Re: sex, the final frontier...

["Kyle Howe" <howe.38 at osu_edu>]

>
> sex...what is it? how do we treat it? how should we treat it?

we?  why must there be a consensus on how to treat it?  i seek no approval
from anyone else as to how to treat it.  so this would never be a "we"
question.


> one: in the bible, god tells adam and eve to be fruitful and multiply,
thus,
> if you believe in the bible, it is your duty to god to have sex (though
not
> with just any random person, of course).

that's because back then, the environmental resistance to the propagation of
the human species is great, disease, war, famine, etc, etc, and to survive
as a species one had to procreate at a fast pace.  this is very much like
the fish spawning thousands of eggs.  due to the environmental resistance,
the fish had to spawn thousands in order one or two might survive.   so
what's the difference?

and i might add, thanks to such brilliant advice, now we have a population
problem. omniscient?  right...


> still in the bible, god also tells
> moses (as one of the ten commandments) that no one should ever commit
adultry
> OR even covet someone else's spouse, thus bringing into effect the concept
of
> monogamy.

i think someone took moses wife on a wild ride, and moses is just a little
bitter.

men are as only faithful as their options,  always have and always will.
the only reason women can afford to be more selective is because they get
offered sex much more often :)
girls, next time a heterosexual male opens the door or do any favors for
you, just remember, they are offering dick.  i've seen chris rock too many
times obviously.


>there are also, scattered throughout the bible, various passages
> about how sex with anyone related to you or aside from your spouse will
lead
> you straight to hell. so obviously,


the bible was probably written by a bunch of uptight unattractive old men.
obviously any sex not with your spouse will lead you straight to that never
mentioned place in the bible, since  no one is lining up outside their door
to give them a blowjob.  they've got nothing to lose.


>for the bible-believing crowd, sex is
> something that you should do, but only with the person you're married to.

and the key words here are "should" and "only with"--hence leading to many
an unimaginative and workman-like attitude toward sex within the bed
chambers.

" huh-oh, honey, its friday night, and you know what that means...its
missinary night, again."


> two: there's the whole medieval concept of chivalry. the woman swoons for
the
> man...the man lives his life for the woman. "loving, chaste, from afar."
nice
> idea. didn't exactly work (don't believe me, just read Morte D'Arthur or
> Astrophil and Stella). this concept is also found in the neo-platonic view
of
> love, love without sex.

considering how often they bathe back then, i would want love without sex
too :)  yuck...


> three: the english poet, donne, writes about sex in almost all of his
poems.
> in "the canonization" he writes a metaphore in which sex is likened to the
> miracle of christ's death and resurrection.

he was obviously a virgin before that one, or, maybe someone just discovered
oral sex.



- sex is a good
> thing...but not the be-all, end-all of love.

i think sex far transcends love.  love is an illusion, biochemically no
different than large quantities of chocolate, so i've been told.  sex is a
physical act one can touch and smell and can happen with or without love.


>i do believe sex is
> a sacred act (although i know some of you disagree) because not only may
it
> lead to the creation of life, but it is also a spiritual experience..

hmm....you are either very  new at this or are very lucky :)

.or at
> least it should be. and no, by saying that sex creates life, i'm not
saying
> that humans are creating life...god is creating life through humans

i'll have to dispute that one.  i'd like to see some physical evidence of
divine creation of life when we have retards, mutants and crack babies being
born every minute.


> the use of the word "fuck" profane the act of sex?...

only when the act of sex is executed properly.

>you only
> disgrace sex if you do it out of pure lust and have no love for the person
or
> respect for the act. getting laid merely to get laid profanes the act of
sex.
> saying "fuck" does not.

there is nothing wrong with a little good old fashioned lust or  a
lot...whatever works for you.  personally i'd prefer a lot, but that's just
me.

---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/MediaNation/OtR/

---

References:

• sex, the final frontier...
• From: PTrenta at aol_com

---

• Prev by Date: ps...my haiku
• Next by Date: Re: sex, the final frontier...haiku
• Prev by thread: sex, the final frontier...
• Next by thread: Re: sex, the final frontier...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread