C
CopticChristian
Guest
You never answered my question…Well, I’m referring to sexual attraction. I don’t know why the term “sexual” would be the first word in it if it was not an intrinsic component of it, unless it is being used in the sense of “an attraction towards a member of the opposite sex.” So is it sexual in the sense of the physiological or biological or sexual in the sense of it concerns differences of sex/gender?
I’ve always split attraction to the opposite sex into 2 categories- physical attraction and non-physical. (I couldn’t think of a better term for the latter.) In the latter case, it’s attraction on the merits of the person- their personality, values, other traits. Maybe this is where I’m wrong…but I don’t know. It’s pretty confusing. On the one hand, my parents have always preached, “Don’t date someone because you think they’re pretty (Beauty isn’t only skin deep.” But I’ve also heard from a few people that sexual attraction is a vital component of a relationship, as it provides incentive to reproduce (within marriage, of course). Of course, my parents also think their spouse is attractive.
I know what you’re saying, but for me, framing her as someone’s daughter or sister is a strong disincentive for me to look at her in a lewd manner. I wasn’t saying she’s someone’s property, merely that she holds value to lots of other people besides me and I ought to be respectful and cognizant of that fact. And I most certainly wasn’t saying that I only respect them on that level, either.
**Rk,
I have some questions for you.
Have you read the Catechism cover to cover?
Are you aware of Lust being one of the 7 deadly sins? **