The morality of casual sex

[Neanderthaland]

If you are having sex for anything other than procreation then you are doing it wrong.

Why? Not everyone wants to have kids, and people that already have kids also tend to still like it.

Maybe that's his fetish? Don't kink-shame.

[Cekoviu]

Why? Not everyone wants to have kids, and people that already have kids also tend to still like it.

Maybe that's his fetish? Don't kink-shame.

(breeding is an actual fetish, fyi)

[Agarntrop]

Why? Not everyone wants to have kids, and people that already have kids also tend to still like it.

Maybe that's his fetish? Don't kink-shame.

ikr, this is kink erasure right here. smh

[Sundiata]

Sex before marriage is essentially the consummation of marriage without vows. Of course it's meaningless.

It has as much meaning as those involved want it to have.

The arbitrary love of contemporary Western culture is incomplete, it's too subject to personal whims. Marriages should be based on love that does not change, a love that's unconditional.

Marriages can and should remain stable and last for life.

[Senkaku]

You can have sex without love and love without sex, or have them together, and they remain beautiful and enjoyable things

A much smarter man than me said

Sex without love is an empty meaningless experience, but as far as empty meaningless experiences go, it's a pretty good one.

I don't think it's necessarily an empty and meaningless experience. It can be, but that's often not the case.

[Neanderthaland]

Maybe that's his fetish? Don't kink-shame.

(breeding is an actual fetish, fyi)

I know

[Necroghastia]

It has as much meaning as those involved want it to have.

The arbitrary love of contemporary Western culture is incomplete, it's too subject to personal whims.

And your god's dictates aren't subject to his personal whims?

Marriages should be based on love that does not change, a love that's unconditional.

I agree. However, that has nothing to do with my point that sex between unmarried participants can still have meaning. You also do not need to have marriages for unconditional love.

[Neanderthaland]

It has as much meaning as those involved want it to have.

The arbitrary love of contemporary Western culture is incomplete, it's too subject to personal whims. Marriages should be based on love that does not change, a love that's unconditional.

Marriages can and should remain stable and last for life.

Which is why you put a condition on it. Makes total sense.

[Ethel mermania]

A much smarter man than me said

Sex without love is an empty meaningless experience, but as far as empty meaningless experiences go, it's a pretty good one.

I don't think it's necessarily an empty and meaningless experience. It can be, but that's often not the case.

It's a woody allen line.

[Senkaku]

Marriages should be based on love that does not change

Even the couple who goes on chaste dates, falls deeply in love but waits to have sex, gets married, and goes on to have kids and live out the rest of their days together is going to have their love change over time. That's a part of being alive in the world. If you believe there is a kind of deep relationship whose emotional dynamics continue unchanged throughout all of a person's life, you are more totally divorced from the human experience than anyone I've ever encountered.

[Sundiata]

And your god's dictates aren't subject to his personal whims?

God doesn't have whims in the manner that we humans do.

God's commands are subject to his nature, as he is the one who is. He is ever-present and eternally constant, but most importantly he is love.

[Diahon]

Sex should always be open to the possibility of procreation. Anything other than coitus is not conducive to life and intrinsically disordered from the standpoint of natural law.

me, old as dirt shagging my spouse:

you, low sperm count:

gay kenyan lion:

[Sundiata]

Marriages should be based on love that does not change

Even the couple who goes on chaste dates, falls deeply in love but waits to have sex, gets married, and goes on to have kids and live out the rest of their days together is going to have their love change over time. That's a part of being alive in the world. If you believe there is a kind of deep relationship whose emotional dynamics continue unchanged throughout all of a person's life, you are more totally divorced from the human experience than anyone I've ever encountered.

There is a love that's deep and doesn't change, the love of God.

When we marry someone we're called to love that person in the same way, regardless of our feelings, our experiences, our life in this world. I'm not saying it's easy but that is Christ's way.

Does that simplify why Catholic love is not casual?

[Purple Rats]

The arbitrary love of contemporary Western culture is incomplete, it's too subject to personal whims. Marriages should be based on love that does not change, a love that's unconditional.

Marriages can and should remain stable and last for life.

Which is why you put a condition on it. Makes total sense.

This is the whole problem I see with Catholic mindset. "God loves everyone unconditionally.... as long as they follow these rules, otherwise they shame them."
And same with people. Unconditional love, but only if it follows some rules. Like here- marriage.

