Amount of sex?

[Ooberman]

How much sex is too much? Too much before marriage? After marriage?
And not in scientific terms.

Moral terms. Is there a "good" in having too little or too much sex?

[JoeyKnothead]

From the OP:

How much sex is too much?

When you're getting too much of not enough.

...
And not in scientific terms.

Moral terms. Is there a "good" in having too little or too much sex?

A good in having too much sex, is there you sit, you done had you too much of it.

[Darias]

[Replying to post 1 by Ooberman]

The amount of sex and whether or not sex takes place is only morally questionable depending on whether or not the sex itself was voluntary.

All else is a matter of what's healthy or not; and that which is healthy or not has nothing to do with morality. This is not to say that certain sex positions are inherently unhealthy, but, for example, it would not be healthy for a victim of abuse to engage in any sexual activity outside of therapy. Another example is if someone is having so much sex that they can't get anything else done. Neither of this cases mean that sex or frequent sex is immoral.

Any endeavor in life can come from a place of trauma, but that does not mean any particular past-time, however often practiced, is itself unhealthy or immoral. It is possible to say that something is unhealthy for a particular person; but that which is moral and immoral applies to everyone in a way whatever may be healthy does not. It would make no sense to say that a certain action is immoral only for a certain individual, but not another. However, it's perfectly okay to say that certain habits are healthy for one person and not another because health tends to vary per individual -- certain diets, for example.

[Mr.Badham]

[Replying to post 5 by Haven]

I've heard it suggested that it's the taboo surrounding sex that makes it so much fun and exciting.

[Princess Luna On The Moon]

Sex is perfectly natural. The only reason I can really consider being a reason to limit sex is the spread of STDs, and even then there are safe ways of having sex to limit this. There's also nothing special about being a virgin, either.

[Ooberman]

The interesting question about the OP, for me, is that it seems to provide a perfect vehicle for discussing morality.

Under theism, sex has a purpose (procreation), but also an inherent morality in which there is a "Person" (God) who cares about what you do.

We are given reasons, but under naturalism, sex is purely nature and, yet, the "first time" can be very important to people (they can make a meaningful event (metaphor: life). For some, sex (or life) is wonderful or mediocre, tragic, too much, too little, wrong kind, right kind, acceptable, questionable, illegal, etc.... There are all kinds of sexual preferences (many ways to live life/ways to be/ways to live).


To some degree, sex IS Life - a metaphor and literally true: a myth. Our sexual life probably mirrors our real life in some way, it also probably says something about what kind of people we are.

Some of us like Luther Vandross and candles, others need to do it in a plane, some just do it on the way to a glass of ice tea on the porch. For some life is violent or peaceful, loving or hateful - and everything in between.

There is no "right way" to have sex, and we're all lucky to have a few good rides every once in a while. Something to shake the cobwebs off. Expend some energy. Hyperventilate..

"Petite mort" the French call it. The end of life. Little death.

Clearly, even under naturalism, there is "too much" sex and they could be moral reasons - if one decides to have a sexual morality. And, there are purely logistical problems.

Even if a person could have sex 24 hours a day, they wouldn't want to. There is no Reason.

Reason gives rise to morality. Theists may claim God gives us the morals, claiming that if morals are reasonable, they must be from God.

But they are reasonable for reasons. Simply, "If one desires x, then one ought to do y".

If one desires to have sex as much as possible, one ought to take time to recover, eat, sleep and do something else until ones body is ready again.

I mention this because one of the common criticisms from theists is that under naturalism, morality is subjective.

But the claim that morals are subjective (or objective) have no bearing. The question is whether there are reasonable reasons for YOU to act in a way that benefits ME.

Like good sex, or a good life, it works better if we cooperate in ways that make us each happy. The more of us that can be happy, the better, but we also have other goals besides sex. There are reasons to get a job, not do drugs, not steal, not kill: because we can have more sex. That doesn't have to be the source of moral values for everyone, but it's a useful example, or literary vehicle to explain why morals are based on reason - and if they are based on a Person (God, or one persons desires for everyone) - they because perverted.

That is, if we were required to have sex like someone else wanted, we wouldn't enjoy it - though, they may do it in a way that is better for us. Likewise, someone may have a good way to live life, and it might be beneficial to us - but we'd figure it out via Reason.

Reasoning correctly has it's own rewards, particularly if you want something from the partners we have in our lives. We exchange trillions of particles with random strangers every day. Everyone we come in contact with is another "partner". Each partner can be a great ride for both of you, or unfortunate.


So, like moral values, "what does it mean to have too much sex" equates to "what is the right amount of anything?" - or "What is Right?"


There is no answer under theism because theism has no answers. Religion is the reflection of what a person finds dear. It shows what that person desires. Religion is a reflection of the person in the same way a persons sexual preference exposes something about them.

Some people like rough sex, calm lives or rough lives and calm sex. But all of it is an expression of our Life. And then the little death, and then the Big Sleep.

And, just like a sexual act is meaningful to us during the act, our life can be meaningful during the act of Living.

Yet again, God need not exist for this Sex or morality to be meaningful and beautiful, but it also explains why there are so many variations and why there can't really be ONE morality (way of having sex).

That is, no God is required to explain Sin (bad sex - it's the negative interaction between partners) and Goodness (good sex - beneficial interaction).

And, again, if there is such a thing as "Objective Good Sex" and it's according to another person, then it's a disturbing thing for those who haven't invited that partner into their sex lives.

Likewise, many of us don't want to choose to believe in an ancient book on how one ought to best have sex. Sure, we can try it, but if it's not for us, then we should have the freedom to "opt out". If Christianity doesn't appeal to us, choosing Buddhism shouldn't worry anybody.

Choosing a violent cult (or rape) only appeals to a few people, luckily, and few of us want to encourage it... in fact, many of us try to dissuade people from joining cults or raping. Even though those people may feel strongly about their morality (sexual preference).

[Tiberius47]

How much sex is too much? Too much before marriage? After marriage?
And not in scientific terms.

Moral terms. Is there a "good" in having too little or too much sex?

I gotta agree with Divine Insight here. "Too much" sex is when it demands more than its fair share of your time. Like other things, it can become an addiction, and that's when the amount of sex becomes harmful.