A Sexual Contention

Debating issues regarding sexuality

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 49 times

A Sexual Contention

Post #1

Post by 2ndRateMind »

The idea is, that sex among heterosexuals, every so often, produces children. And clearly, when it does, the care and upbringing of those children is the priority. While fiction is often mostly about sex, fact is often mostly about children.

So, this observation leads me to wonder whether sex that cannot produce children, because it is masturbation, or because of contraception, or because it is homosexual in nature, is or is not a moral issue. Who cares, other than those engaged and pleasured, and why should they? By what right do they think they have any involvement, at all?

eg:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) teaches that the sexual function is meant by God to be enjoyed in "the total meaning of mutual self-giving" (CCC, n. 2352) within the marital relationship of a man and a woman.
On what rational basis is this assertion made? How does Catholicism come to think itself privy to God's purposes for sex, and what is its justification for this presumption?

Best wishes, 2RM.

User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #11

Post by 2ndRateMind »

Wootah wrote:
I would challenge if masturbation is sex.
Our Catholic friends seem to think it is, and their hierarchy thinks it sinful.
Wootah wrote: Anyway if you believe in evolution the two most fundamental features are surviving and reproducing. So why wouldnt a rational society focus on the reproductive role of sex?
Because our Catholic friends think it is the only role, and the sole purpose of sex is reproduction, and that it is God's only purpose for it.

Whereas anyone who has ever had sex will tell you that it has multiple roles, multiple purposes, not least among which is relationship building, which may be fulfilled even in barren liaisons.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Wootah
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #12

Post by Wootah »

[Replying to 2ndRateMind]

So because you have Catholic friends you don't think sex should be an important focus of rational society? Even though it is essentially one of the two and probably the main tenet of evolution?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826

Looking for head to head debates, especially on contradictions or the Trinity. PM me your topic.

"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image :)."

Edit preferences to remove all the fluff: ucp.php?i=ucp_prefs&mode=view

User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #13

Post by 2ndRateMind »

Wootah wrote: [Replying to 2ndRateMind]

So because you have Catholic friends you don't think sex should be an important focus of rational society? Even though it is essentially one of the two and probably the main tenet of evolution?

Ha Ha!. I don't know where you got that idea from. But in case I have inadvertently mislead you, my position is that sex, and reproduction, are both vital to society. But I would no more advocate that everyone should reproduce, than I would advocate that everyone should have sex. Or that no one should reproduce, and no one have sex. That decision, in my opinion, should be left entirely down to the informed preferences of the adult individuals or couples (or indeed, other numbers) involved. And to have social sexual policy dictated solely by a bunch of (allegedly) celibate men seems to me bound to lead to a distorted perspective on what is good, and what is moral, over sexual matters.

And I am sure we all have good Catholic friends. They need to be rescued.

Best wishes, 2RM.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #14

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to post 12 by 2ndRateMind]


That does not follow, only a proportion of sex acts need to be productive to maintain a healthy population.
Who determines healthy? There are countries now that are suffering from underpopulation and entire races will soon cease to exist.

