Originally posted by sohguanh:hi... we're all adam's and eve's...
[b]heard sex is fun and shiok?
To truly experience and verify that for oneself, one muz eat the forbidden apple in the Garden of Eden to know the Truth[/b]
That is a very narrow minded view of sex and an arrogant assumption that you know and understand God.Originally posted by humjipeng:sex used to be considered sacred because it is a gift from God to produce offsprings.
however in modern context, majority of the people do not consider sex as a sacred activity because it is done mainly for pleasure and not with the reproductive intention
Then in which context of "God" are you refering to? My intention is to say that sex has become something in modern times done plainly for pleasure. It wasn't so in the past, it used to be considered sacred because sex is intented for reproduction. (if you would understand casual sex)Originally posted by casino_king:That is a very narrow minded view of sex and an arrogant assumption that you know and understand God.
Things done for pleasure can be sacred. You think God is a killjoy? If God thinks that reproduction is important but pleasure is not why make sex so pleasurable?
Why give man the chance at all not to confine sex to reproduction?

Look forward to the new show, SGF POLITICS!!!Originally posted by ^tamago^:oh nose~
frame wars... incoming....![]()
![]()
If SEX is solely for reproduction and never for pleasure, and since you invoked the name of God, why didn't God then make sex displeasurable?Originally posted by humjipeng:Then in which context of "God" are you refering to? My intention is to say that sex has become something in modern times done plainly for pleasure. It wasn't so in the past, it used to be considered sacred because sex is intented for reproduction. (if you would understand casual sex)
About giving man the chance to confine sex to reproduction, would you like to elaborate more on it?
thanks for the reminder. toilet. brb~Originally posted by saline:i make love. sex without love is meaningless, no diff from fucking oneself.
are you suggesting that a couple set a timetable or something to that effect?Originally posted by shade343:I mean lets say you are married. You dont abuse sex by doing it 20 times a day or something like that.
It is different... with yourself, only you are involved. Sex without love is still sex with someone else.Originally posted by saline:i make love. sex without love is meaningless, no diff from fucking oneself.
So why did God make sex pleasurable?Originally posted by casino_king:If SEX is solely for reproduction and never for pleasure, and since you invoked the name of God, why didn't God then make sex displeasurable?
Man and woman get married. Man and woman have "no pleasure sex." They do it anyway because they want to have children. Once the woman conceive, no more sex because it is not pleasurable. The man and woman are no longer interested to have sex because they no longer intend to have anymore children.
So why did God make sex pleasurable?
As for the other issue, should people have sex solely for pleasure with no intention of procreation; that is their choice isn't it? We cannot condemn them can we? They make their choice. We make our choice.
http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=5200#I
11. Human sexuality is thus a good, part of that created gift which God saw as being "very good", when he created the human person in his image and likeness, and "male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:27).
Insofar as it is a way of relating and being open to others, sexuality has love as its intrinsic end, more precisely, love as donation and acceptance, love as giving and receiving. The relationship between a man and a woman is essentially a relationship of love: "Sexuality, oriented, elevated and integrated by love acquires truly human quality."
17 When such love exists in marriage, self-giving expresses, through the body, the complementarity and totality of the gift. Married love thus becomes a power which enriches persons and makes them grow and, at the same time, it contributes to building up the civilization of love. But when the sense and meaning of gift is lacking in sexuality, a "civilization of things and not of persons" takes over, "a civilization in which persons are used in the same way as things are used. In the context of a civilization of use, woman can become an object for man, children a hindrance to parents..."18