Sex

[TheBear]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

[Brianna]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Cause they might be sinning with out consulting the thought police.

[Notta]

If you think about it, large swaths of the bible are all about sex and when it is okay.

God is a JEALOUS god, and when you think about or practice sex, you aren't thinking about or worshiping HIM!!

[Monad]

Because they don't like anything they can't control

[Philosophickle]

I do it because I don't want anyone to be having sex but me.
Oh, and one other person.

[His Noodly Appendage]

The meme insists that all happiness, all security, all things not-bad must be granted by the meme itself, that it be the host's only lifeline. That's why marriage is a pre-requisite for either love or sex - you can't have unlicensed happiness, it's got to be stamped and sealed and watermarked, with royalties.

It's the emotional RIAA, in other words.

[TheBear]

Thank you all for the great replies! :notworthy:

[Joykins]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. -- C.S. Lewis

[His Noodly Appendage]

We are animals.

Denying that leads to all kinds of upfuckedness - exactly the same obsessive shame that is seen in those ashamed of a biracial (ugh) heritage.

[BWE]

because sex is tied into society. In a large part, society reflects sexual attitudes.

[Cliché Guevara]

Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.


I think it's mostly about fear of women and the power of female sexuality. The patriarchs just can't handle us hot dames.

[Utu]

Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.



:notworthy:

[Lisa0315]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

Lisa

[sohy]

When I saw the title of this thread, I got all excited because I thought we were gonna talk about kinky Xian sex. Bah. What a disappointment you people are. :D

[RBH]

When I saw the title of this thread, I got all excited because I thought we were gonna talk about kinky Xian sex. Bah. What a disappointment you people are. :DYeah, I thought there was going to be a poll: Sex: "yes" or "no". :D

[SallyAnne]

Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.



LOL, ah man that's funny.:D

[SallyAnne]

When I saw the title of this thread, I got all excited because I thought we were gonna talk about kinky Xian sex. Bah. What a disappointment you people are. :D


How's this for kinky?

It's full length smocks from head to toe and lights out so he doesn't see me.

Not saucy enough? Gee, and that was me trying to be risque!

haha.:D

[Joykins]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

...and to control the fertility attached to the woman.

[Joykins]

wrong thread sry

[TheBear]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

Lisa
What, the sex or the controlling of women? :banana:

[Monad]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

http://images.dancingmokey.com/humor_SFW/nun-bong.jpg

[Ray Moscow]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Isn't it obvious? Christianity and Islam are morally stupid for precisely this reason -- their God is more concerned about pee-pees than about torture or genocide.

One can try to "polish the turd" by arguing otherwise, so feel free to try. But Christianity's failure to have a decent morality about sex is one of many reasons why people should avoid it.

[sohy]

Good dog, this thread needs some spice.

http://www.libchrist.com/bible/compatible.html

I really doubt that all Xians have boring sex lives.


A central problem in the church's misunderstanding of sexuality has to do with its perception that sexuality is somehow fundamentally sinful, thus rendering most if not all sexual acts also sinful. In the section below I will discuss the origin of this problem. Here I want to point out that if we are to follow the basic teaching of the New Testament, we should see sexual sin not so much in terms of acts as in terms of alienation from the healthy, normal sexuality and sexual fulfillment intended for us by God. The New Testament view of sin is one of alienation from God; this is the condition remedied through the redemptive work of Christ: Christ restores the relationship between mankind and God.

I've got to leave for work but so I don't have time to check out that site. Enjoy. ;) I love liberal Xians. :D

[Lisa0315]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

http://images.dancingmokey.com/humor_SFW/nun-bong.jpg

You need to go win in the Witty Caption thread, and then post this pic.

Lisa

[Garnet]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. -- C.S. Lewis

C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.

[Lisa0315]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. -- C.S. Lewis

C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.

Mere Christianity...Pure Win! I need to dig that book out and re-read it.

Lisa

[Joykins]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. -- C.S. Lewis

C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.

He was way too perceptive to be a fundamentalist.

[His Noodly Appendage]

I still want to know what's wrong with being a prostitute.

[Monad]

I still want to know what's wrong with being a prostitute.

