Home - List All Discussions

So, when is sex a good thing?

What values/attitudes help make sex a positive experience?

by: ThunderKitten

Ok, I hear a LOT about all the different situations in which sex is a bad thing, but the most I ever hear about sex being even slightly ok is "when you're married." That's not very helpful. It takes more than a marriage ceremony for sex to be a positive experience between two people. If two people that really hated each other got married, would marriage make sex between them ok and a good experience?
Now, I know abortion would automatically make sex bad, but let's pretend for this example that abortion is impossible. Now, my question about when is it a good thing is from the point of view of the people having sex, not God's or anyone else's. My examples do not assume the couple is or is not married. You get to specify that in your response. When I say "a child" I mean at LEAST one. Again, you get to specify.
One- a couple has sex and concieves a child. At some point the relationship ends. They both participate in raising the child, but eventually one or both might end up in a realtionship with someone else.
What sort of people could have this relationship, look back on it, and see what they had as special even though they had a child with someone they ended up not wanting to spend their lives with? And what kind of realtionship would it have to be to enable them to feel this way?
Especially, what would have to exist for the couple to be glad that they slept together?
Two- same as above, but without the baby being concieved.
Three- a couple has sex, concieves a child, raises the child, and remains a couple until "death do us part".
Four- same as above, but no child is concieved.
What values/attitudes help make sex a positive experience? What sort of relationship makes sex an expression of love rather than just "getting off?" So, when is sex a good thing? I ask these questions both for my own edification and so that when my daughter is older I can explain this important issue to her. *I honestly do not know what makes sex a positive, emotionally fulfilling experience!*

reply from: coco

SEX IS A GOOD THING!!!
I am not one of those people on here that advocate it only for marriage however, I personally believe that if 2 PEOPLE are in a commited relationship and EXCLUSIVE to EACHOTHER then why not!! I think that marriage is now mostly looked upon as a peice of paper. And being in a commited relationship with my significant other for over ten years I can honestly say that I would rather be in a committed, LOVING, RESPECTIBLE, HAPPY relationship rather than being in a married relationship and have the latter then what I have! I know people on here that are really into thier religion that are going to say that I am an evil doer and "living in sin" but guess what people I DONT CARE!! what works for me works for me and nobody lives my life except for ME

reply from: GodsLaw2Live

The type of person in scenarios one and two is a rolling stone, a gypsy type. One who doesn't care about consequences. One who lives for his own personal enjoyment of the moment. He doesn't want to be responsible and doesn't give a hoot about others; whether an abandoned spouse or child.
Scenarios three and four illustrate a responsible citizen.

reply from: yoda

Sex is a good thing when it is NOT done with the intention to abort any pregnancy that results from it.

reply from: AshMarie88

I agree with you.
I don't have a problem with sex itself; What I have a problem with is women that want that sex and they go get it, but they find themselves "accidently" pregnant and just get rid of it. That's what I'm against. As far as I'm concerned, people can have as much sex as they want, just don't kill someone because of the act.

reply from: coco

I agree with you.
I don't have a problem with sex itself; What I have a problem with is women that want that sex and they go get it, but they find themselves "accidently" pregnant and just get rid of it. That's what I'm against. As far as I'm concerned, people can have as much sex as they want, just don't kill someone because of the act.
I AGREE WITH YOU, but I personally would not sleep around!!!

reply from: AshMarie88

I agree with you.
I don't have a problem with sex itself; What I have a problem with is women that want that sex and they go get it, but they find themselves "accidently" pregnant and just get rid of it. That's what I'm against. As far as I'm concerned, people can have as much sex as they want, just don't kill someone because of the act.
I AGREE WITH YOU, but I personally would not sleep around!!!
I wouldn't either.

reply from: Shiprahagain

I'm wondering why my views on sex insofar as they take place in a world without abortion matter on a forum about abortion.
As for the sex is a part of marriage thing, that doesn't make marriage an excuse to have sex, it just says sex is part of marriage, not the main impetus.

reply from: thecatholicamerican

As a Catholic you know what I am about to say, but let me say it anyway.
Sex belongs in marriage. Why? I believe that is what sex is intended for, the deepest expression of love and responsibility between married people. Where there is no marriage there is no real visible sign of commitment between and man and a woman. Where there is no marriage, there is nothing to prevent either the man or the woman from leaving the relationship. If one or the other leaves the marriage at least there is a contract to be broken.
Also, why bring children into the world as parents that have not at least made the commitment of marriage to each other? While abortion could and one day will be eliminated from our culture, there is no 100% effective means of preventing pregnancy other than abstinance. If you think that it is good that children grow up in the world not knowing who there parents are, or that it is better to have children being pulled in two directions between parents rather than having a two parents at home than you are only fooling yourself and doing an injustice to your children.
Its not about whether sex is good or not. Tts about whether sex is responsible or not. Sex outside marriage is not responsible. Parents who are single may well take just as good a care of their children and love them every bit as much as married parents, but they are not doing what is best for their children. They are doing what is best for themselves.
Sex inside the marriage is what is best for children! Sex inside marriage is what is best to protect the sanctity of life.
The reason this question is important is that it was the loosening of sexual values (so called casual sex) and having of children outside of wedlock and amongst young and irresponsible people that helped legalize abortion and thus raise abortion to the acceptance level that it has since achieved.
Abortion is not and never will be a replacement for responsible sexual choices.

reply from: coco

The reason this question is important is that it was the loosening of sexual values (so called casual sex) and having of children outside of wedlock and amongst young and irresponsible people that helped legalize abortion and thus raise abortion to the acceptance level that it has since achieved.
Cathoilic american I know you are catholic and everything but besides your religion why do you believe that???I am not married I had 2 children by the age of 21 and my children are loved and taught and my & I partner are not irresponsible?? me and my partner never go out on "dates" try to teach our children right from wrong, provide for our children both mentally and spritually we dont go to church because I believe religion is a divider instead of a uniter, I teach my kids about MY view of god, ETC... I know I am "living in sin" according to the religious but I would rather "live in sin" then be in a home were thier is no love, abuse and my children suffer from low self esteem. I am not agiainst marriage but I am against those that advocate it for people that say it is better being married and an f***** up relationship and frowning upon those that choose to not be married. THAT IS MY BELIEF
P.S. Abortion will never go away because their will ALWAYS be women that dont want to have babies and will turn to abortion to elemenate thier "problem".
just wondering why

reply from: laurissamarcotte

^O^
I completely agree with you.
What does this have to do with marriage?? I can tell you, most homes with married couples are not like this. It really ticks me off that you'd say that married families treat their kids with "no love, abuse and children suffering from self esteem." I ask you, what about marriage brings down a child's self esteem?
And who says we're saying that? Marriage doesn't screw up a relationship. Sex outside of marriage most of the time does. I know a couple who lived together before marriage and got divorced recently. Trust me, sex is WAY better inside marriage. And what's the point of choosing not to be married to someone you want to spend the rest of your life with? Isn't that the whole point of marriage? To be commited to someone for the rest of your life? Marriage is a sign of commitment.

reply from: thecatholicamerican

Parents teach by example.
Religion is very well a divider. Christ said that he came to divide, not to unite. Morality and truth do divide. Why should children marry if their parents dont see fit to get married?
You may live in a relationship with love but what you dont do is live in a commited relationship. If a person is not married there is no outward sign of the commitment. What does that mean? It means that you partner has every moral and even legal right to leave. No questions asked. Love and commitment are not utually exclusive. You give me the excuse that you would rather live together than me married and have no love. What do I infer from that? That if the relationship finds itself without love you would have no qualms about leaving relationship and you would have every moral and legal right to do so.
A disdain for marriage to me suggests a general disdain for commitment. That lack of marriage to me will always give the appearance of people that are not truly commited and leave open to themselves the possibility of leaving the relationship.
How can we respect life when we cannot even respect something as basic as marriage?

reply from: coco

^O^
I completely agree with you.
What does this have to do with marriage?? I can tell you, most homes with married couples are not like this. It really ticks me off that you'd say that married families treat their kids with "no love, abuse and children suffering from self esteem." I ask you, what about marriage brings down a child's self esteem?

What I ment is that if a marriage is in this situation is it better to stay in it or to leave??? I NEVER SAID ALL MARRIED PEOPLE TREAT THEIR KIDS LIKE THAT I GAVE AND EXAMPLE IN this case is it better to be alone or MARRIED that is what I was insinuating!!! He said that PEOPLE THAT DONT GET MARRIED DISERVICED THEIR CHILDREN BUT THAT IS OK TO SAY RIGHT??
And who says we're saying that? Marriage doesn't screw up a relationship. Sex outside of marriage most of the time does. I know a couple who lived together before marriage and got divorced recently. Trust me, sex is WAY better inside marriage. And what's the point of choosing not to be married to someone you want to spend the rest of your life with? Isn't that the whole point of marriage? To be commited to someone for the rest of your life? Marriage is a sign of commitment.
I CHOOSE NOT TO MARRY BECAUSE I dont want to I am faithful. I never said that marriage "screws" up relationships . People that are screwed up screw up relationships,I know many couples that cheat and are in abusive relationships with children that are married and to pick my relationship out of those that are married and abusive toward thier partners and children and say my relationship is "not best for my children" is a bunch of S***.
I would rather have my boys in a great loving,nurturing, respectible relationship and not be married then one that is full of physical,emotional,and spritual abuse for their partner and thier children and be married but then again this is MY opinion!!

reply from: coco

FYI most people dont respect marriage why do you think the divorce rate is so high?? I am affraid of marriage I DONT BELIVE IN DIVORCE WHATS SO EVER!!! I need to know the person inside and out to makesure if i am going to make that vow to god that i am going to be with that person for better or worse, I guess my parents divorce tramitized me or something. I dont take god lightly, and if I promise him something I BETTER deliver
I would rather live together with my partner for 10 years that I love rather then be married and no love!!
What is commitment to you catholic???

reply from: coco

oh catholic I dont belive in the bible

reply from: coco

If you are in a happy, loving, nurturingrespectible relationship gay, straight, whatever then I give you props and that is all that matters PERIOD!! If YOU believe in the bible and not married and a gay person then you live in sin and I DONT believe in the bible!!!
p.s. I LOVEGAY PEOPLE, HECK ILOVE EVERYONE!!!

