bring about…and my husband says the same. We love our sex life, it’s a gift from God to share something so wonderful and amazing–but if someday, we need a pill or something ingestable to improve things…we would rather abstain. We must be a small group in that thinking, considering Pfizer is raking in the dough off of Viagra, and the like!

 

[Phemie]

I don’t think my sex life would be worth all the potential side effects(some sound pretty serious) that these drugs can bring about…and my husband says the same. We love our sex life, it’s a gift from God to share something so wonderful and amazing–but if someday, we need a pill or something ingestable to improve things…we would rather abstain. We must be a small group in that thinking, considering Pfizer is raking in the dough off of Viagra, and the like!

I might have said the same thing once, but I don’t anymore now that I’m in that situation. Unfortunately Viagra is of no help to us.

 

[whatevergirl]

I might have said the same thing once, but I don’t anymore now that I’m in that situation. Unfortunately Viagra is of no help to us.

I’m sorry to hear this…that you’re in that situation. I can’t see the risks/side effects being worth it, though.