[[Don't let them get you down - be proud of what you are]]

[His Noodly Appendage]

Heh, I have vast respect for whores. I mean hell, I burn out just working help desk.

[Monad]

Agreed - certainly should not be stigmatised (of course my opinion of the low lifes that exploit, pimp or traffic prostitutes is at the other end of the spectrum - if anyone should burn in hell...)

[Garnet]

*Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. -- C.S. Lewis*C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.*Mere Christianity...Pure Win!* I need to dig that book out and re-read it.*LisaReally?* Wow, talk about different perceptions!* I read it when I still had a desire to find my way to faith.* It turned me right in the other direction.* I thought his arguments were awful.

[Sodong]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?. Well, I think it might just be an extreme sectarian expression of what most (I don't know of any societies that don't) of our species does regardless of religion or ontological orientation: order marriage/reproduction and social relationships in some way and degree. Why there's extreme fixation in some sects of christianity is in my guess, related to a rejection of their sneaking suspicion that the bonobos got it right and permiscuous sex is actually good for social relations :evil:

[Lisa0315]

*C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.*Mere Christianity...Pure Win!* I need to dig that book out and re-read it.*LisaReally?* Wow, talk about different perceptions!* I read it when I still had a desire to find my way to faith.* It turned me right in the other direction.* I thought his arguments were awful.

Knowing my struggles, try to read that through my eyes, Gar.

Lisa

[SallyAnne]

*C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.*Mere Christianity...Pure Win!* I need to dig that book out and re-read it.*LisaReally?* Wow, talk about different perceptions!* I read it when I still had a desire to find my way to faith.* It turned me right in the other direction.* I thought his arguments were awful.


Why?

[David B]

Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport, and back-biting; the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither. -- C.S. Lewis

C.S Lewis obviously never encounted southern US fundamentalism.

Mere Christianity...Pure Win! I need to dig that book out and re-read it.

Lisa

Please do!

You should, by now, be prepared to see what shite it really is.

False dichotomy city, as I recall it.

David

[Jobar]

Classically, Joykins is quite right. In Dante's Inferno the ones whose worse sins were sexual got thrown into the whirlwinds of the Second Circle. Unsanctified sex was the least of the sins of incontinence; those which intended no malice towards others.

Today, though, some fundamentalists seem to rate sex, particularly homosexuality, as much worse. Perhaps they rate it as violence against the self, and thus deserving of punishment in Dante's seventh circle, with the suicides, and the blasphemers and god-deniers. (Us, IOW.)

(Does anyone know how the Vatican rates the sin of contraception?)

[TheBear]

http://images.dancingmokey.com/humor_SFW/nun-bong.jpg
That's awesome! :D :thumbup:

[TheBear]

Well, I think it might just be an extreme sectarian expression of what most (I don't know of any societies that don't) of our species does regardless of religion or ontological orientation: order marriage/reproduction and social relationships in some way and degree. Why there's extreme fixation in some sects of christianity is in my guess, related to a rejection of their sneaking suspicion that the bonobos got it right and permiscuous sex is actually good for social relations :evil:

Thank you, Sodong!


I want to know the truth about why they are so fixated and consumed by the one topic. I got some ideas as to why, but I wanted to give them an opportunity to give their honest feedback first.

What percentage of Christians are fighting off strong, natural urges, in order to be in strict compliance with scripture? All of them?

[Joykins]

Classically, Joykins is quite right. In Dante's Inferno the ones whose worse sins were sexual got thrown into the whirlwinds of the Second Circle. Unsanctified sex was the least of the sins of incontinence; those which intended no malice towards others.

One of the interesting thing is that the adulterers in the whirlwind were stuck *eternally* with those with whom they supposedly *temporarily* lusted.

Today, though, some fundamentalists seem to rate sex, particularly homosexuality, as much worse. Perhaps they rate it as violence against the self, and thus deserving of punishment in Dante's seventh circle, with the suicides, and the blasphemers and god-deniers. (Us, IOW.)


in Dante, they are in the 7th circle, but violent against nature (not self).

Traitors, however, are at the bottom of the 9th. Frozen in ice.

There are homosexuals also in the Purgatorio, learning chastity alongside heterosexuals.

[Sodong]

Well, I think it might just be an extreme sectarian expression of what most (I don't know of any societies that don't) of our species does regardless of religion or ontological orientation: order marriage/reproduction and social relationships in some way and degree. Why there's extreme fixation in some sects of christianity is in my guess, related to a rejection of their sneaking suspicion that the bonobos got it right and permiscuous sex is actually good for social relations :evil:

Thank you, Sodong!


I want to know the truth about why they are so fixated and consumed by the one topic. I got some ideas as to why, but I wanted to give them an opportunity to give their honest feedback first.Well, I guess I didn't pick up on that in the OP or subsequent posts and thought I'd add something. Was my comment an impediment to your intent for the thread? :confused:

[DMB]

Homophobia is certainly not a cultural constant, but control of women pretty well is. I think this is founded in the saying

It's a wise father that knows his own child.

Various non-human mammals go in for harems; others use different strategies to favour their sperm over that of rivals; so the instinctive basis of trying to ensure one's own reproduction must go deep.

Control of women explains a great deal about focus on sexuality in a socio-religious context.

[TheBear]

Well, I think it might just be an extreme sectarian expression of what most (I don't know of any societies that don't) of our species does regardless of religion or ontological orientation: order marriage/reproduction and social relationships in some way and degree. Why there's extreme fixation in some sects of christianity is in my guess, related to a rejection of their sneaking suspicion that the bonobos got it right and permiscuous sex is actually good for social relations :evil:

Thank you, Sodong!


I want to know the truth about why they are so fixated and consumed by the one topic. I got some ideas as to why, but I wanted to give them an opportunity to give their honest feedback first.Well, I guess I didn't pick up on that in the OP or subsequent posts and thought I'd add something. Was my comment an impediment to your intent for the thread? :confused:
Not at all. Your remarks are welcomed and appreciated! :thumbup:

Looking back, I should have posted the thank you in one post, and the other remarks in a subsequent post. Sorry for the confusion. Your remarks here are fine. :)

[epepke]

All religions control sex, because sex is powerful and sacred, and religions want a monopoly on that.

[TheBear]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

Lisa
What, the sex or the controlling of women? :banana:
Where's Lisa? :D

[Lisa0315]

It began as a way to control women. I think it is just a very bad habit now.

Lisa
What, the sex or the controlling of women? :banana:
Where's Lisa? :D

I am here babydoll. Not much today. I have been moving and I won't have internet service once I move my computer, but in the meantime...

Control me. Tell me what you want. Thats it. Make me. :evil:

[Norrin Radd]

With all the egregious behavior mankind has perpetrated upon itself, (slavery, genocide, torture, massacres, Bernie Madoff, theft, rape and on), why are many Christians narrowly fixated and largely consumed with what two consenting adults do behind closed doors?

Maybe because it's easier to define than some other bad behaviors, while at the same time being promoted as "normal."

Greed and gluttony are wrong, but at what point above "just enough to live" does consumption become "sin"?

Boinking someone of the same gender is a bit more clear-cut.

Also, there's the fact that many of us tend to be Biblicists. We recognize that "slaver, genocide, torture, massacres" cannot be universally and absolutely wrong, since God either endorsed them or even commanded them in certain cases.

[Sodong]

Thank you, Sodong!


I want to know the truth about why they are so fixated and consumed by the one topic. I got some ideas as to why, but I wanted to give them an opportunity to give their honest feedback first.Well, I guess I didn't pick up on that in the OP or subsequent posts and thought I'd add something. Was my comment an impediment to your intent for the thread? :confused:
Not at all. Your remarks are welcomed and appreciated! :thumbup:

Looking back, I should have posted the thank you in one post, and the other remarks in a subsequent post. Sorry for the confusion. Your remarks here are fine. :)

Ah ok then. I misunderstood your comment. That happens from time to time on the Internut. :)

Why so fixated? Probably lots of things feed into that. Sex is arguably the most obvious apspect of our animal nature - the activity that we share in common with the rest of the animal world. If the premise of special creation is to be upheld, it just won't do to behave like the other animals on the Discovery Channel. I don't think it's sex these champions of chastity object to so much as unsanctified - uncontrolled sex. Premarital, extramarital, autoerotic, homosexual or anything else considered to deviate from the versions played out in the pages of their holy texts or the emotion-wrought exclamations of their sermons.