And yes, every sexual act does not result in conception. It is designed that way by nature – though o one can with 100% accuracy prevent the possibility of the procreative function of the sexual act – again not something I decided. That is simply the nature of the act.
Because our Catholic friends think it is the only role, and the sole purpose of sex is reproduction, and that it is God's only purpose for it.
Nope – inaccurate. The Church believes exactly what IS – which is the nature of the sexual act has a unitive nature of both procreative and pleasure. The point being the inherent nature of the act is unitive. To attempt to take out the procreative nature of the act would be tantamount to bulimia – wanting the pleasure of eating, but then vomiting up the food so as not to allow the natural consequences of eating said food. It is disordered and rightly labeled.
Whereas anyone who has ever had sex will tell you that it has multiple roles, multiple purposes, not least among which is relationship building, which may be fulfilled even in barren liaisons.
Yep, the Catholic Church will tell you this as well.
I would no more advocate that everyone should reproduce, than I would advocate that everyone should have sex. Or that no one should reproduce, and no one have sex. That decision, in my opinion, should be left entirely down to the informed preferences of the adult individuals or couples (or indeed, other numbers) involved.
So, a person should be encouraged to eat food and vomit it up, even though clearly it is disordered behavior, simply because people should be able to do what they like? Would you advise your daughter it is her decision if she wants to engage in a lifestyle of bulimia? Or would you suggest she is making a bad decision and bulimia is not properly ordered?
And to have social sexual policy dictated solely by a bunch of (allegedly) celibate men seems to me bound to lead to a distorted perspective on what is good, and what is moral, over sexual matters.
Again, not dictated by a bunch of men. This is something all human beings can recognize, whether in the Church or not – just like men can recognize the disorder of bulimia. It is simply a matter of natural law and the Church in her wisdom is simply looking out for her children.
And I am sure we all have good Catholic friends. They need to be rescued.
I appreciate your concern – as misguided as it may be.

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9459
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 117 times
Been thanked: 182 times

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #15

Post by Bust Nak »

RightReason wrote:
That does not follow, only a proportion of sex acts need to be productive to maintain a healthy population.
Who determines healthy?
That quote came from me by the way, not 2ndRateMind.

Scientists? It's not exactly a subjective opinion of what counts as healthy.
There are countries now that are suffering from underpopulation and entire races will soon cease to exist.
Sure, but that's not due to the lack of reproduction but too much inter-racial reproduction. The lost of a racial/cultural identity is sad, but hardly a danger to the health of our species.
And yes, every sexual act does not result in conception. It is designed that way by nature – though o one can with 100% accuracy prevent the possibility of the procreative function of the sexual act – again not something I decided. That is simply the nature of the act.
Well, there is such a thing as "perfect use failure rate," the best form of contraceptive gives 99.95% accuracy. But let not get bog down with numbers.

tryme
Student
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:53 pm

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #16

Post by tryme »

[Replying to post 2 by FWI]


My friend, if sex is not meant to be pleasurable, then what exactly is the “productive� value of the clitoris? It’s OK go ahead… I’ll wait

tryme
Student
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:53 pm

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #17

Post by tryme »

[Replying to post 3 by 2ndRateMind]

Like most Christians, he probably hasn’t even read the Bible and it’s entirety. And is also painfully unaware of how many of his police come from things talk from the pulpit, and not his “holy authoritative text�

tryme
Student
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:53 pm

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #18

Post by tryme »

[Replying to post 6 by RightReason]



🤣 LMAOOOOOOO

Someone who believes that there is an invisible creature just beyond the atmosphere of the earth and the place called “heavens� is where he resides, a God that loves every creature that he created and has the capacity to fix their life and every problem in the world, but refrains from doing so, but it still loving and omnipotent, Calling someone else illogical is quite rich my friend. Quite rich

tryme
Student
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:53 pm

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #19

Post by tryme »

[Replying to post 10 by 2ndRateMind]

The Catholic Church also thinks it’s godly to hide the fact that their employees “priests� are having sex with little boys. Soooo there’s that.

FWI
Sage
Posts: 500
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:50 pm
Location: USA

Re: A Sexual Contention

Post #20

Post by FWI »

[Replying to post 15 by tryme]
My friend, if sex is not meant to be pleasurable, then what exactly is the “productive� value of the clitoris? It’s OK go ahead… I’ll wait


If my statements were to be reviewed again, you would clearly read that I did not claim sex (among married male/female humans) was not meant to be pleasurable. It seems that you are putting your own spin on my comments. I stated that the main purpose of sex was reproduction and that pleasure was a by-product of that action. This, of course, would ensure that the population would continue to grow to a point, where human extinction would not occur, because of the lack of reproduction. The deviations from this purpose are only self-interests and as I have also written causes mental and physical hardships to millions!

Post Reply