[Ethel mermania]

The arbitrary love of contemporary Western culture is incomplete, it's too subject to personal whims. Marriages should be based on love that does not change, a love that's unconditional.

Marriages can and should remain stable and last for life.

Which is why you put a condition on it. Makes total sense.

He is not putting a condition on it, and I dont know there is really ever such a thing as unconditional love between anyone but a parent and a child. But there is an incredible comfort and ease between an old happily married couple that never has to question the love between them, that really does make life better.

[Andsed]

It has as much meaning as those involved want it to have.

The arbitrary love of contemporary Western culture is incomplete, it's too subject to personal whims. Marriages should be based on love that does not change, a love that's unconditional.

Marriages can and should remain stable and last for life.

A loving and stable relationship does not require treating sex as some sacred thing though. Plenty of relationships last with a more casual view on sex.

[Necroghastia]

Which is why you put a condition on it. Makes total sense.

He is not putting a condition on it, and I dont know there is really ever such a thing as unconditional love between anyone but a parent and a child. But there is an incredible comfort and ease between an old happily married couple that never has to question the love between them, that really does make life better.

Saying you have to be married is most certainly putting a condition on it.

[Ethel mermania]

He is not putting a condition on it, and I dont know there is really ever such a thing as unconditional love between anyone but a parent and a child. But there is an incredible comfort and ease between an old happily married couple that never has to question the love between them, that really does make life better.

Saying you have to be married is most certainly putting a condition on it.

Unconditional love is the part our neanderthal friend was objecting too.

[Nouveau Yathrib]

Casual sex isn't immoral in and of itself, provided neither partner is in a committed relationship. But if one prospective partner is in a relationship, then the line between right and wrong falls somewhere before you both start taking your clothes off.

In my experience, most people of sound mind + body prefer and seek out committed mongamous relationships.

[Neanderthaland]

Saying you have to be married is most certainly putting a condition on it.

Unconditional love is the part our neanderthal friend was objecting too.

I don't have a problem with unconditional love. I just think that calling it that, and then saying it can only exist between married couples... well, that's QUITE OBVIOUSLY a condition.

[Sundiata]

Unconditional love is the part our neanderthal friend was objecting too.

I don't have a problem with unconditional love. I just think that calling it that, and then saying it can only exist between married couples... well, that's QUITE OBVIOUSLY a condition.

Unconditional love does not exist only between married couples. It's a sacramental service to reciprocate God's unconditional love for us through our spouse. The other ways of doing so are holy orders and consecrated celibacy (For example, Opus Dei numeraries).

[Necroghastia]

I don't have a problem with unconditional love. I just think that calling it that, and then saying it can only exist between married couples... well, that's QUITE OBVIOUSLY a condition.

Unconditional love exists only between married couples. It's a sacramental service to reciprocate God's unconditional love for us through our spouse. The other ways of doing so are holy orders and consecrated celibacy (For example, Opus Dei numeraries).

So a parent cannot have unconditional love for their child, and vice-versa? A person cannot have unconditional love for a close friend? Those in a long-term, committed relationship cannot have unconditional love unless they are married?

Thou shalt not lie.

[Neanderthaland]

I don't have a problem with unconditional love. I just think that calling it that, and then saying it can only exist between married couples... well, that's QUITE OBVIOUSLY a condition.

Unconditional love does not exist only between married couples. It's a sacramental service to reciprocate God's unconditional love for us through our spouse. The other ways of doing so are holy orders and consecrated celibacy (For example, Opus Dei numeraries).

Outside of joining a Catholic cult, I mean.

[Sundiata]

Unconditional love exists only between married couples. It's a sacramental service to reciprocate God's unconditional love for us through our spouse. The other ways of doing so are holy orders and consecrated celibacy (For example, Opus Dei numeraries).

So a parent cannot have unconditional love for their child, and vice-versa? A person cannot have unconditional love for a close friend? Those in a long-term, committed relationship cannot have unconditional love unless they are married?

Thou shalt not lie.

Typo. I meant to say that unconditional love does not only exist between married couples.

[Sundiata]

Unconditional love does not exist only between married couples. It's a sacramental service to reciprocate God's unconditional love for us through our spouse. The other ways of doing so are holy orders and consecrated celibacy (For example, Opus Dei numeraries).

Outside of joining a Catholic cult, I mean.

Opus Dei is not a cult and would love to have you as a member.