If lusting after a woman is a sin, why did god make having sex so enticing?

I meant it is for the marital couple to decide. The church isn't taking away anyone's freewill. It just provides teaching in what it believes to be right. The marital couple is the only one who is going to be concerned about that action. What might look silly to you could be that couples way of trying to do things the way they believe is right.

 

twhy77

I appreciate the fact that you are trying to live according to your church's doctrine. I really do. but you can try to dress this up as much as you want to

a) I believe most people including catholics probably wouldn't even know about this doctrine and definitely don't try to live by it because

b) its very unreasonable for the average couple. I mean really, we could do a poll on this board

 

but the church is saying that if you are in this situation and you use an artificial method you are sinning.

 

When you are doing NFP correctly, it basically takes a block of 6 days out of the month that are off limits.

 

Yeah, that's their job, to try and provide right teaching. If you are Catholic and have been educated on the matter, you can see their argument much more clearly. If you are Catholic and you haven't, it looks silly. That's why there is a big push to teach as much as possible about what NFP is, and what it's not. If you are really interested you should check out a book on JP II's Theology of the Body.

They took a lot of this guy's quotes out of context, but here's a piece Nightline did on a guy who's really out there pushing the Theology of the Body and NFP.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OYmkDM2jFoc&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OYmkDM2jFoc&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

I don't agree with the Catholic doctrine, which I think is based on a misinterpretation of scripture. So, I can only go so far to defend it.

The pill is a bad example, because of its potential to cause early abortions. They could favor birth control and still oppose the pill based on that.

But, so what if they do assert (if they did) that procreation is the main function of sex? That's not much of a debate concession for me to make. That still wouldn't mean you were not supposed to enjoy sex.

 

Keep in mind, the Church doesn't actually make this argument.

 

Despite the serious nature of this thread, and the various views being expressed, this stands alone as a classic post.

 

It might sound strange, but I think most reasonable churches teach this. My pastor openly teaches that spouses have a duty to keep each other satisfied in the bedroom, and I'm pretty sure he gives that same advice to couples in pre-marital counseling.

As for the OP's question, it is a fallacy to try to comprehend God's law without understanding His original design first. God created sex, and it was by design that He created it to be enjoyable, but he created it for marriage. The sexual desires we have outside of marriage were not part of His original design, that's a result of man's fallen nature which we cannot redeem ourselves from (hence Jesus and the whole plan of redemption). And as such the Christian life does not revolve around what thou shalt do and thou shalt not do and trying to overcome natural weaknesses, but rather submitting to God's grace and Spirit which helps us be strong where we couldn't be, and knowing that if we do stumble He is always forgiving.

Hopefully that summarizes it well.

 

I think it does.

 

We have a fabulous pediatrician who is in Opus Dei. You don't get more Catholic than that and he is of the opinion that sex is most certainly meant for pleasure. Many people have used the analogy of a fire: great in a fireplace, not so great when it is outside of a fireplace, like in the middle of your livingroom.

Two great books on the subjects brought up here:
Open Embrace: A Protestant Couple Rethinks Contraceptions by Sam and Bethany Torode
Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity by Lauren Winner

PGabriel, I don't think it is the case that sex is noticeably more enjoyable during a fertile period. I'd be happy to run that by others, I'm sure there is a great deal of variance. But if that were the case I think it should be noted that most women don't know when their fertile period is. A lot of women learn about when it is by trying NFP and certainly those using NFP are most aware of it. On a similar note, when you are on the pill you don't have a fertile period (obviously) so while you might argue that it is terribly sadistic of men to suggest women not have sex during what might be a more enjoyable time of the month, isn't it even more sadistic to just wipe that time of the month off the calendar?

Not that I am that committed to NFP. But I do think it has a great deal of merit. For obvious reasons, most of the people I know who like it are women. Often their husbands are not crazy about it because it means several days they can't have sex. But a couple we know has been using it for years and found the following positive things worth considering:
1. They never got pregnant when they didn't want to.
2. When they did want to get pregnant they managed to do so on the first month that they tried each time (four times).
3. NFP helped both of them be considerably more in touch with what was going on with her body which lead to them having more respect and concern and appreciation for how women's bodies work and hers in particular.
4. Periods of refrain on a regular basis provided spiritual benefits with regard to their relationship with God similar to fasting.
5. Periods of refrain functioned as a means of drawing them together in a spiritual discipline that can only be shared with a spouse.
6. It is the only form of birth control that is free.
7. It is a form of birth control with absolutely no health risks.
8. Using NFP involves more than monitoring when you are fertile, it also very quickly identifies many other health problems. You know if something is going wrong that you should have checked out.

Going over all those reasons my friend argues for NFP makes me think perhaps we should be using it

Another twist to the Christian view of sex and marriage is that marriage is a reflection of the relationship between Christ and the Church. Sex and Marriage are designed in part to illustrate that intimacy. I'd elaborate but its late.

 

*Sigh*

[IMO]Sexual desire has nothing to do with God, and everything to do with evolution, natural selection, and survival of the fittest.

If you want a religious answer - "No one knows! He designed it that way!"[/IMO]

 

topics like this exemplify why I don't think I'll ever be able to be a Christian. It's not that there aren't many great teachings...it's (among other things) the denial of things that seem so natural to being a human. No matter how someone tries to explain it to me, it just doesn't make sense to me.

 

That's exactly right. If it's (1) two consenting adults and (2) not harming anyone >> remember that these are two pre-conditions for marriage.

You're right in your thinking IMO. The only thing is you are leaving out a few tiny possibilities of things that could go wrong. To me, that's what a marriage contract/covenant is based on. I know many won't agree with me, but I see it as the "if **** goes wrong" paper. I've never been a big fan of the actual paper and ceremony and stuff. I believe I'm married to someone the moment I want to be married to them and think I should be.

What you'll find is that a marriage contract/covenant is basically a set of responsibilities for each side which, if broken, result in certain fair and pre-determined outcomes.

Now the next thing to logically consider is "what if both sides waive these responsibilities", right?

Wrong. Since this relationship MAY result in a child, it requires the consent of an unborn entity which is unable to consent. Therefore this contract also governs the future rights of that not-yet born entity/person. The child deserves a minimum set of conditions, I think we can agree on that.

Since we're speaking in a religious context and we can safely assume that there's no form of birth control which works 100% AND does not harm the body in any way (short or long term)... It brings me to the conclusion that we can't have sex without being married at the moment.

This kind of talk really bogs the whole thing down for me. The paperwork and ceremony is a result of a relationship IMO - it is not the actual relationship. It's somewhat like signing a waiver form before bungie jumping - accepting the responsibility of what you are about to do. Lots of peopel will try to minimize the whole thing into "wow, this is a contractual arrangement. how empty." but in reality the action is not the contractual arrangement, it is the actual relationship (or bungie jump in the example).

Anyways, hope that helps.

 

The desire was given to you partly in order to be able to procreate.

This desire came with a basic set of instructions and two main things:

- A mind strong enough to be able to keep it under control.
- A mind strong enough to be able to enjoy it.

Temptation to do things comes from within. That includes drinking alcohol and having sex with total disregard for the consequences of each.

 

I doubt it, but I'm sure some would rank one above the other and vice versa.

 

Clearly you need to dig deeper. You are actually a soul within a body. The things that seem so natural to you are just things that seem natural to your earthly body. You may be incapable of differentiating between the two sides of you. In addition there is some force which pulls you towards doing negative things (whatever you want to call that force).

What you need to do is decide what the best way is for determining right from wrong - not determining "feel-good" from "not-feel-good". Because once you make yourself the sole/final/infallible authority on determining right from wrong, you are essentially worshipping your own mind. That may be the path you want to take, but I would argue that you were never considering the path to Christianity in the first place.

 

Why is desire altogether a sin? what makes you think that?