The Nature of Sex

I chanced upon this article from another blog. It is a legal opinion on the church’s view of contraception.  Here’s an excerpt from the article which spun my head a bit and I don’t mean to be cynical but it did challenge my common sense.

quote

The moral issue here is whether a man and a woman should engage in sexual intercourse merely for sexual pleasure or mainly for procreation which is the means of cooperating with God in creating another human being.

“Thus the Catechism states that “Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes”. “Any act of contraception, be it by pills, condoms, withdrawal, or ligation is always wrong, and if this is done with full knowledge and full consent, it is always a mortal sin. Every marriage act must be open to the transmission of human life”

unquote

I asked myself the question – does anybody even know about this dogma ? The reason for having sex is to have children – period. Theory is one thing but reality is altogether a different story. If a man gets attracted to a woman does he murmur to himself ” wow, I’d love to have 10 babies with this woman ” ? 😯

Is man’s lust for the opposite sex triggered by a mental desire to procreate or is it the consummation of his intrinsic sexual cravings ? Simply because we possess brains and don’t copulate based on the sense of smell like dogs, must we be deprived of sexual pleasure if it doesn’t result in procreation? And here’s an inconsistency that befuddles me. If the only church compliant form of family planning is the rythmn method, and sex is consummated knowingly when the woman is infertile, isn’t this likewise tantamount to having sex with no intent of procreation ?

 

I’m confused. What about you?

 

BACK TO NORMAL PROGRAMMING

I never quite realized how hard it is to be an online forum moderator, especially if you accidently blog about a topic that is hot in cyberspace. It is difficult enough to temper a post and convey your thoughts without slighting other people’s feelings and it is even worse when you are compelled to moderate comments to keep decency afloat. In the end, except for a soul who didn’t quite comprehend the gist of my post, I felt vindicated that my post was linked by a fan club.  Someone accused me for posting on a controversial topic to get hits which is quite laughable since my blog has nary an ad. I had to close the thread as I felt that the topic was beaten black and blue and to diffuse the air strikes between posters. My intent wasn’t to denigrate anyone but to discuss an issue. Much like discussing religion, you can’t avoid some people from getting upset with the mere thought of discussing it. If there was anything I learned it is being true to what you think.  Well, now I’m back blogging with my usual friends where I feel more relaxed, like having coffee at the beach house deck on a sunny morning 🙂

Advertisements

47 Responses

  1. …”I’m confused. What about you?”..
    If I translate this in Ilonggo the word “libog” will be mentioned. So “Libog”a.k.a. Intrinsic sexual cravings, and sexual intercourse go together right?
    Deprive me of my favorite past time and I will go up on the highest tower in town and throw rubber balloons full of fecal waste to clerics who preaches sexual intercourse strictly for procreation only!

  2. I read once in the old testament about a story of two brothers. The older brother died so Gos gave his wife to the younger brother. the younger brother, for some reason do not want to have children with his brother’s wife so whenever he ejaculates on their coitus, he withdrws his penis out of the vagina and let his semen “FALL TO THE GROUND” God was enranged. he punished the man.

  3. i’ve long reconciled that religion is but a form of politics. in the end, spirituality is different from religion.
    my concern is world hunger, the population explosion, death of mothers and babies. isn’t that also a form of evil that must be addressed?

  4. oh your comments are also moderated now? why changed your setting?

  5. Noypetes –

    “Deprive me of my favorite past time”

    you’re one lucky guy hehe 🙂

    Actually I heard a pastor preach one time and he said sky is the limit when it comes to sex between married couples. It also applies to him coz he’s married 😉

  6. Richmond – hmm.. first time I heard about that. I only read in the new testament that the apostles preached to single men that it is OK to marry the widow of their brother who died in battle.

  7. Prinsesa – very true and when you think that Pinas population with explode to 140 million in 2050 it is pretty scary.

    I’m moderating my comments for now but may take it off later 🙂

  8. does using a rubber make me less of a Christian?

    my officemate is sterile. does this mean she is committing mortal sin whenever she had sex with her husband knowing that she cannot have a child?

    i’m confused too.

  9. What are they going to do with population control?

    You have moderation now ? Welcome back to safer blogging 🙂

  10. Lawstude – being a lawyer yourself, I certainly respect your opinion 🙂

  11. Irrealis – population control? Really not much. Pinas has one of the highest growth in Southeast Asia, trailing Laos and Cambodia.

    Strangely, Japan, Singapore and Hongkong have one of the lowest growth rates – in the world at that. THere is definitely a strong correlation between economic wealth and population growth.

  12. That pastor is really smart to cover himself LOL 😆 Definitely no confusion in that.

  13. obviously, the church is confused. they deemed sex for pleasure as a sinful act. the mere thought of it, i surmise, and without the intention of procreation is considered, according to the church, mortal sin.
    personally, i don’t adhere to this dogma. why is the church very much interested in the people’s sex lives? O_O

  14. Natez1 – walk the talk seems apparent here 🙂 I guess the pastor knows how a sexual urge works 😆

  15. Mari – it does seem to me that organized religions always attempt to write a single rule that governs certain acts without considering the humanistic side of it. The fear factor – damnation, punishment for such a natural thing as a sexual urge – is also quite disturbing.

    Then comes control of the urge – marriage.

    I always thought that marrying gives you that latitude, that license to do everything under the sun about sex with your spouse, and insulates you from sinning as long as you do it within the context of marriage but apparently not 🙂

    I guess we all hell bound, arent we? 😆

  16. I am also confused let’s leave it at that. 😀

  17. I also do not subscribe to the Church’s view that sex is only done with the sole purpose of transmitting human life. I hate to say it but this is a myopic view and is so out of step with the times.

    The so-called sanctity of life should not only ensure that a baby is protected within a mother’s womb. It should also require the parents to provide a decent and dignified quality of life for the child once he/she has been successfully brought into this world. It seems when it comes to sex, the Church fails to distinguish the forest from the trees.

  18. Ewok – I guess there’s really not much we can do eh? 🙂

  19. Panaderos – it does put too much premium om compliance as a self-fulfilling act and negates the virtue of responsibility doesn’t it?

    Sometimes we feel that what is important is obedience and who cares what comes next ! It does ignore the humanistic side of things, that we ought to take a greater sense of responsibility to the material world, and the betterment of society as such.

  20. hey hey hey there
    i have a special tag for you
    it’s an erotica tag. lol.

  21. i’ll be honest with you.. didn’t really read the post. hehe.

    but what was the controversial topic that you deleted? 🙂

  22. I say let the church take care of the thousands of homeless children in the street. Feed, shelter and educate them. Then maybe they’ll think twice about meddling on what is purely a social issue…

    BTW, I love that semi-nekkid woman prancing up there, hehehe. 😀

  23. Thats sad……lets say if a family has like about 2 kids………mean that they might have done it around that number of times during the entire course of their marriage. Marriage should not be built on sex, but it definitely plays a large part. Cheers!

  24. Princess – sure 🙂

  25. Tin – moderation means you have to approve the comment before it gets posted in the blog. The purpose is to prevent posters from making derogatory comments in general. Obviously you won’t see the dropped ones 🙂

  26. Sngl – well, for starters the Vatican has billions of dollars in assets 😉

    I could have posted a more controversial image hehe 😉

  27. Stanley – yep, just 2 times would probably make two kids, esp if it is done under medical supervision hehe 🙂

    Sex is not everything in marriage I agree but it is a big part of it. There will come a time when couples would stop doing it but the relationship will still be there – hopefully 🙂

    Thanks for dropping by.

  28. Obviously, sex ain’t just merely for procreation. That’s quite obvious and patent to me.

    However, I also believe that too much or excessive inclination towards it would be bad for the indiviual, physically and psychologically.

    It should be tempered always.

  29. Major Tom – I hope by “excessive” you mean a psychological disorder hehe 🙂

    Otherwise as the good pastor said, if it is consentual and between a married couple, sky is the limit 🙂

  30. The Vatican may have its billions but I bet they too will suffer from charity fatigue, given the ever increasing number of homeless and hungry people around the world. It’s easy for the church to say that contraception is evil because they do not exactly carry the burden of caring for them, it’s the government who always end up holding the bag.

  31. Sngl – true, even if the Vatican would divest itself and donate all their billions to the hungry, it will never solve the problem 😦

  32. If this is so then everyone is guilty of moral sin.

    But to many extremely financially-challenged people for instance, which is more sinful: to use a contraception or to bring to this world innocent lives and make them suffer lonely, troubled, poverty-stricken and miserable life?

  33. Abaniko – spot on. From the looks of it, we are succeding very well in creating hell on earth 😡

    In fact, we are making the hell bigger as the day passes. And since that mortal sin you have mentioned has taken all of us, then it will have taken us to hell twice – double jeopardy – hell here on earth and the afterlife 👿

  34. I’ve heard from many locals that abortion is a harbinger of bad luck; but then I ask them what about bringing a baby in this world and totally unprepared for its care and a good enough future — isn’t that bad luck for the newborn?

    Nonetheless, many guys would go insane if sex were for preoccupation only.

  35. Eric – unfortunately, contraception had been equated to abortion by the church supporters. Except for the controversial “morning after pill”, the propagation methinks this kind of misinformation is quite disturbing.

  36. naloka ako don! for some reason eh mas lalo lang akong nalito. they say, that sexual pleasure is a moral disorder? if not for pleasure, sex would be so darn boring and i doubt if people would even engage to doing it. i hate to say this, pero mukhang kulang sa ‘sex’ ang nagsabi nyan! hahaha 😉

  37. Nell – very true. Sexual pleasure being a moral disorder if it is not done to procreate is a pathetic denial of our human nature. In short, hypocritical 😡

  38. No comment. 🙂

    Someday, I’ll have my own opinion blog.

  39. Jayred – I look forward to it 🙂

  40. That would be the day (LOL).

    Truth be told, I was just a bit lazy to type in my comment on this issue. 🙂

    Will come back later for a more substantial comment.

    BTW, sexy yung girl sa animation mo. Reminds me of a Pinay who looks like a streetwalker here in our town. But I digress, hihi.

  41. Jayred – I know, I know 🙂 Frankly, I also shortened my post down to one argument. The legal opinion packs a lot of controversy that we can talk about the topic for the whole day !

    I also got a bit lazy looking for a better animation so the first one I saw that had something to do with the notion of sex, I grabbed it hehe 🙂

  42. Being a Christian, it’s my conviction that sex should be within the bounds of marriage. So, sure, God meant it for procreation (“Be fruitful and multiply.” — Gen 1:28). But to say that sex is intended ONLY for that sole purpose of reproduction is kinda limiting. I think God primarily designed sex as a normal expression of one’s love and, yes, even natural instincts (or what is normally referred to as “lust”) between man and wife, whether this physical expression bears fruit or not. So I guess that’s what the Catholic Church means by “procreative and unitive purposes.”

    *****

    You wrote: “If a man gets attracted to a woman does he murmur to himself ”wow, I’d love to have 10 babies with this woman ”?”

    — MY RESPONSE: I think the Catholic church was referring to the MARTIAL ACT and not the usual casual sex common among unmarried couples these days. 🙂

  43. “Someone accused me for posting on a controversial topic to get hits which is quite laughable since my blog has nary an ad.”

    — If I may say so, readership is readership, no matter if one blog features ads or not. There are lots of ad-less blogs out there, dying to have thousnds of hits. So the accusation hurled against you was not really “laughable.” But this is not to say that you’re guilty of posting controversial topics to get lots of hits. 🙂

  44. LOL at your animation choice. Hahaha!

  45. Jayred – well said. In my sanctimonious days of the past 🙂 , I attended a class on the biblical portrait of marriage, here’s one of the verses that was discussed quite intensely:

    “1 Cor. 7:2. … each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion”

    Sounds quite self explanatory to me 😉

    I did get a deluge of hits coz one fan posted my post on YouTube and placed my URL on the link 🙂

  46. I don’t think God made the sexual act so pleasurable if it was only for the sole purpose of begetting children. It is one of God’s gifts to us. But he also must have a great sense of humor to make it look so silly.

  47. Annamanila – That’s the best answer I heard so far!

    Heck, He could have made the woman’s sexual organs on the arms and the man’s on his finger and made the act much simpler 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: