[
Replying to Purple Knight in post #1]
I don't really condone Bill Clinton's famous lie, because it was clearly intended to deceive, but I actually agree with it.
I don't consider anything to be true sexual intercourse unless it carries the possibility of producing offspring. Oral sex? Sex with a condom? I consider that masturbation with two people. I don't consider what Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski did to be measurably different than one of them peeping at the other in the bathroom or pasting the other's head on random naked pictures (we'll say with consent, so it'll be equal in that way). What does touching change? Even very nasty touching? To me, nothing, if the touching can't make babies.
Hi purple Knight. Interesting discussion. I love how you have partially pointed out one of the Catholic Church’s understandings about sex. I love how you recognize the significance of procreation when it comes to sex. Bravo! Lots of people ignore that. Clearly, from observation of this world we live in and acknowledging the design of the world we can conclude that the sexual act has a procreative nature. This is merely acknowledging a scientific observation, but it is amazing how many people want to deny it.
Unfortunately, acknowledging this truth gets many to falsely accuse the Catholic Church as seeing the ONLY function/purpose of sex is procreative and Catholics as being commanded to have as many kids as they can. Obviously, that is anti-Catholic propaganda and not a teaching of the Church. The Church teaches the sexual act has a unitive nature of procreation and pleasure(intimacy), with the primary purpose being procreative. The Church goes on to teach that it is wrong to separate the unitive nature of the sexual act. To do so is usurping God’s design and tweaking His gift to us of sex.
You are correct in recognizing oral sex or contracepting sex as essentially mutual masturbation. The couple is not engaging in the sexual act as designed and intended and therefore not allowing for its purpose. What the couple is actually doing is simulating sex, not accepting that authentic sex comes with consequences and responsibilities.
That said, the Clinton/Lewinski act is still wrong and the parties are guilty of engaging in sexual relations/fornication even if they did not technically have sexual intercourse. Their intention was still to enjoy the pleasure of God’s gift of sex while trying to bypass the natural consequences that might occur from partaking in this pleasure. So, yes, Clinton was trying to be deceptive by claiming he did not engage in actual sexual intercourse with Monica, but no, he was not really correct and off the hook, because what he did (even excluding the lie) was still wrong. It was a misuse of God’s gift of the sexual act. And he clearly did it to enjoy the pleasure without risking his behavior getting found out with her becoming pregnant. That’s in a way doubly wrong.
God designed the sexual act to be enjoyed by those pledging a lifelong commitment to one another. The very fact that sex can result in the creation of a new life is reason enough to understand its significance and not something that should be treated as simply scratching an itch. Married couples are called to become co creators. That is an awesome power and not to be taken lightly. The Church in her wisdom recognizes this. For this reason the sexual act is only to be engaged in for married couples and quite frankly that is the only thing that makes sense anyway.
Question for debate: Is there any precedence for this view in either religious or secular philosophy?
As I explained above, your view is partially the view of the Catholic Church, in the sense of acknowledging the procreative aspect of the sexual act.
Some precedence for Catholic teaching is Sacred Scripture includes the story of Onin, who was smited by God for practicing contraception. He engaged in the sexual act, but then withdrew and ‘spilled his semen’. God found this an abomination. Also, every single Christian denomination taught the evils of contraception until around the 1930’s. Think about that. That's some precedent. All Christian denominations (Baptists, Methodists, Protestants, Lutherans, etc) taught that the use of contraception was immoral. So, I guess I have a question for others – what changed? Does truth change? Only the Catholic Church has remained unchanged in her teaching of this beautiful truth. Everyone else has seemed to have caved to the fashions of the day. We see this for same-sex relations as well. This is what happens when one’s religion is viewed more as a political democratic group instead of Christ’s Church on earth, where we did not elect Christ as our King. Rather He is our King by right of His divinity!