reply from: thecatholicamerican

I know many many people that live together that have more than disfunctional relationships. Many once they live together, never get married and the longer they stay living together the less likely they are to be married. That does not imply that they are healthy relationships.
Marriage is a sign of commitment, to each other in the marriage, to ones children growing up and to community they live in. Without marriage, there is no contract pertaining to fidelity. I am not accusing any one person of this, but that is the simple fact. In the workplace, we would call it being employed at an "at will basis" which means that either party may leave without reason or notice. That essentially what "living together" is like. You remain in the relationship at whim and will, knowing that you have made no sign of fidelity or commitment and that you are in fact free to leave.
It is no wonder that America legalized abortion at the height of the sexual revolution, when things such as marriage were really beginning to get hammered by popular secular culture. In communist Poland one of the first things that the state did is encourage sexual experimentation and endorsed and provided contraception. Get the young people away from the church and their moral base and they become more inclined to the state. But alas, rights come from God, not from governments. Does anyone think that it is a coincidence that the secular godless movement in America is so against religion? Religion protects the idea of the sacredness of human life, the sanctity of marriage and the condemnation of abortion. Separate people from religion and you separate them from their pro-life stance and moral high ground. Too bad for them its just not working.

reply from: coco

What is your definiton of commetment???

reply from: coco

Expain the divorce rate??? If marriage is a commitment and not on "at will basis"why do so many walk out then, it is because society puts pressure on most people to get married when they are pregnant because it is the "reponsible" thing to do and then 20 years latter they get divorced!! and if they dont get married you are looked down upon!! Do you know how many times i was asked when am i going to get married I always said WHEN I WANT TO!! Screw what people say All That matters is that if you are in a good relationship married or not!!!

reply from: yoda

Me too. It seems to present a wonderful opportunity to divert the discussion.

reply from: ThunderKitten

Coco, that's a lot of where my question stems from. I believe a couple needs that, whether married or not, in order for sex to be emotionally fullfilling. But what is it that MAKES a relationship loving, respectable, and happy?
Well, if we argue that sex is wrong in instance X, Y, and Z, either we should let people know that we believe that in instance Q sex IS a GOOD thing, so that they know when to be ok with it, or come out and say sex is ALWAYS wrong. If you only only know the negatives, how are you going to be able to find the positive?
I agree that sex should not be the MOTIVATION for marriage, just like finances shouldn't, but- it is IMPORTANT to marriage, and should be considered just like any other major aspect of a lifelong commitment.
But, more than that, I ask out of genuine curiosity for my own personal benefit and knowledge. When it comes to my own sex life, my attitudes about sex are counter-productive and cynical. I know they don't help, but until I find something positive to replace them with, I can't change them.
For example: I have always felt that people shouldn't have sex until they're ready to have a baby. The thing is, I thought "ready" exclusively meant "want". So what happened? I ended up having sex with someone who didn't want a baby, and was very hurt because I ALSO thought "man wants baby" = "loves woman and takes her seriously" and "man doesn't want baby" = "man only cares for sex". To me, wanting a baby was "proof" that sex was loving and meaningful.
My reaction was to get him on board with the baby thing (which happened two years later), all the while stressing out about having a kid because I couldn't stand not knowing whether I was pregnant or not. That's even when the condom stayed intact the whole "cycle", because I honestly didn't (and still don't) know if you can get pregnant if the condom hasn't broken. And that's with WANTING a kid! You have know idea how much RELIEF it was to get pregnant! And now that I don't want another one- I freak out every time I have sex (even when the condom doesn't break), which is not that often. THIS IS NOT HEALTHY!!!
So, I have the kid, the guys a good dad, we get along ok, and we're not struggling financially in the least, but, before having a kid... I would've willingly and intentionally concieved under MUCH WORSE circumstances, because I didn't have ANY IDEA what having a child was like.
After having a kid? For reasons I won't go into, I realized that my hurt that he didn't want babies with me (for the first two years) wasn't really solved by having a baby, and if I want to be really honest I really should have broken up with him a LONG time ago, before I had a kid with him, heck before I had sex with him. But, here I am, we've been together four years and that child will tie us together forever even if we do break up (or at least until she's 18).
In defense of my mistakes, if I hadn't made the mistakes I did my beautiful daughter wouldn't be here, and she is even more deserving of being here than I am glad to have her. Does anyone object to me (or God, if you prefer) having created life?
There is no emotional fulfillment for me when I have sex with my guy, and with no emotional fulfillment I have little desire to "improve things physically" in the bedroom. I don't think I've ever "made love" to him. I don't think I ever will. This is not what I want.
The only context I had for "sex=good" was "man wants baby". In fact, to me the most arousing thing would be if I turned on a man so much that he literally forgot about protection, as opposed to just being lazy about it (don't leave me in charge of the birth control, LOL). Now I know that "man wants baby" by itself doesn't work, doesn't turn sex into "lovemaking" and every other attitude I have about sex is negative. So, I am seeking advice. I need healthy attitudes about sex and I need to know when it's a good thing. Like, specific examples of things that indicate a relationship is good, what kind of behavior indicates that a man respects you, yada, yada yada! I want to know what it takes to make love, and look back on it with fondness!!!
And if some of you think I should stick with the man I got, regardless of how I feel about him, ok. Just imagine you're giving this advice to my daughter when she turns sixteen, because I'm going to be the one telling her this stuff, and if I don't know what I'm talking about she could end up unmarried and out of love like me.

reply from: coco

whats better must choose one a mariage with children that is raveged by abuse or a non married couple with children that is not abusive and very loving?? like I said you have to choose one

reply from: laurissamarcotte

I don't quite understand. Are you saying that you're faithful enough that you don't have to get married, or that marriage makes you unfaithful?
Getting married doesn't make kids suffer.

reply from: ThunderKitten

In essence, I'm asking what makes sex good on a personal level, rather than a societal one. You can say, "When it doesn't violate God's morals", but I need more info than that.
And people who wait until marriage still have the RELATIONSHIP before marriage, they just don't have the SEX until after the wedding! I'm asking about the relationship part, what makes a relationship so good that (sex/marriage) is a good, emotionally fulfilling experience? And what attitudes can lead one TOWARD that happy and fulfilling (sex/marriage), and to not feel bad about (sex/marriage) when it IS a good thing?

reply from: ThunderKitten

Me too. It seems to present a wonderful opportunity to divert the discussion.
I'm not trying to divert the discussion, I'm asking for advice.
Noone complained when Ash asked about childcare.

reply from: laurissamarcotte

I think the only good time to have sex is when you're married, not only because God says so, but because, as theamericancatholic said, you can morally and legally leave your sexual partner in a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship, but you can't in a marriage. Also, married parents is better for kids. I don't think I could live with the fact that my biological mom and my biological dad could just split up at any moment, and have the absolut right to move half way across the world if he pleased. When you get married, you make a commitment. When you date, you don't. You're much less likely to leave your spouse than you are your sexual partner. Anyway, that's my two cents.

reply from: coco

Coco, that's a lot of where my question stems from. I believe a couple needs that, whether married or not, in order for sex to be emotionally fullfilling. But what is it that MAKES a relationship loving, respectable, and happy?
What I feel what makes a relationship is an understanding that one is exclusive to one another that they are able to be themselves and not wonder if i say this the person will think i am stupid. I say be yourself and let the other be themselves, be faithful, trusting, and most of all respect eachother!!!

reply from: coco

For me in my relationship sex is gratifing because I know that I AM LOVED, and that he is their for me and has been their for me , and I dont need to give it to him or else he is going to get it somewhere else!! I know that he loves me he has seen and been their for me at my worst and best!! If you dont feel a connection then chances are you are in the relationship for the wrong reasons, but that is just me!!

reply from: coco

I don't quite understand. Are you saying that you're faithful enough that you don't have to get married, or that marriage makes you unfaithful?
Getting married doesn't make kids suffer.
I didnt get married because i didnt want to and just because i am not married that doesnt mean that i am not faithfull i have never cheated on my partner. And when did I say marriage makes kids suffer???

reply from: laurissamarcotte

You said:
I'm sorry if I misunderstood, but I got the impression that you were saying getting married would automatically put you into an abusive relationship. I'm telling you, not many marriages are like this.

reply from: coco

If i confusied you i am sorry but when i decide to get married i am making sure that my marriage is not a abusive one. Just like people tell others to hold on to thier virginity I am holding on to marriage

reply from: ThunderKitten

Ash, I don't have a problem with sex itself when *other* consenting people do it, either- also with me it's the consequences (abortion, disease, etc.) I'm opposed to. It's *me* having sex I have a problem with.
coco, I am happy for you. I have a question, though. Basically, I ask myself, can sex without marriage (or other lifelong commitment) be a good thing? But my criterion for myself is not just, was it a good relationship at the time, but should it come to an end would the relationship be looked on positively with no ill will toward the former significant other? Especially if a child or children were produced during the relationship?
Basically, if I can't have a kid with someone and look back on the relationship positively after it's over, I can't see sex without a lifelong commitment as a good thing for myself. Ok, I take that back- I'd always love the kid. But I don't think I'd look on the relationship itself positively.
I guess the precondition for that would be, can ANY relationship end on good terms and with positive feelings? And if there was no ill will to drive the two people apart, what did cause the relationship to end? Bear in mind I've only had the one relationship that I'm currently in, never had an "ex", so I can't draw upon experience to answer this for myself.

So, was it a mistake to get divorced, or to get married in the first place?
theamericancatholic, please expand on this. What is it about marriage that brings about this love? And sex as an expression of responsibility? How does that work?
What aspects make it better?
Ok, it seems most are agreed that sex comes after marriage. So what makes two people compatable for marriage? What would you tell people who are afraid of "a lifetime of sexual obligation" about sex/love/marriage/etc.? (That was my main reason why I didn't want to wait until marriage!!)
Nonetheless, I am certain of my partners' fidelity, and I am faithful, too, and will be as long as I'm with him. Marriage or the lack thereof is not what guaruntees a partner's fidelity. It has more to do with the person's personality than whether there is an "official contract". I would never marry someone if I wasn't certain of his faithful nature.

reply from: coco

I guess the precondition for that would be, can ANY relationship end on good terms and with positive feelings? And if there was no ill will to drive the two people apart, what did cause the relationship to end? Bear in mind I've only had the one relationship that I'm currently in, never had an "ex", so I can't draw upon experience to answer this for myself.
I think relationships end for a reason and something is lacking hence the breakdown of a relationship. You can be and should be civil with your ex I always tell my partner that I want a family like demi and ashton. The reason is because I know first hand what it is like to be in a divorced family with childish parents and boy does it SUCK!!! I think for the childrens sake you should be civil and frendly but dont sleep together or anything cause that is very confusing and would give the children false hope!! If you are not happy you must remember ALL relationships have thier ups and downs. Trust me sometimes he gets on my nerves but that is the cycle of close personal relationships. You would know when you are done in a relationship!! In the 10 years we have been together we only "broke up" 1 time for 1 day and that was 9 years ago, and I am only 26 years old ( on friday ) I never play those mind games break up make up stuff that is childish

reply from: coco

I hope I ansewered your question. I am not one that believes in the bible that is why I dont base my opinions on the bible or any religious orginizations. So when I post anything I dont use the bible to back up my claims

reply from: yoda

Okay, that's a fair observation.
IMO, that's what the private folders are for.

reply from: coco

Yoda,I think she understands that private folders are for that but she wants a verity of peoples opinions that is why she asked on the form. at least that is how i interperted that correct me if i am wrong thunderkitten. And what is wrong with asking these types of questions???

reply from: thecatholicamerican

What is commitment? Marriage is commitment.
The divorce rate is so high because of people that do not take marriage any more seriously than people who only live together.
Let me understand this, you dont get married because you dont want to get divorced? There are many possible negative outcomes of an action or choice but that does not mean that one does not try for the best possible outcome and still do what is right.
As Catholics and Christians we are commanded to love, but we are also compelled to reject sin.
For the record, marriage is between one man and one woman. Period. Everywhere that has been voted on, the people of this country have stated that they believe that this is so and true.
I would strongly disagree that people any longer feel compelled to get married simply because of pregnancy. In fact I would say that that attitude has directly led to more abortions. I know of a woman that had an abortion that did not even tell the father. She knew she did not want to marry him. I also know many women that have had their children and not married the father. Holding life as sacred always outweighs every other factor where pregnancy is concerned.
Why the discussion about sex? Why is it relevant? See my other topic, WHY MARRIAGE MATTERS.
Cavalier attitudes about sex, in part, lead to more abortions.

reply from: coco

I think if 2 consinting adults want to get married then so be it. * GAY PRIDE* btw, I am a fag hag so that is why I say that. And NOT all citizens of this country believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. The divorce rate is so high because most people RUSH into marriage and they dont know themselves or what they want in life then they get into one fight and want a divorce hence the term starter marriages. Marriage doesnt always result in commitment THAT IS WHY PEOPLE CHEAT!! not all people that are married cheat and not all people that are in a commited relationship cheat. I guess you think that ALL people take thier marriage vows serious*thats laughable* i wished people did take marriage seriously but *news flash* they dont that is why half of marriages lead to divorce. You just believe that because the bible tells you and if that is what you want to believe that is your right I just think people need to take the time to know themselves know thier partner know thier goals and aspirations and then get married and that is MY opinion.

reply from: thecatholicamerican

As long as those two consenting adults are one man and one woman, yes, anyone who wishes to get married should be able to get married.
Married or not, no one has the right to end the life of the unborn.
Many people rush into marriage because they put the value of sex above the value of the person and above the thought of long term commitment to that person.
People cheat out of moral weakness, again putting the value of sex above the value of the person, which in this case precipitates the need to lie and decieve.
No, I dont think that all people take their marriage vows seriously, that is why they cannot remain commited.
I believe that marriage is a sacred union in the same way that I believe that life is sacred. A person can truly know another persons values and goals without living together and without having sex. Unfortunately people put the value of sex above the value of the other person, even themselves.
I believe that the male/female union is instituted by nature and is intended by nature for the purpose of reproduction. If values and what is sacred are only left to mans devices than the view that abortion is right is just as good and valid as the view that abortion is wrong. As Dostoyevsky said, without God all things are permissable.

reply from: coco

so if its nature for a marriage to pro create what happends if one in the marriage is not able to reproduce can they still be married and have sex???

reply from: thecatholicamerican

If one person, be it the man or the woman, cannot have children, they may still have sex. They also have the option and right to adopt unwanted children. I did not say that sex is only for procreation, only that it must be only in the institution of marriage with the willingness and acceptance that life can and may occur.
Sexual activity that is not in marriage, or that may not by natures rules even include the possibility of procreation, is wrong.

reply from: coco

I believe that the male/female union is instituted by nature and is intended by nature for the purpose of reproduction.
can you elaborate on this statement???