Alas, this god played another cruel trick and used the same handful of steroids to make humans join-together-exclusively-as-one-in-holy-matrimony as he did to make bonobos copulate frequently, permiscuously and with great unabashed enjoyment. An oversight I'm sure, but for humans who fear they may be punished by an omnipotent, invisible alpha male it presents the continual problem of temptation in which one's virtuosity is measured by ones ability to resist such bodily urges.

[TheBear]

[Elephant Man]

I am not an animal!!!

[/Elephant Man]

:D

[Sodong]

Bears are animals :huh?:

[Brianna]

Sex is my religion. Come worship at my temple... :D

[Joykins]

Homophobia is certainly not a cultural constant, but control of women pretty well is. I think this is founded in the saying

It's a wise father that knows his own child.

Various non-human mammals go in for harems; others use different strategies to favour their sperm over that of rivals; so the instinctive basis of trying to ensure one's own reproduction must go deep.

Control of women explains a great deal about focus on sexuality in a socio-religious context.

I think you could actually make a good argument that prohibitions on homosexuality, which are usually prohibitions on male homosexuality, are an effort to maximize fertility as well.

[TheBear]

We recognize that "slaver, genocide, torture, massacres" cannot be universally and absolutely wrong, since God either endorsed them or even commanded them in certain cases.
Did your god command any extramarital affairs or homosexual acts, or did he only command cruel acts?

[TheBear]

Sex is my religion. Come worship at my temple... :D
I'll be there!

[Hevvin Machine]

All religions control sex, because sex is powerful and sacred, and religions want a monopoly on that. This is pretty much it.
Sex is a powerful force both in the lives of individuals and society.( I won't waste my breath arguing the sacred with bunch of hell-bound heathens:p) So it has been regulated by societies for nearly all of human history. For most of that history there was no particular division between religion, state, or society. Societies that didn't control the procreation well enough to provide for healthy children died out, leaving mostly the ones who did.
Hev

[Norrin Radd]

We recognize that "slaver, genocide, torture, massacres" cannot be universally and absolutely wrong, since God either endorsed them or even commanded them in certain cases.
Did your god command any extramarital affairs or homosexual acts, or did he only command cruel acts?

Hmm. Mainly cruel ones, I think. He did tell one of His prophets (Hosea) to marry a prostitute, and there were one or two prostitutes in the recorded lineages of Jesus. And I recall someone interpreting some passage as saying He either allowed or commanded the Israelite men to take women as sex slaves after conquering rival nations.

[DMB]

Homophobia is certainly not a cultural constant, but control of women pretty well is. I think this is founded in the saying

It's a wise father that knows his own child.

Various non-human mammals go in for harems; others use different strategies to favour their sperm over that of rivals; so the instinctive basis of trying to ensure one's own reproduction must go deep.

Control of women explains a great deal about focus on sexuality in a socio-religious context.

I think you could actually make a good argument that prohibitions on homosexuality, which are usually prohibitions on male homosexuality, are an effort to maximize fertility as well.

I don't think it can go as deep as controlling the fertility of women. After all, if you are a hetero man, the fact that some of your potential rivals are choosing not to reproduce can be seen as a good thing.

[sohy]

I think we are blaming religion too much for something that is probably a human trait. Sexual modesty and sexual regulation have both been attributed by anthropologists as human universals. If you're not familiar with the list or definition, these are traits that have been found to be present in all known cultures.

There is also speculation based on some recent research in Sweden, which of course may be false, that some males have a genetic trait that gives them a tendency toward monogamy. Monogamy with occasional cheating is usually considered the "norm" for humans, at least from an anthropological perspective. Humans have those wonderful bonding chemicals, i.e. oxytocin, which motivates us to be monogamous. I believe that if a couple doesn't share a satisfying sex life, the relationship is often in trouble. It's easy to maintain a monogamous relationship when the brain candy ( neurotransmitters secreted during sexual activity that provide pleasure and bonding tendencies ) rewards you both at regular intervals. :)

There are certainly social benefits to monogamy, i.e. the raising of children in a secure environment, companionship, pooling of funds, sharing or division of labor, etc. I'm a big fan of monogamy although I won't judge anyone who has not discovered the joys of this particular practice.


One more thing. It 's been a trend lately for fundy Xian ministers in the states to challenge their married parishioners to have sex on a much more frequent basis. This is exactly the type of thing that keeps monogamy strong due to those bonding chemicals. I doubt these preachers know the biological basis as to why this advice is so sound, but I'm all for improving the sex lives of others so I won't criticize this advice. Not as long as it's understood that nobody is being forced to participate.

[Joykins]

Homophobia is certainly not a cultural constant, but control of women pretty well is. I think this is founded in the saying



Various non-human mammals go in for harems; others use different strategies to favour their sperm over that of rivals; so the instinctive basis of trying to ensure one's own reproduction must go deep.

Control of women explains a great deal about focus on sexuality in a socio-religious context.

I think you could actually make a good argument that prohibitions on homosexuality, which are usually prohibitions on male homosexuality, are an effort to maximize fertility as well.

I don't think it can go as deep as controlling the fertility of women. After all, if you are a hetero man, the fact that some of your potential rivals are choosing not to reproduce can be seen as a good thing.


I was thinking more along the lines of maximizing fertility on the population level. Out-breeding the effete Canaanites, as it were.

[Sodong]

I think we are blaming religion too much for something that is probably a human trait. Sexual modesty and sexual regulation have both been attributed by anthropologists as human universals. If you're not familiar with the list or definition, these are traits that have been found to be present in all known cultures. Yes, but on the other hand, so is religion considered a universal in anthropological circles. I'm not sure what this tells us then. Perhaps only that religion is a common cultural mechanism for controlling sexual behavior. Kinship groups might be seen as another means.

There is also speculation based on some recent research in Sweden, which of course may be false, that some males have a genetic trait that gives them a tendency toward monogamy. Monogamy with occasional cheating is usually considered the "norm" for humans, at least from an anthropological perspective. I've heard some anthropologists refer to what we (Westerners) do as serial monogamy :) Humans have those wonderful bonding chemicals, i.e. oxytocin, which motivates us to be monogamous. I believe that if a couple doesn't share a satisfying sex life, the relationship is often in trouble. It's easy to maintain a monogamous relationship when the brain candy ( neurotransmitters secreted during sexual activity that provide pleasure and bonding tendencies ) rewards you both at regular intervals. :)

There are certainly social benefits to monogamy, i.e. the raising of children in a secure environment, companionship, pooling of funds, sharing or division of labor, etc. I'm a big fan of monogamy although I won't judge anyone who has not discovered the joys of this particular practice. I don't think those benefits are exclusive to monogamous relationships and cross culturally there are other arrangements, even if not very common.

So while it's true that control of reproductive behavior is a human cultural trait, the OP asked why a some xtian sects were so visibly fixated on sexual matters so I think that's why we were picking on the xtians. :)

[sohy]

Yes, but on the other hand, so is religion considered a universal in anthropological circles. I'm not sure what this tells us then. Perhaps only that religion is a common cultural mechanism for controlling sexual behavior. Kinship groups might be seen as another means.

Quote:

Of course religion is also a human universal! It's another trait shared by all human cultures. Humans like to create religions. I don't see religion going anywhere. I'm not so sure that religion is necessary for a culture to practice sexual regulation. When it comes to sexuality, I've known too many uptight atheists. :D

Of course we could go round and round and claim that atheists are highly influenced by the surrounding culture, but America also has unlimited opportunities for one to experiment outside the norm. We are both Xianized and sexualized. At times, the two meet. I'm sure your familiar with Xian polyamory. :)


I've heard some anthropologists refer to what we (Westerners) do as serial monogamy


Yes, anthropologists do sometimes say we have serial monogamy. That's certainly true, but most of us seem to be looking for someone that we can settle down with and enjoy. Not everyone finds it. We're much more picky and we live longer than our ancestors. Regardless, we tend to be monogamous most of the time. That's the point.

I don't think those benefits are exclusive to monogamous relationships and cross culturally there are other arrangements, even if not very common.

Some are, others not so sure. I speak mostly from personal experience and anecdotal evidence. Long term monogamy has benefits that are difficult to find in other arrangements. At least for most of us. It's still pretty popular, even among the youngsters.


So while it's true that control of reproductive behavior is a human cultural trait, the OP asked why a some xtian sects were so visibly fixated on sexual matters so I think that's why we were picking on the xtians.


Well, duh....:D It's what atheists do. We pick on Xians. :evil:

[Lisa0315]

Glad someone finally admitted it...;)

[David B]

Glad someone finally admitted it...;)

I'm innocent, I tell you!

I don't pick on Christians. I'm an equal opportunity atheist, and pick on all purveyors of religion and other woo.

David

[Lisa0315]

Glad someone finally admitted it...;)

I'm innocent, I tell you!

I don't pick on Christians. I'm an equal opportunity atheist, and pick on all purveyors of religion and other woo.

David

Its okay. I am a racist. I think all atheists look alike. :evil:

Lisa

[Matty]

Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.

lmao. top notch.

a t shirt waiting to happen.


and we cant have that nun pic in the caption thread when the "bad habit" line is already done. :)


well, actually,fuck it, yeah we can ....... :)

http://images.dancingmokey.com/humor_SFW/nun-bong.jpg
The Vatican today came up with an approved emergency measure for when cognitive dissonance strikes without warning.

[Notta]

There is also speculation based on some recent research in Sweden, which of course may be false, that some males have a genetic trait that gives them a tendency toward monogamy. Monogamy with occasional cheating is usually considered the "norm" for humans, at least from an anthropological perspective. Humans have those wonderful bonding chemicals, i.e. oxytocin, which motivates us to be monogamous. I believe that if a couple doesn't share a satisfying sex life, the relationship is often in trouble. It's easy to maintain a monogamous relationship when the brain candy ( neurotransmitters secreted during sexual activity that provide pleasure and bonding tendencies ) rewards you both at regular intervals. :)

There are certainly social benefits to monogamy, i.e. the raising of children in a secure environment, companionship, pooling of funds, sharing or division of labor, etc. I'm a big fan of monogamy although I won't judge anyone who has not discovered the joys of this particular practice. You should try discovering the joys of monogamy when one partner is unable or unwilling to participate in an active sex life.....:(

[Brianna]

Glad someone finally admitted it...;)

I'm innocent, I tell you!

I don't pick on Christians. I'm an equal opportunity atheist, and pick on all purveyors of religion and other woo.

David

Its okay. I am a racist. I think all atheists look alike. :evil:

Lisa

Pretty sure they all look like rat bastards. :D

[Sodong]

Yes, but on the other hand, so is religion considered a universal in anthropological circles. I'm not sure what this tells us then. Perhaps only that religion is a common cultural mechanism for controlling sexual behavior. Kinship groups might be seen as another means.

Quote:

Of course religion is also a human universal! It's another trait shared by all human cultures. Humans like to create religions. I don't see religion going anywhere. I'm not so sure that religion is necessary for a culture to practice sexual regulation. When it comes to sexuality, I've known too many uptight atheists. :D

Of course we could go round and round and claim that atheists are highly influenced by the surrounding culture, but America also has unlimited opportunities for one to experiment outside the norm. We are both Xianized and sexualized. At times, the two meet. I'm sure your familiar with Xian polyamory. :) Well, I do have polyamorous tendencies, but none of them could be described as xtian :D


I've heard some anthropologists refer to what we (Westerners) do as serial monogamy


Yes, anthropologists do sometimes say we have serial monogamy. That's certainly true, but most of us seem to be looking for someone that we can settle down with and enjoy. Not everyone finds it. We're much more picky and we live longer than our ancestors. Regardless, we tend to be monogamous most of the time. That's the point.

I don't think those benefits are exclusive to monogamous relationships and cross culturally there are other arrangements, even if not very common.

Some are, others not so sure. I speak mostly from personal experience and anecdotal evidence. Long term monogamy has benefits that are difficult to find in other arrangements. At least for most of us. It's still pretty popular, even among the youngsters.


So while it's true that control of reproductive behavior is a human cultural trait, the OP asked why a some xtian sects were so visibly fixated on sexual matters so I think that's why we were picking on the xtians.


Well, duh....:D It's what atheists do. We pick on Xians. :evil:Oh yeah, I forgot. :)

[sohy]

You should try discovering the joys of monogamy when one partner is unable or unwilling to participate in an active sex life.....


I'm sorry if you are implying that is your current situation. That does make matters very difficult.

There are ways however that people can enjoy each other outside of traditional intercourse. Even quadriplegics can participate. I remember many years ago attending an inservice that gave some examples of how those who have disabilities can enjoy sex. It was at least 25 years ago, so I don't remember the details.

I think that women with vulvodynia really have a difficult time. Post menopausal women also can become sexually incapacitated so I didn't mean to imply that every human is able to have an active sex life or enjoy a monogamous relationship. I don't like to share too much personal information in this area, so let's just say I've always been able to find a way to overcome disabilities related to sex. It takes a lot of determination and trials. Not everyone is motivated.

I have known many people that were unwilling. My ex husband for one. One of my female friends refused to have sex following menopause. One of my sisters as well. Neither want to try to find solutions. So, yes, you're correct. There are barriers to staying monogamous. Some can be overcome, but if a partner is unwilling, that's pretty serious. I don't know what I would do in that situation. My first marriage was a bad one and his decision to stop having sex was just the final straw. I'm thankful for that. I'm much better off now. I'm also way off topic now but this would make an interesting discussion one day. For now, I'm off to work.

Let me add, that I would remain loyal to my current husband if he suffered a disability. He has given me such joy and our relationship is certainly about more than sex. After thirty years, I can't even imagine having anyone else in my life.

[Notta]

Let me add, that I would remain loyal to my current husband if he suffered a disability. He has given me such joy and our relationship is certainly about more than sex. After thirty years, I can't even imagine having anyone else in my life.I've also been married for 30 years, and I sometimes find the 'joy' of monogamy more like the 'shackles' of monogamy. But I'm still monogamous by choice.

[Sodong]

Yes, but on the other hand, so is religion considered a universal in anthropological circles. I'm not sure what this tells us then. Perhaps only that religion is a common cultural mechanism for controlling sexual behavior. Kinship groups might be seen as another means.

Quote:

Of course religion is also a human universal! It's another trait shared by all human cultures. Humans like to create religions. I don't see religion going anywhere. I'm not so sure that religion is necessary for a culture to practice sexual regulation. When it comes to sexuality, I've known too many uptight atheists. :D Poll! (http://secularcafe.org/showthread.php?t=1442)

[Brianna]

Let me add, that I would remain loyal to my current husband if he suffered a disability. He has given me such joy and our relationship is certainly about more than sex. After thirty years, I can't even imagine having anyone else in my life.

So sex with other people means that you aren't loyal?

[TheBear]

Bumping this SEX thread because, well, it's about SEX. :evil:

[Lanakila]

Bumping this SEX thread because, well, it's about SEX. :evil:
Sex does involve some bumping. :D

[Mung Dynasty]

Not necessarily. Muff diving is sex of a sort.

[Lanakila]

Not necessarily. Muff diving is sex of a sort.
So is that "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" thing Clinton got in the oval office. You know if he'd have said: I did not have sexual intercourse with that woman all the trouble would have been stifled because there would have been no lie.

[sohy]

Let me add, that I would remain loyal to my current husband if he suffered a disability. He has given me such joy and our relationship is certainly about more than sex. After thirty years, I can't even imagine having anyone else in my life.

So sex with other people means that you aren't loyal?


Not if you're in a committed monogamous relationship. It's a choice. What's so hard to understand? I'm confused a bit by your question. Look at the definition below. Does that help?

characterized by or showing faithfulness to commitments, vows, allegiance, obligations, etc.: loyal conduct.

[Brianna]

Let me add, that I would remain loyal to my current husband if he suffered a disability. He has given me such joy and our relationship is certainly about more than sex. After thirty years, I can't even imagine having anyone else in my life.

So sex with other people means that you aren't loyal?


Not if you're in a committed monogamous relationship. It's a choice. What's so hard to understand? I'm confused a bit by your question. Look at the definition below. Does that help?

characterized by or showing faithfulness to commitments, vows, allegiance, obligations, etc.: loyal conduct.


Yeah exactly. I am glad that people use such words to describe committed monogamous relationships. Where as people who aren't in either are just rat bastards.

I understand the word well enough.