• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is non-procreative sex immoral?

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
In several of the threads that discuss human sexuality, one or more people have asserted that non-procreative sex is immoral, but I don't think any thread has yet specifically addressed that question. So, is non-procreative sex immoral? If so, why is it immoral? If not, why not? What do you think?
 
In a word, no. I don't think that non-procreative sex is immoral. First of all, not all sex leads to procreation even if that is the intent of the act. By admittedly thin causality, I don't think that procreative sex was intended to be considered immoral. The caveat to this would be that having tons of sex might be considered immoral but I am not sure. Is prostitution immoral because of the sex or the money or the combination of the two?
 

The Voice of Reason

Doctor of Thinkology
Not only is non-procreative sex not immoral - it (the sex drive) is one of the stronger driving forces in life (along with food, clothing, and shelter). The fact that some people can (and do) willingly override this need does not make it any less important - it just makes those people feel as if they have achieved something through self-denial.

I, for one, am all for it.

And anyone that disagrees with me is wrong!! :)
TVOR
 

Lightkeeper

Well-Known Member
Practice, practice, practice.:) No, sometimes it takes several unions to fertilize an egg. If the itch wasn't supposed to be scratched it probably wouldn't be there.:)
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
How do you deal with the argument that the natural purpose of sex is procreation; therefore, non-procreative sex is unnatural?
 

The Voice of Reason

Doctor of Thinkology
Sunstone said:
How do you deal with the argument that the natural purpose of sex is procreation; therefore, non-procreative sex is unnatural?
I laugh at it and ignore it. But that's just me.

Just curious - would breathing anything other than oxygen from the ambient atmosphere be immoral?

TVOR
 

Pah

Uber all member
Sunstone said:
How do you deal with the argument that the natural purpose of sex is procreation; therefore, non-procreative sex is unnatural?
Sex for procreation is only for 5-6 days per month from the age of puberty to menopause. Sex for pleasure is available for a much longer time and more frequently. The asumption that sex is for procreation only is a religious myth

Bob
.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
pah said:
Sex for procreation is only for 5-6 days per month from the age of puberty to menopause. Sex for pleasure is available for a much longer time and more frequently. The asumption that sex is for procreation only is a religious myth

Bob
.
IF sex were solely for procreation in humans, then wouldn't those 5-6 days each month be marked by the female going into heat, as is the case with most species of animal? In most animals, the female goes into heat when she is fertile, at which point she becomes sexually attractive to males. That's a very efficient way of having sex for procreation. But the fact that human females have a largely hidden estrus cycle would seem to indicate that procreation is not the only natural purpose of sex in our species.
 

cvipertooth

Member
To start off, this is under the assumption that God created sex. (hehe that sounds funny) athough he did create it for the creation of new life, I'm sure he meant for it to be pleasurable between a man or a woman, or else it would be dull and arduous and have no purpose but for pro-creation. If there is anything in the Bible about non-procreative sex, and im not sure where if there is, I'd almost bet it would be in the early old testament and i would again, bet that it had something to do with the succession of the Hebrews and the lineage of Christ.
 

Scott1

Well-Known Member
cvipertooth said:
If there is anything in the Bible about non-procreative sex, and im not sure where if there is, I'd almost bet it would be in the early old testament and i would again, bet that it had something to do with the succession of the Hebrews and the lineage of Christ.
Don't bet just yet.... I'd suggest reading John 8:1-11

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin

;)
 

Pah

Uber all member
Sunstone said:
IF sex were solely for procreation in humans, then wouldn't those 5-6 days each month be marked by the female going into heat, as is the case with most species of animal? In most animals, the female goes into heat when she is fertile, at which point she becomes sexually attractive to males. That's a very efficient way of having sex for procreation. But the fact that human females have a largely hidden estrus cycle would seem to indicate that procreation is not the only natural purpose of sex in our species.
Many of the animals detailed in Biological Exuberance (by Bruce Bagemihl, Ph.D) participate in non-reproductive sex. This is noted especially in species where only a select number of males sire offspring. Female Big Horrn Sheep only have sex while fertile but the males (with each other) cavort all year round. All homosexual activity is non -procreative sex. Three hundered species are detailed along with an extensive list (pages 657 - 663) have been observed having homosexual sex.

Bob
 

cvipertooth

Member
SOGFPP said:
Don't bet just yet.... I'd suggest reading John 8:1-11

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin

;)
Yes, im familiar with the story. But that has to do with aldutery, which is entirely different from non-procreative sex. I think the question could be changed to is it wrong for a married couple to use condoms or birth control. I seriously doubt there is anywhere in the Bible that says that sex cannot be pleasurable and only serves the purpose of reproducing. It's part of the bond between two people.
 

cvipertooth

Member
pah said:
Many of the animals detailed in Biological Exuberance (by Bruce Bagemihl, Ph.D) participate in non-reproductive sex. This is noted especially in species where only a select number of males sire offspring. Female Big Horrn Sheep only have sex while fertile but the males (with each other) cavort all year round. All homosexual activity is non -procreative sex. Three hundered species are detailed along with an extensive list (pages 657 - 663) have been observed having homosexual sex.

Bob
Don't dolphins have sex for pleasure as well? I heard somewhere that dolphins have sex for the purpose of pleasure more often than for reproduction. Also, I had a cat once that really liked a fleece blanket, and I dont think he was trying to make little cats.
 

Scott1

Well-Known Member
cviper said:
I seriously doubt there is anywhere in the Bible that says that sex cannot be pleasurable and only serves the purpose of reproducing.
Then why would Jesus care about adultery?..... it's just two people having sex for pleasure... right?
 

Pah

Uber all member
SOGFPP said:
Then why would Jesus care about adultery?..... it's just two people having sex for pleasure... right?
It might be a "property" issue - especially for the woman. Not saying it is.

Bob
 

cvipertooth

Member
SOGFPP said:
Then why would Jesus care about adultery?..... it's just two people having sex for pleasure... right?
because aldutery causes unrest in families, which leads to broken homes and hurt children, suicide, and ultimately bad for the people themselves. Here's a question, If God only wanted sex to be for reproduction and a married couple got no pleasure out of it whatsoever, what motivation would anyone have for reproducing? And if god intended sex to not be pleasurable and only serve for reproductive purposes, why did he allow it to be pleasurable?
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
SOGFPP said:
Don't bet just yet.... I'd suggest reading John 8:1-11

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin

;)

Cannot that story be read more than 1 way?

With the emphasis on the first part of Jesus` words in 11 ?

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

It just doesn`t seem to me that Jesus`s judgement was reliant upon her leaving her life of sin.
He had made the decision before he could know whether she had or not.


 
Top