reply from: thecatholicamerican

Sex between members of the same sex serves no purpose. It does not produce anything, only serves the pleasures of those enaged in the activity.
Sex between man and a woman nurtures bonds of love and protection between the sexes and also allows for the creation of new life. That union of man and woman serves to care for nurture, protect and teach this new human being. Nature makes man and woman. Only distorted human reasoning assumes that same sex relations are normal. It is based upon the false idea that only what is harmful is wrong. Freedom is not lisense to do whatever one wishes. Because same sex relationships occur does not make them normal or intended by nature and simply because there is no tangible harm done, does not make that sexual orienation right or moral.
Even if a man and woman are unable to have their own children does not make those sexual bonds any less real in deepening the relationship should they choose to adopt children from others that are unwanted. For most that are unable to have children it is a great hardship and a cause of great heartache. We cannot always achieve what nature intended, but that does not give us the right to do what nature DID NOT INTEND.

reply from: coco

Even if a man and woman are unable to have their own children does not make those sexual bonds any less real in deepening the relationship should they choose to adopt children from others that are unwanted. For most that are unable to have children it is a great hardship and a cause of great heartache.
I think the above statement goes for gays as well

reply from: bradensmommy

Promiscuity has been around for ages as so has prudes. I think that as long as you are responsible when it comes to sex who freakin cares? You don't have to be married, heck, most of the time you aren't even in love. Sex is sex and as long as you are careful, have fun. But abortion is never an excuse and should not be used because you were irresponsible.

reply from: thecatholicamerican

According to Catholic teaching, contraception, including surgical precedures that preclude the possibility of life are not allowed. What is natural and within the sacrament of marriage is allowed. Sex is not forbidden in catholic teaching, only sex that precludes the possibility of life. If you are born sterile, than that was not something you had a choice in. A sterile person does not consciously choose to end or prevent life from occurring. Couples that are too old are not in any way from forbidden from sex either, since age is a natural part of life.

reply from: coco

I love gay people, I love everyone married or single, and that is the way it should be!!! I am no better or worse then anyone else we are all humans that are imperfect ,we make mistakes we all bleed, but one of the things that seperates us is how we worship!!

reply from: thecatholicamerican

I dont think that I said that sex was only for procreation, but sex is for marriage where it does not preclude the possibility of life. Sterilization precludes life. Contraception precludes life. In short, in the eyes of the Catholic church, any means that prohibit life are one and the same as an abortion. The only moral way to prevent an unwanted pregnancy is through abstinance.
One makes a decision to follow God and live by His law. Man and God do not sit down and arbitrate morality on a case to case to basis.
Example; people that will say they are married, even though no priest is present because it is between them and God are clearly mistaken. Marriage is a covenant, not a word of mouth agreement between a man a woman and God.

reply from: bradensmommy

I agree 110 percent! When people ask me if I get along better with men or women I always say GAY MEN!!

reply from: coco

I agree 110 percent! When people ask me if I get along better with men or women I always say GAY MEN!!
IM A SELF PROCLAIMED FAG HAG!!! YOU GOTTA LOVE THEM!!

reply from: bradensmommy

That is why I don't agree with organized religion...it divides people, not unites them.

reply from: coco

Yes but i feel that religion is the catalist of some bigotry, but religion is also up for your own interprataion so i understand your comment

reply from: faithman

Genetic information is passed between folk thru the exchange of body fluid. The human body was created to bond to one person in this way. Multiple partners causes the soul to be fractured. One man, one woman, one life time, is the way human beings were created to be. The exchange of genetic information is the process of becoming one flesh. This is truely manifest in the face of children. 23 bits from mom, 23 bits from dad, and walla, the two have become one flesh. We live in a sin sick world that is imperfect. Even though we fall miserably short of perfection, does not mean that we do away with the standards and goals of said perfection. The optimum situation for the raising of children is one man, one woman, one life time, just because that goal is not always reached, does not illeagitimize it as the standard we should strive for.

reply from: faithman

Genetic information is passed between folk thru the exchange of body fluid. The human body was created to bond to one person in this way. Multiple partners causes the soul to be fractured. One man, one woman, one life time, is the way human beings were created to be. The exchange of genetic information is the process of becoming one flesh. This is truely manifest in the face of children. 23 bits from mom, 23 bits from dad, and walla, the two have become one flesh. We live in a sin sick world that is imperfect. Even though we fall miserably short of perfection, does not mean that we do away with the standards and goals of said perfection. The optimum situation for the raising of children is one man, one woman, one life time, just because that goal is not always reached, does not illeagitimize it as the standard we should strive for.

reply from: thecatholicamerican

No, because abstinance is not a sexual act, it is the absense of sex, the choice to not hace sex. When you preclude life, you have the sex without the natural possibility of life.
If Catholics do not accept these teachings it is their fault and lack of desire to accept the truth, not some or any flaw with the teaching.
From a spritual and moral standpoint, if you are not married before God, you are not married. Do they legally recognize a civil marriage? Only insofar as the law requires them to. Inside the church and its law, they are not married.
No, not at all. Members of the same sex are not allowed to have sex, it is immoral. They cannot be married. Remember, homosexual behavior is not condoned by Catholic teaching. Keep in mind, it is not that a person cannot be homosexual, but they must not act on those urges and not engage in the lifestyle.
Morality is a dividing line. Jesus Christ said that he same to divide, not to unite.
The Jesus Christ that loves everything and everything regardless of what they do, irregardless of repentence, is a myth.
The rejection of homosexuality is not bigotry. Hate, and your perceived hatred by Catholics and Christians is a lie. Those that would condone homosexuality need to prepetrate the lie of hate to portray Christians as bigots. Catholics and Christians are not to hate gays and if they do that is their sin. Any hatred is rejected by Catholic teaching.

