human sexuality is inextricably linked to emotion and psychological well-being. it is phenomenally ignorant to claim otherwise. human sexuality is a complex aspect of humanity. it is as complex as happiness or love.
atheists and extreme liberals insist foaming at the mouth that s-x is purely a physical act. that emotions should not be considered, that morality should not be considered, that comfort level should not be considered. they adamantly maintain that s-x between two people, any two people, should be casual, any time, any place, any how, any why. that anyone who objects to this is a puritan, religious fundamentalist, s-x-hater.
hogwash. that is as ridiculous as claiming that the only purpose of s-x is to reproduce. void of any enjoyment. if you see that s-x has purposes far beyond procreation, then you must also concede that sex is far too meaningful to do with just anybody.
to say that sex is a purely physical act, with no ties to a person's emotional health or identity, is as supremely ignorant as saying that the only purpose of sex is reproduction.
You are saying that sex is a purely physical act? You are alleging that it has no emotional connections whatsoever? in other words, you are making the claim that the only purpose of sesss is to reproduce. yes, in your own words, se is only physical. it has no emotional purpose at all. so why would anyone engage in it except for the express purpose of reproduction?
aha. so *now* it appears that you are saying it is NOT just physical. it has an emotional component as well.
well, guess what. if it can be used for emotional validation some of the way, then it can have an emotional requirement all the way.
if we can acknowledge that sex affects emotion part of the way, then we can acknowledge it all the way. it is immoral to claim that sex is innately tied in to a person's happiness, and then to NOT claim that because of that, people should be more choosy about whom they choose to have sex with. if they choose the wrong person to have sex with, yet sex is innately tied with human emotion, then you would be unhappy if you had sex with a bad person.
it is illogical to state that regular sex can lead to better elevated mood levels and general release of tension --and then-- not to state that if this is true, then there might also be more profound emotional effects of sex.
if you can use it for emotional health part of the way, then you can use it for emotional health all of the way.
liberals seem to think that humans were not meant for monogamy. they think that from an evolutionary perspective, is that humans were meant
well, hell if you are citing the trail of human history as evidence for what humans should and should not do, then humans also were not meant for peace. humans were not meant for the different races to get along. humans were not meant for abolishing slavery.
if you are looking to the past for clues on how to react, then go ahead and take your cues.
atheists and extreme liberals insist foaming at the mouth that s-x is purely a physical act. that emotions should not be considered, that morality should not be considered, that comfort level should not be considered. they adamantly maintain that s-x between two people, any two people, should be casual, any time, any place, any how, any why. that anyone who objects to this is a puritan, religious fundamentalist, s-x-hater.
hogwash. that is as ridiculous as claiming that the only purpose of s-x is to reproduce. void of any enjoyment. if you see that s-x has purposes far beyond procreation, then you must also concede that sex is far too meaningful to do with just anybody.
to say that sex is a purely physical act, with no ties to a person's emotional health or identity, is as supremely ignorant as saying that the only purpose of sex is reproduction.
You are saying that sex is a purely physical act? You are alleging that it has no emotional connections whatsoever? in other words, you are making the claim that the only purpose of sesss is to reproduce. yes, in your own words, se is only physical. it has no emotional purpose at all. so why would anyone engage in it except for the express purpose of reproduction?
aha. so *now* it appears that you are saying it is NOT just physical. it has an emotional component as well.
well, guess what. if it can be used for emotional validation some of the way, then it can have an emotional requirement all the way.
if we can acknowledge that sex affects emotion part of the way, then we can acknowledge it all the way. it is immoral to claim that sex is innately tied in to a person's happiness, and then to NOT claim that because of that, people should be more choosy about whom they choose to have sex with. if they choose the wrong person to have sex with, yet sex is innately tied with human emotion, then you would be unhappy if you had sex with a bad person.
it is illogical to state that regular sex can lead to better elevated mood levels and general release of tension --and then-- not to state that if this is true, then there might also be more profound emotional effects of sex.
if you can use it for emotional health part of the way, then you can use it for emotional health all of the way.
liberals seem to think that humans were not meant for monogamy. they think that from an evolutionary perspective, is that humans were meant
well, hell if you are citing the trail of human history as evidence for what humans should and should not do, then humans also were not meant for peace. humans were not meant for the different races to get along. humans were not meant for abolishing slavery.
if you are looking to the past for clues on how to react, then go ahead and take your cues.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment