Does sex have a purpose?

[Sunstone]

It came up in another thread that the "purpose" of sex was procreation. Do you believe that to be the case? If so, then why? If not, then why not? Can sex have more than one purpose?

In a larger sense, how do we determine what the purpose of something is? What is "purpose"? And who decides what "purpose" is?

 

[Ceridwen018]

I think purpose can be relative from person to person....

Personally, I think sex is for procreation, yes, but it's also much more than that. Now, I have but limited experience on this issue (let's just say I'm a dandy canidate for sacrifice), but for me, physical initmacy of any kind is how I convey affection and deep feelings. So in a loving relationship, I would say that the main purpose of sex would be to show that affection and bond on a new level....As a woman of science, I feel compelled to test my theories...now all I need is a test subject. Any takers? :flirt:

 

[Pah]

I think purpose can be relative from person to person....

Personally, I think sex is for procreation, yes, but it's also much more than that. Now, I have but limited experience on this issue (let's just say I'm a dandy canidate for sacrifice), but for me, physical initmacy of any kind is how I convey affection and deep feelings. So in a loving relationship, I would say that the main purpose of sex would be to show that affection and bond on a new level....As a woman of science, I feel compelled to test my theories...now all I need is a test subject. Any takers? :flirt:

I'm married - happily mariried.

Kidding aside, not only does it strengthen a relationship but it is a means of being pleasured. (I love that old Southern word.)

-pah-

 

[Paraprakrti]

I agree with Ceridwen that the purpose does differ amongst people, but that its main intent should be for procreation. If one is married and having sex then that is better than not being married and doing it. At least then the couple can take responsibility for the results, if such a thing happens to manifest. I already explained in the other thread my views that the intimate connection and pleasure in sex only has value so long as procreation is not being ignored. I can understand that as a married couple people will tend to get involved in one another in such a way, but at least they can be mindful of the possible outcome. It seems hypocritical to be passionately in love with someone to the point that you will decide to duck out of the responsibility of having and raising a child. "I love you, honey. Let's kill it", doesn't quite fit the mood, in my opinion. The same love used for sex is the love that nicely raises the child. Otherwise, if the child is ignored, then none of it was love but rather, it was purely lust.

 

[Pah]

I agree with Ceridwen that the purpose does differ amongst people, but that its main intent should be for procreation. If one is married and having sex then that is better than not being married and doing it.

Value judgements really have no business in a definition of purpose. You could say that procreation is included in sex and right along with pleasure and structural maintenance. The ranking of these three depend on the individual motive for the instances of sex.

At least then the couple can take responsibility for the results, if such a thing happens to manifest. I already explained in the other thread my views that the intimate connection and pleasure in sex only has value so long as procreation is not being ignored.

If can safely be ignore whenever procreation is not possible.

I can understand that as a married couple people will tend to get involved in one another in such a way, but at least they can be mindful of the possible outcome.

And they certainly can be mindful of the times when procreation is not possible and participate anyway.

It seems hypocritical to be passionately in love with someone to the point that you will decide to duck out of the responsibility of having and raising a child. "I love you, honey. Let's kill it", doesn't quite fit the mood, in my opinion.

Now you are changing the subject of the thread from sex to abortion. You are off-topic by floating a (what IS it, a strawman?, a red herring) non-sequitur to the defined thread topic.

The same love used for sex is the love that nicely raises the child. Otherwise, if the child is ignored, then none of it was love but rather, it was purely lust.

Let's hear it for erotic love!!! for that seems (by combining pleasure and making the relationship stronger) to be the main purpose.

-pah-

 

[Paraprakrti]

Value judgements really have no business in a definition of purpose. You could say that procreation is included in sex and right along with pleasure and structural maintenance. The ranking of these three depend on the individual motive for the instances of sex.

Lol @ "structural maintenance". Anyway...

The ranking of these three depends on experience. Apparently we have such issues as abortion, therefore our experience tells us that we should be more responsible with our actions. I only addressed the individual motives because I realize that they are there. That they are there is meaningless to the fact of what should be there. The primary purpose of sex is to procreate, period. Everything else is added bonus. That is the way it should be understood.

If can safely be ignore whenever procreation is not possible.

And sex is still primarily for procreation. The fact that procreation is less possible during certain times does not mean that sex has any other prime purpose. I know that sex is used for the pure intent of sense gratification, but that makes no difference. If it were so easy to have sex without pregnancy resulting then why is there another thread about abortion? Apparently, sex should be considered primarily for procreation, not sense gratification.

And they certainly can be mindful of the times when procreation is not possible and participate anyway.

Of course they can. They can also go around punching people in the face. Its the "because we can" philosophy again. The fact that we have abortion issues and contraceptives shows how helplessly indulged people are. As long as sex is considered a play thing, people will get burnt.

Now you are changing the subject of the thread from sex to abortion. You are off-topic by floating a (what IS it, a strawman?, a red herring) non-sequitur to the defined thread topic.

No, I am not changing the subject of the thread. I am regarding something related to my point.

Let's hear it for erotic love!!! for that seems (by combining pleasure and making the relationship stronger) to be the main purpose.

-pah-

The main purpose according to most people, obviously. But that does not take into consideration all the undesirables that often result from the sexual act. We are debating based on preferences, but just try to think reasonably. If you were you would understand why procreation should be the main purpose of the sex act. While your preference is to rationalize sense gratification, my preference is to place procreation as the prime intent. There is a certain amount of sense gratification that is necessary for material life, but I gaurantee you that people can control themselves a lot more than they currently are. My preference is so obvious that I hardly need to rationalize it. The only reason I need to rationalize it at all is because most people are blindly indulged in sense gratifying antics. People have no sense of self worth or the worth of others.

 

[Ardhanariswar]

sex is for procreation, pleasure, and/or spiritual realizations.

i obviously know the first two, and im researching tantric art about the third purpose. kinda weird. i wonder if gay sex can also be spiritual. i think so.

 

[Sunstone]

sex is for procreation, pleasure, and/or spiritual realizations.

i obviously know the first two, and im researching tantric art about the third purpose. kinda weird. i wonder if gay sex can also be spiritual. i think so.

Why wouldn't gay sex be just as spiritual as heterosexual sex? Is the possibility of procreation required for sex to be spiritual?

 

[Pah]

The ranking of these three depends on experience. Apparently we have such issues as abortion, therefore our experience tells us that we should be more responsible with our actions. I only addressed the individual motives because I realize that they are there. That they are there is meaningless to the fact of what should be there. The primary purpose of sex is to procreate, period. Everything else is added bonus. That is the way it should be understood.

Don't be telling me what I should or should not understand. I am really growing tired of your tendency to belittle my rights and facilities. I expect you to be more in compliance with the etiquette of ReligiousForums.

And sex is still primarily for procreation

.

Nope! You have offered nothing in support of that assertion other than repetition.

The fact that procreation is less possible during certain times does not mean that sex has any other prime purpose.

I'm not talking about "less possible". I'm talking about impossible and that means procreation is not the primary reason for sex.

I know that sex is used for the pure intent of sense gratification, but that makes no difference

.

It makes all the difference

If it were so easy to have sex without pregnancy resulting then why is there another thread about abortion?

I'm going to get personal here. Assuming for these questions that you were the first child, do you think your father conceived you on the first instance he had sex with your mother? Don't you suppose there were numerous times he had sex preceding that one instance? Do you think that your mother had an ova ready and delivered from her ovary whenever sex was initiated? Do you understand the biology that produced you?

Apparently, sex should be considered primarily for procreation, not sense gratification.

The data does not bear that out!!!!!

Of course they can. They can also go around punching people in the face. Its the "because we can" philosophy again.

Because God instilled it in his creation and made it available for non-abusive use. It's not a sin - free will has nothing to do with it. You can and we can because God gave it to us.

The fact that we have abortion issues and contraceptives shows how helplessly indulged people are. As long as sex is considered a play thing, people will get burnt.

As long as some attitudes I've heard here today are allowed to prevail, there will be oppression

I always considered contraception to be responsible. Why can't you?

No, I am not changing the subject of the thread. I am regarding something related to my point.

I'll not tell you again that abortion is not the subject of this thread. Your comment was not germane to the subject. You were finished with your point when you said "but at least they can be mindful of the possible outcome." There was no reason to bring up the subject of abortion except in your mind. It is off-topic If you have any further comment of this matter, PM one of the Super Mods or Rex, himself - do not publicly post any remarks.

The main purpose according to most people, obviously. But that does not take into consideration all the undesirables that often result from the sexual act. We are debating based on preferences, but just try to think reasonably.

There you go again demeaning me by implying I do not think reasonably.

Why must I consider the undesirables ( assuming you mean pregnancy and within a faithful relationship) when pregnancy is unable to occur?
What are the "undesirables" when no conception is possible?

If you were you would understand why procreation should be the main purpose of the sex act.

I'll let this stand as it is a continuation of the insult I mentioned above

While your preference is to rationalize sense gratification, my preference is to place procreation as the prime intent.

I am not dealing with my preferences but the recognition that sex has a primary purpose of erotic love.

There is a certain amount of sense gratification that is necessary for material life, but I gaurantee you that people can control themselves a lot more than they currently are.

Why should they beyond what is necessary for prevention of abuse when sex will not possibly achieve conception

My preference is so obvious that I hardly need to rationalize it. The only reason I need to rationalize it at all is because most people are blindly indulged in sense gratifying antics. People have no sense of self worth or the worth of others.

I think you should consider not poking your nose into other people's business. Your preferences only apply to you. Your preferences are not binding on others and insisting that they should is an unwarranted intrusion.

-pah-

 

[Pah]

sex is for procreation, pleasure, and/or spiritual realizations.

i obviously know the first two, and im researching tantric art about the third purpose. kinda weird. i wonder if gay sex can also be spiritual. i think so.

I forgot about that aspect - you are right about the spirituality!!!! But that makes four purposes in my mind when you add the fortifying of a relationship

-pah-

 

[Sunstone]

So far it seems we've come up with four "purposes" for sex: (1) procreation, (2) pleasure, (3) bonding, (4) spirituality. Can anyone think of more? And is there any logical, rational, or reasonable way to actually rank these "purposes"?

 

[Paraprakrti]

So far it seems we've come up with four "purposes" for sex: (1) procreation, (2) pleasure, (3) bonding, (4) spirituality. Can anyone think of more? And is there any logical, rational, or reasonable way to actually rank these "purposes"?

To have sex for spiritual purposes means to beget and raise a new life. So really there is only three purposes. We can rank these purposes by understanding which one is most important. (1)procreation/raising a child, (2) bonding, (3) pleasure. Does anyone have any discrepancies with that? If so, why?

 

[Pah]

To have sex for spiritual purposes means to beget and raise a new life. So really there is only three purposes. We can rank these purposes by understanding which one is most important. (1)procreation/raising a child, (2) bonding, (3) pleasure. Does anyone have any discrepancies with that? If so, why?

Because tantric is an "eastern art" of sex that can reach transendance That is the "new addition" to the list and is probably first in value

It is probably a toss-up for 2nd and 3rd place for bonding and pleasure.

And, of course, you have not given us anything to put procreation ahead of the other three. (hehehe sex is NOT raising a child)

You've been told why procreation is last.

-pah-

 

[Sunstone]

To have sex for spiritual purposes means to beget and raise a new life. So really there is only three purposes.

I don't know about that! Some of the sex I've had seemed pretty darn spiritual, even though had nothing to do with beggetting a new life.

What about intimacy? Is that a fifth purpose of sex, or is it part of "bonding"?

 

[Ardhanariswar]

sex for fun out of boredom. sex on tuesdays just for the sake of it. sex with someone hott just cuz.

man, i can think of loads.

 

[Ceridwen018]

I don't like this whole "sex for procreation" deal...I want my children to be conceived from spiritual sex, not "Honey--get over here and impregnate me--NOW!" At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what type of sex you have I suppose--biology is biology and babies are babies, but I think having sex for the sole purpose of procreation would be a little empty. Plus, I would imagine that thinking of babies while your having sex would be quite the turn off!

 

[Bastet]

To have sex for spiritual purposes means to beget and raise a new life. So really there is only three purposes. We can rank these purposes by understanding which one is most important. (1)procreation/raising a child, (2) bonding, (3) pleasure. Does anyone have any discrepancies with that? If so, why?

Well, I sure have a problem with it, as it doesn't take lesbians/gays (not to mention people who just can't conceive), into consideration. :sarcastic Procreation comes dead last for me, as there is no earthly way that will happen from me having sex with my partner (unless I have a full turkey baster handy).
I rank intimacy/bonding first, and pleasure second - because, while yes, sex is extremely pleasurable, if all I was after was pleasure, I could do that on my own. Sex, for me, is a way of expressing love, and deepening the bond I have with my partner...if it was just lust, then I'd go out and madly shag everyone I could. My partner is on the other side of the world, and I wait for her, and her only.

...the intimate connection and pleasure in sex only has value so long as procreation is not being ignored.

Pfft! Says who? You? So anyone, anyone at all, who his having sex, and who has no possible hope of conceiving as a result of that sex, is what - doing it purely out of lust? What a load of crap!

People have no sense of self worth or the worth of others.

Speak for yourself...

The primary purpose of sex is to procreate, period. Everything else is added bonus.

If procreation was the be-all and end-all of sex, then women would not have a clitoris. It is not required to be involved (and quite often, goes entirely ignored), for a woman to have sex, or to conceive. That 'added bonus' was not just put there as an aside, it's there for a very good reason. I have a clitoris, and I'm not afraid to use it! :jam:

 

[QTpi]

I rank intimacy/bonding first, and pleasure second - because, while yes, sex is extremely pleasurable, if all I was after was pleasure, I could do that on my own. Sex, for me, is a way of expressing love, and deepening the bond I have with my partner...if it was just lust, then I'd go out and madly shag everyone I could.

I agree, Bastet. Sex/love-making creates an intimatacy and bonding unlike anything else.

 

[Sunstone]

If the overweening purpose of sex were procreation, wouldn't rape be on an equal footing with sex between mutually consenting adults? After all, rape can result in procreation....

 

[Paraprakrti]

Because tantric is an "eastern art" of sex that can reach transendance That is the "new addition" to the list and is probably first in value

First of all, you are an atheist. What is "transcendence"? You are simply making this first in value because it allows unrestricted sense gratification.
Secondly, the only transcendental realization one has while engaging in unrestricted sexual enjoyment is, "Why am I wasting my time engaging myself in this nonsense? I am such a slave to these senses."

And, of course, you have not given us anything to put procreation ahead of the other three. (hehehe sex is NOT raising a child)

Just as no one else has given any reason to put sense gratification over procreation. You aren't going to accept my position just as I am not going to accept yours. The abortion thread is evidence of why sex should be considered primarily for begetting and raising a child. I rest my case.

You've been told why procreation is last.

No, I haven't. The only reason why people make it last is because people are selfishly indulged.