reply from: coco

The god that I believe in LOVES everyone. And if I wnat to be a good person I must also do the same!!

reply from: Shiprahagain

Seriously folks, why are we discussing sex and stuff in a world without abortion? Is this supposed to eventually tie into the abortion debate?

reply from: coco

Ship this topic is about sex if you dont want to talk about it then dont post it is not like you dont know what the subject is it states clearly on the heading!!

reply from: thecatholicamerican

What the church favors is the love of the human person that is in line with divine law and within natural law.
I did not say that you are immoral because you do not follow my religion.
What I was attempting to explain that is in the Catholic Church if you expect to be recognized as being married or if you expect to be recognized as truly married than one must be married in the Catholic Church. I dont expect that everyone will believe this. They will only come to believe it when they do.
It is the hope of Christians that children will be the natural outcome of love, true love, not lust or the seeking out of a sexual experience. Sex that is not in the spirit of true expressions of love between a man and woman is nothing other than sensual gratification.
You might ask me, or someone reading this might ask, 'Is all sex for the sake of having sex bad?' Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. So-called casual sex is bad, it is irresponsible and even immoral.
A person has the right to do whatever they want to do. Thats free will. That does not mean it is in line with Catholic teaching or that Catholics must accept that what other people does is moral. It is not wrong to discern the moral weight of an action. Pluralism is just an un-imposable as any other ideal. Catholicsim is based upon what is good, what is true and what is moral as defined by God through His church. Freedom is a means and not an ends. Freedom is not lisense.
I do not have accept what you believe any more than you have to accept what I believe. If speaking what I believe to be true without assigning personal blame or causing personal harm to others makes me a bigot, than either we are all bigots, or none of us are bigots.
Would not the belief that all persons must accept every form of behavior be a form of bigotry in itself?
Which is more wrong? Citing a belief about specific behaviors or assigning labels to specific people?

reply from: thecatholicamerican

When I was referring to love in this instance I was referring to love where sex was concerned. Catholic teaching is not sola-scriptura, bible only. Of course Christ teaches that we must pray for our enemies, where did I imply that this was not so? Have you ever read John Paul II?
That which is against Catholic doctrine in the sphere of morals is immoral. Is that unclear?
Where did I say that not sharing Catholic belief is the root cause of abortion? If a person is not in a marriage and raises their children as opposed to having an abortion that is certainly preferrable. But it has been shown that people that become pregnant that are not married are stastically more likely to have an abortion.
The teaching of the Catholic church is, that sex that is not in the state of marriage, or that precludes life by a willful choice or act, either my means of self imposed sterilization or contraception, is not permitted. If you are married and are open to the possibility to life, than you can have sex. The preclusion of life must be by a willful act or choice. If the person is medically no longer to have children or is born or becomes sterile by illness than that is not a willful act. I dont know how much more clear that can be.
I will give you a break. I admit that all Catholics do not succeed in upholding their belief and some openly reject it and that is their own fault, not some flaw in the teaching. If a person knowingly breaks the rules in anything, it is the fault of the person, not a defect in the rules.
I will assign blame to the act of abortion and to any act that is immoral. That is what you and I do in an anti-abortion forum all the time. Is it less wrong when a person points out the immoral act of abortion and not something else, or do only people that are against abortion get to be self righteous?
Let me rephrase the question...
Would not the belief that all persons must accept every form of belief be a form of bigotry in itself?
1) I think that certain actions are immoral because of my beliefs. 2) You think that I am wrong to do so because I should be tolerant of other peoples chosen morality.
Is there anything substantively different between those two points of view in their potential for being viewed as bigoted? Or are only Christians eligible for that label?
Tolerance for tolerances sake says only that a person is indifferent to everything.
This was the question. My answer is...
Marriage in the sight of God. If you dont like my answer, simply say so because it is your right to say so. But dont try to tell me that 2000 years of Catholic Doctrine is wrong.
In case it wasn't clear, Catholics ARE Christians.

reply from: thecatholicamerican

Catholics that do not accept the churches teaching on marriage, sexual ethics and contracpetion are not in,ine with the church. The church is not a democracy and it never has been. You accept it for what it is or you reject it for what it is. Period.
I simply think that marriage, I will even give you that long term commited relationships decrease the instances of abortion.
In light of this spritied debate I would like to say that I am in no way trying to evangelize you or condem you CP or anyone else. I appreciate that you view things differently. That doesn't mean that I agree with your views, although we dont disagree on everything either.
I hold my religious views and I will not let them go. What people may think of me I am prepared to deal with. I think that we have exhausted this argument as far as it might have been useful to this forum.
Lets simply agree to disagree and move on. I hope you you harbor me no ill will as I have none for you. This is a debate and we will not always agree.
For the record and for what its worth, the Catholic Church does recognize other Christian marriages.

reply from: Shiprahagain

Ship this topic is about sex if you dont want to talk about it then dont post it is not like you dont know what the subject is it states clearly on the heading!!
I think I'm allowed to ask how this thread relates to abortion on an abortion forum. At least the evolution/Creation debates are tangential to aboartion.

reply from: faithman

It is the so called sexual revolution, that unleashed the abortion holocost. Ole margy sanger was a class AAA slut, who knew how to use her body to marry well, while sleeping with every radical eugenist she could raise a skirt on. She just couldn't allow too many kids to get in the way of all her fun. The ultimate perversion of the sexual act is abortion. Insted of being divine instruments, used by the Creator in the mirical of the pro creative process, mankind is nothing more than secular humanist aperatis at a sporting event, and the product of their union, a mistake, a glod of no thankyou, to be thrown away. I don't know why, but that kinda bothers me.

reply from: coco

Faithman abortions exsisted way before she came into play, she just popularized them!! I am almost certain of that!

reply from: coco

The way I see it, sex is a good thing! It should be enjoyed and celebrated it is natural and if you want to sleep around it is not doing anything to me, but you should use condoms and another method of birth control to ensure no pregnancy occurs and to reduce the risks of v.d's ( yes I know that condoms dont protect against all v.d's but something is something) I personally would not like to sleep around but whatever. I view sex as a special thing and is best with someone you love I think you feel a strong sense of love and just a strong connection overall which makes us diffrent then animals.

reply from: faithman

I think I have stated at least once that pagan cultures from way back knew how to kill the womb child. It has always been one of the first things that happen when pagan meets christian, the child killing stops, the wife burning stops, the lopping out of hearts, the selling of young for sex slaves, you know, stuff like that. Kinda goes away as human life is seen as the image of the divine. For we were origanally created in His likeness. Every human being has the oportunity to comunicate with the Divine. Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life. No man comes to the farther, unless they come thru Christ.

reply from: Shiprahagain

Again, this isn't correct. For example, in Thailand Christian missionaries are the ones selling sex slaves.

reply from: bradensmommy

I believe Faithman has been living on too much coffee and no sex whatsoever...but then again, I don't think he'd be getting much sex with his ignorant and immature statements

reply from: Shiprahagain

How can you call him ignorant? Do you think this post was mature?

reply from: bradensmommy

How can you call him ignorant? Do you think this post was mature?
I don't know this weird obsession about you always having to be offended or hateful towards my posts but its getting old. Have you been reading ANY of his posts? You seem to defend him ANY time I say something in regards of what he says. The only time I can actually read his posts is when someone quotes him. He is a sad, sad individual and if you like him thats your problem.

reply from: yoda

Let me ask a question here, and make a suggestion.
Does venting our anger against another poster (on either side) help the anti-abortion cause?
If you answer is no, would you consider just putting the posters that generate your anger on iggy and be done with it, so we can get back to the purpose of this forum? (Hint: it's to make America more Prolife)

reply from: bradensmommy

I apologize Yoda, I was frustrated to see that everytime I made a post, she would have to be so rude about it...if you notice she loves to call me out on everything I say. But I won't post anything else, all my talks will be with Ashley because I don't need any unnecessary drama, I live around army wives I have enough!

reply from: yoda

No need to apologize to me, I'm just as guilty as anyone. But thanks for "getting the point".

reply from: Shiprahagain

I have made numerous posts to you prasing pro-life pagans, complimenting your character, etc. If you don't want my ire, don't be bigoted. Ironic how you want me off your back and do the same thing to faithman.
Yoda, have you noticed lately me and cp have been mostly chill? I've had him on ignore for awhile. I agree with avoiding digression when possible, but when I see other posters making derogatory remarks about things as inappropriate as the sex lives of others I am going to stand up for that person.

reply from: yoda

Yes, the iggy function does its job well, as I have also discovered. I also see lots of things I disagree with, but usually I stop and ask myself whether it's more important to correct someone else's statement, or to try to stay on topic. Most of the time, on topic wins out.

reply from: ThunderKitten

Hey, guys! I couldn't get to the computer for awhile, but I'm back. Let's see if I can catch up.
Coco- thanks for your replies!
This was the question. My answer is...
Marriage in the sight of God. If you dont like my answer, simply say so because it is your right to say so. But dont try to tell me that 2000 years of Catholic Doctrine is wrong.
theamericancatholic (thecatholicamerican, just wondering, did you lose your passowrd?), actually that was my question, not CP's. And I'm not here in this thread to dislike anyone's answer, I'm here to understand them.
So, in your view, hypothetically, if I marry my guy, would sex with him become a positive experience? What would you think if I ended up marrying someone else?
Also, do you see sex strictly a moral issue, or is there more to it than that? I guess what I'm asking is, let's assume that a couple fulfills ALL of the moral requirements, what else does it take to make a happy marraiage in which two people see sex as a good, positive event in their lives?
I see what you believe are the preconditions for sex. So, what are the preconditions of marriage? What leads to a happy union? How do you know whether you should marry someone?
And CP- what does HUTAS mean?


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics