Sex and Spirituality

mcopado

Lit's Resident Reverend
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Posts
6,807
Hi,
I just thought I'd start this new thread. It's based on a series of posts on the Pat Robertson thread.

Lets talk about spirituality, let's talk about God, let's talk about how religions got formed, and how their views changed from the Divine feminine & Goddess worship (where sex was held to be sacred) to the hyper puritanism of christianity, especially the neo-con fundamentalism of today, Let's talk about masturbation, let's talk about homosexuality- what the old testament says and what curiously Jesus didn't say (and why), let's talk about celebacy and Tantric sex...

But let's attempt to do it in a way that respects each other's views, and beliefs, and doesn't fall into meaness and abuse of the participants...Above all let's explore this oft confusing topic, God and sex, and have fun doing it....

If you havn't read them, I would like to recommend Thomas Moore's "The Soul of Sex" and a book, who's author I can't recall, called "The Metaphysic of Sex" that explored sexuality as it was employed and enjoyed in early religions...

Let me tell you quickly about my self. I am a Christian Minister (I call myself Christian, but I have studied and used the texts and insights from all religions in my teachings. I believe that God (the word I use, but not necessarily the right word or the only word) is like the center of a great wheel, and all religions are but spokes of that wheel all pointing to the source, the Divine)
I come from a little known spiritual movment that has been around for over 100 years, we are Non demoninational, non-judgmental, and ordain (gasp) women and homosexuals... We and other movements that came out at the same time are often scorned and called cults by by fundamentalist Christians (oh well)....I was Ordained at Unity Scholl of Christianity in Missouri...Unity is part of a group of denominations known as the New Thought Movement...along with Religuous Science...

Prior to being dragged kicking and screaming by (God, the Divine, The Universal Consciousness) I worked in media production and medical education, and I was also a local "leader" in the mythopoetic men's movement (Robert Bly and other's) in the Detroit area in the mid 90's. By happy circumstance, and a combination of the two skill sets, I became involved in helping teach medical students about the varieties of sexul experiences that humanity does, so that the future doctors would be desensitized to anything out of their comfort zones and be able to provide the medical care that all people should have, in a non-judgmental way. I also directed and shot sex education videos.

I am heterosexual, but through my work with men, have found and been accepted by the "Gay" community, primarily because I am not homophobic and non-judgmental, OF ANYONE. A group of Gay men saved my life when I was at my lowest and planned to end it all, and because of that I have pledged to support the rights of homsexual to live and love...

I would be glad to share my history with anyone who asks, but I am not here to toot my own horn...But to open a pathway to insightful exchange.

I will leave you with one quick snapshot of my view of sex and God....

Sexuality between consenting adults is one of the Divine's greatest Gifts to humankind, a way of giving us a taste of the ultimate pleasure (why do we often say "Oh God" during orgasm? :) ) It is not just some mechanical tool of procreation as most religions say- (Ask me why and I'll share my opinion.)

If it were truly just some mechanical to create more humans, it would probably feel about as good as taking a leak...Something we have to do , but we don't necessarily think about...It wouldn't be the knock down drag out awsome thing that it is...

I believe that as long as no person is harmed by the act then anything goes, partner swapping, homosexuality, fetishes, masturbation, oral, anal, yadda yadda yadda, are all OK as long as no one is hurt, and all involved go into it with eyes open to the implication of their actions...

I don't personally condone, incest, rape, pedophilia, and infidelity...Because they all harm someone in one way or another....I may not condone it, but I do not hate, or judge the perpetrators of those things...

Enough from me, how about you?
 
Last edited:
mcpado

Good concept for a thread of like-minded people (or at least of open-minded and thougthful people).

Anyone who has read my book Death by Fucking will know that I am deeply interested in evolution and in understanding how we got where we are, and where do we go from here.

I've been interested for a long time in what makes a human being. Why/how do we differ from other animals? When and why did we become human? Until the next set of revelations come out from paleontolgists and/or genetic researchers, I currently hold some beliefs that I think relate directly to this thread.

The real key to humanity is the development of symbolic thinking. The real key to the development of symbolic thinking is the invention of an extended language. There is no doubt that other species have some sort of 'language' going on. They certainly have an identifiable vocabulary of 'words' that they share with others of their species.

So what makes man different? Our language has developed to the point that we can put abstract concepts into our words. The real question is 'when did that happen, and what was the result?'.

Current theory is that all of Homo sapiens' predecessors probably did not have fully developed language. Their phisiology wasn't right, and the artifacts they left behind were entirely functional (as far as I can ascertain). In other words, they were making tools, but the tools of the Homo erectus weren't a vast improvement over the tools of Homo habilis. In fact, the tool set didn't improve dramatically for the first two million years of Homo's existence.

Many species of animal make and use tools. In chimps, tool making and tool use are culture-specific; i.e. one 'tribe' of chimps may use tools that another tribe doesn't, and vice versa.

BUT: with the advent of Homo sapien (say 150,000 years ago), man's brain had finally evolved to the extent that the capability for abstract thought was there. When abstract thought really began is the real question. It may have taken another 50-70,000 years for language to develop enough to put abstractions into words.

Until we could talk abstractly, we couldn't think abstractly. Our pre-abstract thought ancestors lived entirely 'in the moment'. They couldn't express or envision tomorrow. Nor could they remember yesterday - at least in words. And I challange you to think about yesterday in something other than words. Pictures of things that happened in your past are for the most part molded to the words that describe those pictures, IMHO.

OK, then. How does this relate to the topic at hand? What would be the response of a species that had never thought before to suddenly beginning to think? I'm talking abstractions. I'm talking the ability to plan, the ability to chronicle the past.

The first generation or so of those people must have been more than surprised to hear these voices in their heads. Perhaps at first it was only the very odd Homo sapien whose language skills had developed to the point of thinking abstractly.

What would that voice in their heads appear to be? Could they think abstractly enough to realize it was themselves, kind of like a parakeet seeing its reflection for the first time? Or would 'the voice' seem somehow supernatural?

Might it not be the voice of a God? Perhaps this was the beginning of the concept of God in our species.
 
OOH Great start!!!,
I need to jump in the shower before a dinner engagment so I can't stop to go through your points right now...But tell me about Your book?
never heard of it, but you've got me peaked...Now where does someone find it? (Can't see going into a library and asking for it).

Can't wait to dive into your post later.
 
tell me about your book
2004 Golden Clitorides Award Winner: Best New Author; Best Long Story by a New Author; Best Humor Story
2004 Golden Clitorides 2nd Place Winner: Long Story of the Year
______________________________
And now for something completely different...

...or try this one!
If you click on "...or try this one!" you can get to a full and easily read version of the book. If you click on "And now for something completely different..." you can get to the Literotica posting. It is a little more difficult to read on Lit.

Thanks for askin'
 
Oh this is interesting.

I am a man who firmly believes that people, not just men or just women, can love more than one person. Is this cheating or adultery? To some it might be.

As for religeon, I find it interesting in a histoical way. I have studied it for quite some time and find that most organised religeons are there for the sake of the Shamans, (Or priests,) and not for the people they watch over. Mainly the religeos texts, and I have read all of the major ones as well as most of the minor ones, teach one important thing. Do not go out of your way to hurt other people.

Cat
JK
 
I am a man who firmly believes that people, not just men or just women, can love more than one person. Is this cheating or adultery? To some it might be.

It's cheating or adultery if the significant other is unaware of and/or disapproves of the tryst. Simple as that A multiple partner situation must be agreed upon by all partners or cheating is involved. Period.

Seacat: yes, most religions teach: do not go out of your way to hurt other people.

On the other hand: many if not most religions teach the exclusivity of their beliefs; the rightness of their beliefs, the specialness of their adherents; the dfferentness of non-believers.

SO with one hand they teach "Do Unto Others" and on the other they teach "Kill the Infidels" or some such nonsense.

It's hard to find a religion that isn't rife with hypocricy.
 
I don't necessarily believe that having multiple partners is necessarily cheating or adultry (although I've never had multiple sexual partners concurrent with each other- either dating 2 different woman or in the bed at the same time).

But I have met many deeply spiritual people who had either open marriages or swung together, and although it is rare to find such a healthy degree of openness for all involved- if every involved was open and honest with each other then morally (at least to me) I wouldn't judge it as either adultry or cheating...

The sexologist I worked with doing the sex ed stuff, was part of a group of what I would call deeply spitiual swingers I don't know if your familiar with the human awareness institute (HAI) although not my scene per se, I met tons of people in the group and even had the opportunity to interview the founder on a men's radio show I used to produce/co-host. There were quite a few messed up people involved, ut the majority of the people were deeply spiritual, though not necessarily "religuous" or involde in traditional Christianity ('cause quite frankly Christianity hate human sexuality of any kid).

Al lot of those involved considered themselves "pagan" or studied Tantric Buddhism, or practiced native american spirituality...Or were involved in Religous Science or Unity or were Unitarian Universalists....

About 3 years ago, on Dec 30th I was down in Daytona Beach Florida, with my then fiance (now ex). We were sitting in a beach side bar and was approached (and attempted picked up by) A middle aged couple who were swingers, they found out I was a minister and she was a relationship therapist, and so over drinks as they attempted to seduce my fiance (I was actually tempted because I found the woman devastitatingly attractive- but I wouldn't do anything if my parnter didn't agree to it- and later she didn't but that's another story), But in the course of the evening, I found that they were aching for spirituality that didn't judge them for their sexual proclivities...THey were yearning to experience the Divine but their sexuality clashed with most religions. It's also the same with gays- they didn't necessarily choose thier orientation- do they not yearn for the kiss of God.

I hope we discuss Homosexuality and Religion at some point in this thread. I had a great learning experience while in seminary- were were given an amazing bible seminar by the pastor of the Metropolitan Conmmunity Church,
a "gay" Christian denomination in a lot of major cities- he showed us the biblical origins, the greek, roman and aramaic meanings of those five (I think 5) passages in the bible that the fundies use to allow the hate of gays....
Adn if you look at the linguistics origins, they actually had a different meaning...I can't do it justice, but for example Soddam and Gammorah was destroyed NOT because of homosexuality but inhospitality to guests (or something like that- Geex it's been 5 years.)

There's a good book that the mcc church puts out called "The Children are Free" I loaned it to someone and never got it back...

I want to pose a question to you two, 'cause it's just us 3 guys so far... It is evident by our participation with lit that we like sex and because we're here we are probaly not into the "vanilla" expression of sexuality, and all moral judgements about what is infedility or not...I'm sure we've probably been unfaithful in one way or another- Dropping all value judgments having to do with sexuality- In the rest of your lives would you consider your selfves "Good" people or "moral" ? Do you help your neighbors, etc. etc.?

Now I'm probably assuming Sea and Bullet you would answer Yes, (I know I do, whetheor not I have Rev. in my title)- The basic question for society becomes then, what does what we do in the privacy of our own homes, between consenting adults-no matter how unconventional it may seem, have to do with how we treat our neighbors, become stewards for the planet, care for our kids, feed the poor etc?

the answer,
NOTHING!
 
Last edited:
Hey there Mike,,

It looks to me as though you are posing several questions. (you must pardon my typing, I have been drinking a bit.)

The first question is do I consider myself a good person? I do consider myself a good person, although I am not a nice person. (There is a difference, and if I remember to I'll get into that.) I follow something that is out moded, a code of honor. I will not hurt my spouse. I love her dearly and while we may have our differences we do love each other. I will protect her, I will shield her from the harm that comes from other as well as my abilities allow. I will also protect my friends, few as they may be. (If you do not fall into this catagory and you harm or threaten harm to those who do, then woe is you.)

Do I consider hjaving more than one sex partner, or loving more than one person cheating? No I do not, if certain criteria are met. If it is done with the full knowledge of all involved. If it is done with the acceptance of all involved, and if it is done with no deception. If these criteria are met, then I do not consider it cheating, nor do I consider it a sin. (I am currently attempting to add to my family circle another young woman, as well as her children. She is one person who falls under my protection and I do feel strongly for her as does my wife. I am just dealing with my wifes breaking of societies rules.)

As for being a nice person, I am not one. I have taken the life of another, and I can see where it may happen again. While I hold life to be something special there are times where I feel that it must be ended. (If you attack my family or those under my protection then your life may very well be forfeit, if you are lucky.) I can and will and have made people suffer. I can and will and have made people wish they were dead. I can and will and have made peoplewonder if it was worth it. In those cases I was not a nice person.

As for spirituality. I think it is a case by case situation. What fits for one person may not fit for another.

Cat
 
This time Im gonna be serious! (if you'll noticed all my post are all flirting)

Im a firm believer of GOD,Im roman catholic,I grewn up in NUN school and my family roots somehow I can say sort of conservative..I wanna tackle this subject about Masturbation!

According to Bible: masturbation is a *SIN*


"Isn't it still better to masturbate than to commit fornication?"

The easy answer to this question would be, "Yes, it is better to masturbate, because at best it corrupts only one person. It certainly is the lesser of two evils." However, why would a loving, holy, all-powerful God abandon you to a situation in which you have to choose any evil, whether it be "lesser" or "greater?" To really answer this question, we must again go back to God's original plan for sex.

First of all, masturbation will not truly relieve the sexual pressure that one may feel. It may for a short moment, but in the long run it only creates a deeper desire and capacity for sex, which will lead to more masturbation. If you let yourself become enslaved to a sexual high, you will find that you need to go to increasingly extreme acts to maintain the same degree of excitement. There are even ungodly sex therapists who recommend masturbation as a way of increasing sexual desire, not lessening it. This creates a vicious circle, like the junkie who craves a "fix," but is only temporarily satisfied. The more he indulges in his dependency, the more ensnared by addiction he becomes. This is the nature of all sin. That is why Jesus declared that all who sin become a slave to sin (John 8:34).

Furthermore, masturbation usually involves fantasy, visualization, and often pornography. The Bible is very clear as to what God expects of us in these areas of fantasy and lust. It teaches that we must not look lustfully at each other and nor should we behave in such a manner as to entice others to lust after us.

"I made a covenant with my eyes not to look with lust upon a girl. I know full well that the Almighty God sends calamity on those who do" (Job 31:1-3, The Living Bible).

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5:28).

While the above verses refer to men lusting after women, all women know that it can very easily be reversed to apply to themselves as well. Men may be more easily visually stimulated than women, but women can be just as vulnerable to sexual fantasy in the emotional realm. Both are sin in God's eyes, and both can be brought into subjection by controlling our thoughts through Christ's power.

All sexual immorality begins with a thought. A lustful thought not taken captive, will eventually lead to other perversions, because sin reproduces itself in increasingly greater measures. If we do not deal with our evil thoughts, they will take root in our heart.

It is for this reason that God is so concerned with our thought life. Jesus came not only to deliver us from our "outward" sins, but also from wickedness that begins in the heart.
---------
I do really believed that being a saint is hard job or at least just being good. IMHO..I rather commit sin doing masturbation done to cheat on my man. I think its more sin to have sex with someone while your SO is away.Being unfaithful is unacceptable for me.Im just human,all of us.So we have a choice right. For me since Im away from my man at the moment I rather to masturbate,fantasize him(my Man) alone,reminiscing all our good times we done before,that way I satisfy my human/sexual needs without harm and without fornication.Just my thought..Isn't there's a saying *All Forbidden are good* :D
 
The last time I struck a person in anger was in the 2nd grade. I'm still ashamed of myself. I am usually able to defuse potentially explosive situatios with wit or wisecracks.

I treat people the way I wish to be treated, even in business. Sometimes that leads to me being walked on by people who aren't so nice. But as I get older I'm learning to avoid situations where people can take advantage of me.

I'm not a spiritual person. I meditate. I read about and study comparative religions. But I've never felt a need to become spiritual.

My wife was raised an Advent Christian. They are a Southern sect that thinks the Southern Baptists are a bunch of pussies. She tells me that when she was 8 years old she realized that what they were telling her was bullshit. It took her till her mid-20's to escape the South and come north by herself with no job, no prospects and very little money. She is a tiny little thing with a little-girl's voice and long beautiful blonde hair. Her problem for her whole life was that people wrote her off as inconsequential - including (especially) her parents.
When my boss of the time offered her a job, then pulled the offer back because of what were clearly sexist reasons, she pratcially cut his balls off. He quickly learned never to cross her. I met her on the job, and a year later we were married.

She is a very spiritual person. She dabbled in new age stuff back in the '70s. But she has internalized her spirituality. She practices yogo every day. She reads and she reads and she reads: she claims to have a phobia of some sort that requires her to read a minimum of 500 pages a week. She usually goes far beyond that. Mostly she reads non-fiction: women's issues; spiritual quests; politics; quilting; religion (she knows Bishop Spong); anti-war stuff (she is a friend of Mike Berg, whose son was beheaded in Iraq a while back).

So my wife is the true family activist. She marches on Washington, maintains an anti-war website (and has done so since well before the war); she is a vegetarian; she has friends who are Koreans, Germans, Indian. I'm pretty much her support system.

I bring to the table a good grasp of history (I was a history major in college) along with being well read in a few subjects that interest me.

Oh, and I play a 1967 Martin D12-28. It's a beaut.
 
thebullet said:
The last time I struck a person in anger was in the 2nd grade. I'm still ashamed of myself. I am usually able to defuse potentially explosive situatios with wit or wisecracks.

I treat people the way I wish to be treated, even in business. Sometimes that leads to me being walked on by people who aren't so nice. But as I get older I'm learning to avoid situations where people can take advantage of me.

I'm not a spiritual person. I meditate. I read about and study comparative religions. But I've never felt a need to become spiritual.

My wife was raised an Advent Christian. They are a Southern sect that thinks the Southern Baptists are a bunch of pussies. She tells me that when she was 8 years old she realized that what they were telling her was bullshit. It took her till her mid-20's to escape the South and come north by herself with no job, no prospects and very little money. She is a tiny little thing with a little-girl's voice and long beautiful blonde hair. Her problem for her whole life was that people wrote her off as inconsequential - including (especially) her parents.
When my boss of the time offered her a job, then pulled the offer back because of what were clearly sexist reasons, she pratcially cut his balls off. He quickly learned never to cross her. I met her on the job, and a year later we were married.

She is a very spiritual person. She dabbled in new age stuff back in the '70s. But she has internalized her spirituality. She practices yogo every day. She reads and she reads and she reads: she claims to have a phobia of some sort that requires her to read a minimum of 500 pages a week. She usually goes far beyond that. Mostly she reads non-fiction: women's issues; spiritual quests; politics; quilting; religion (she knows Bishop Spong); anti-war stuff (she is a friend of Mike Berg, whose son was beheaded in Iraq a while back).

So my wife is the true family activist. She marches on Washington, maintains an anti-war website (and has done so since well before the war); she is a vegetarian; she has friends who are Koreans, Germans, Indian. I'm pretty much her support system.

I bring to the table a good grasp of history (I was a history major in college) along with being well read in a few subjects that interest me.

Oh, and I play a 1967 Martin D12-28. It's a beaut.

Bullet,

I as well study history. I have been called a warrior by one we both recognise. (The Indian Maiden) I have struck out, not in anger but in defense of others. (You too have read my posts and so know me.)

My wife was raised by Southern Baptists. She is no longer accepted by her family because she chose me over them. She has learned from me, she has learned my world view as well as my view on life. She has mt the few people I consider friends, from all over the world, including the family of my first wife. (Who love her dearly.)

I bring to the table a love of history as well as an enjoyment of religeon. I enjoy seeing how people screw each other over, and how nothing in this world is truly new. (Isn't it a shame we cant learn?)

Cat
 
Wow, Virgin_Not - you write beautifully, your avitar is fabulous, and yet you write of all these restictions built into your church's view of sexuality. Very interesting...

I was a regular church goer up until the last Sunday before I went to college (after that, all bets were off), and I can honestly say that I have no idea what stance my church (Methodists) took on sex. None, far as I can tell.

I ran off at the mouth on my first post, talking about the evolution of symbolic logic and abstract thought. But the Eagles were on, fucking away another loss, and I had to run to the store for my wife (yes, Virginia, I am pussy whipped), so I forgot to add something that I had intended to include in that little diatribe.

Pair bonding. That has had a great deal of influence on human evolution. Early men were hunter/gatherers. Almost certainly males hunted and females gathered. Sometime in the very early history of Homo, the species invented pair bonding (they were neither the first nor the last species to do so). What did pair bonding buy its participants?

For the female it assured her that she would be included in the splitting of the hunt. It gave her a particular male to protect her children, one who probably even had a genetic reason to do so. For the male it gave him ready and year round access to a female sex partner, one who would accept his genes for reproduction (maybe).

Other primates had totally different sexual mores. Often the male was far larger than the female and the males fought over harems, as is the case in many mammals. Bonobos have developed a sex as negotiating tactic culture where all members of the society regularly have sex with all the other members of the society, regardless of sex and age.

But pair bonding was Homos solution. And it was an extremely successful one. Then, suddenly and without apparant cause, there grew a group of semi-related religions that looked at sex as an evil. The very thing that was developed by our ancestors to hold our families together and keep a couple happy was suddenly considered to be somehow sinful.

The sex for procreation crowd are control freaks. They try to control their congregations in a lot of other ways as well. By labeling sex sinful and dirty, even married sex, they gain an additional measure of control over their congregants.

Virgin_Not: the Catholics are the craziest of all. Sex for procreation only: birth control is a sin; and yet many catholic countries are overflowing with too many people, many of whom are wallowing in poverty.

Do you notice some kind of irony there, Virgin_Not?

My point, if I remember it, is: Sex is something that was used by our ancestors to make our family lives enjoyable and fullfilling. If sex should be for procreation only, Homo females would come into heat just once a year or so. Instead, Homo females are sexually receptive year-round.

It doesn't square with what the churches teach, does it.

No wonder they hate evolution. It makes them look like fools.
 
thebullet said:
Virgin_Not: the Catholics are the craziest of all. Sex for procreation only: birth control is a sin; and yet many catholic countries are overflowing with too many people, many of whom are wallowing in poverty.

Do you notice some kind of irony there, Virgin_Not?

My point, if I remember it, is: Sex is something that was used by our ancestors to make our family lives enjoyable and fullfilling. If sex should be for procreation only, Homo females would come into heat just once a year or so. Instead, Homo females are sexually receptive year-round.

It doesn't square with what the churches teach, does it.

No wonder they hate evolution. It makes them look like fools.

Well..its not just catholic are craziest..we have our own beliefs. Most of us are having the same bible..it says there *go and Multiply* birth control is a sin too..geez..I can't understand really too.I myself is confused with those rules.Poverty is all over my country..Like I said depends on people's choice.How they will take the pros and cons.

If Im gonna follow all the rules in the bible..definitely i'll be ended up in an mental asylum..lol.. Though Im not saying I dont really live my life according to bible. As long as Im not doing harm to people.Ill do whatever I want to do to satisfy my sexual needs..plus there's a confession booth always ready anyway..so Father forgve me for I have sinned..there again..Im free to have sins again..back to my masturbation world..lol.. Isnt vanity is most people's fav. sin??
 
plus there's a confession booth always ready anyway
The other day I saw an amusing little movie starring Kevin Kline and Tracy Ullman called I Love you To Death. Kline played a pizza restaurant and apartment owner who cheated on his wife daily.

There is a scene in the confession booth where Kline is trying to remember how many women he screwed that week that was truly hilarious.

When his wife found out she hired some total goof-offs to kill her husband. They shot him in the head (among other things) and he complained of a pretty bad headache. When he was told by the police that his wife had tried to kill him, he refused to press charges, saying that he deserved it and the couple reconciled.

Unbelivably, this movie was based on a true story. It actually happened.

Sorry for the off-topic vignette. I just was remembering that scene in the confessional.
 
thebullet said:
The other day I saw an amusing little movie starring Kevin Kline and Tracy Ullman called I Love you To Death. Kline played a pizza restaurant and apartment owner who cheated on his wife daily.

There is a scene in the confession booth where Kline is trying to remember how many women he screwed that week that was truly hilarious.


Unbelivably, this movie was based on a true story. It actually happened.

Sorry for the off-topic vignette. I just was remembering that scene in the confessional.

Yes..I've seen that movie and it was funny and movie is not bad..don't apologized to me..Apologize to the creator of this thread cause right now we theadjacking his thread :D *Threadjacking is a sin* ;)
 
virgin_not said:
Yes..I've seen that movie and it was funny and movie is not bad..don't apologized to me..Apologize to the creator of this thread cause right now we theadjacking his thread :D *Threadjacking is a sin* ;)

In the case of this particular thread creator…I think he would find it terribly amusing :p

Having practically no knowledge of most practiced religions (or anything else of much importance lol) …and sadly, a child born into a world of ignorance and stereotypes…and hidden agenda, I bring nothing to the table and on top of that you'll have to excuse my layman terms and questions…

Mcopado ( ;) ) I have not had the opportunity to read the book you mentioned by Thomas Moore but I do remember, and I'm wondering if it is actually by him, an idea that resonated with me that pertained to this topic. It was about how, we had, through time, become a society that split the "eros" from our everyday lives and in doing so has lent/burdened sex the taboo status of which now it suffers; that while sex may be a private issue, the absolute lack of reconciliation with the totality of life may lead to even monstrous manifestations.

So my question here is...and bear with me, for those not yet used to my nonsensical "waffling".

If I were to put a label on me from what there is available I would stick Atheist on my forehead…but it still makes me wonder, and worry…does that mean humans, have the end word on …morality? Sexual or otherwise?
And how do you impose limitations of morality of sex...if it is an individual choice?

Here's closest I can come up with in terms that I understand...and in no uncertain terms I guess it's pretty much what you've been saying all this time, Revvy :)

The Buddhists adopt what they call a STRICT ethic code when it comes to sexuality…but it is not a REPRESSIVE ethic.

The first 3 of the 5 precept of Buddhism are basically:

1. Refraining from harming living beings/practising loving kindness
2. Refraining from taking the non-given/practising generosity
3. Refraining from committing sexual misconduct/practising contentment

Encompassed within these three precepts are the concept that should lead you to establishing your own moral sexual code, emphasizing that good sexual conduct is basically the same as good social conduct…the practice of generosity, kindness, and respect. In the second and third precept, sexual misconduct can be construed as practice that involves that which is not given freely, involves deceit, conduct that involves violence or manipulation that will ultimately lead to suffering by a party.

As there are no commandments in Buddhism, these are regarded as individual interpretations and responsibilities, the based on the belief that "Moral judgement is never a question of blindly applying a rule."


So from my personal standpoint… based on the Buddhist view I've been given a pretty big scope of what is sexually moral…

But there is one last …mmm, guideline, and I think this is really the icing on the cake:

Whatever your choice of sexual undertaking...you must honour it.
Should you take a vow of celibacy, abstain! If you have entered into a monogamous relationship, you should only participate in sex within the confines of that relationship. Otherwise, what is it if not deceit? Beginning with the deceiving of yourself.

I once read somewhere, quote by a meditation teacher about sex that I wish I could tattoo on my own sexual moral code; "there's nothing wrong with dancing lightly with your desires, so long as both can hear the music and all hearts are open."

And so I go forth, hoping that I have the insight of mind and heart to make the right judgement but sometimes I still have to wonder…could this really be the last word??
 
Well, Asian Princess: you begin by beating your breast with a mea culpa of ignorance and repression, then proceed to give us an educated and thoughtful analysis of the Budhist interpretation of how to live a life (and by extention, how to handle one's sexuality.)

Robert Heinlein was very interested in sexuality in his later years (probably because he couldn't get it up, if you know what I mean). His characters lived lives of unrestrained senusousness within the confines of their bonded group (for the most part). And the group was whatever they chose it to be. And within the group, anything went, including incest, homosexuality, whatever (and his stories wouldn't have been allowed on Literotica, because sex with teenagers was okay by him).

Heinlein also maintained that the masses have their mores and that's fine - who really is that concerned about 'the masses' anyway? The outstanding members of society, especially the geniuses, make their own mores, including sexual mores. A true genius lives his life by his own standards and doesn't concern himself with how his standards compare to those of the great unwashed.

Yeah, Heinlein was getting pretty elitist in his old age, IMHO.

I hadn't really thought about it much until now, but my little 'universe' that I created in two continuing stories (Death by Fucking and Tales of the eKids) established a totally different set of mores, even though my protagonists were all geniuses. I posited a universe where bonding becomes permanent and irrefutable. Where 'marriage' occurs at the molecular level. Where such a thing as 'cheating' is impossible to contemplate because the totality of the sexual experience is so intense and so fullfilling with one's partners due to the deepness of the bond, that sex outside the relationship would essentially be a waste of time.

I made this bonding as part of the next evolutionary phase of Homo, one of the 'improvements', if you will, in the new species over the old.

Homo sapiens were evolved to be one way and then created societies totally contradictory to the evolutionary experience. We are very square pegs trying to fit into very round holes. The result is obvious: war, violence, pressure, unhappiness with one's position, tendency toward dependancies and self-gratification.

The most secure and content peoples on earth are those that still maintain the hunter/gatherer lifestyle. They work short hours; they have pier groups that are peaceful and loving for the most part; they live in harmony with nature. Life is often very good for them. For an example, refer to the Bushmen of the Kalarhari Desert.

When I wrote about an evolutionary upgrade to Homo, one of the things I shot for was the ability to be content within the society in which one lived. That required most of all a strongly bonded sexual/emotional support group. Contentment within ones personal life made living in the outside world far easier to bear.

Let's face it, the stuff I wrote is the most white bread of sexual matter on literotica. So far there have been 29 chapters, and still no incest, no cheating, no child porn, no BDSM. Plenty of sex, but all of it within the moral universe that the characters have created.

Hey, this isn't an advertisement for my stories. The subject matter just fit into what we are discussing.
 
asian_princess said:
The Buddhists adopt what they call a STRICT ethic code when it comes to sexuality…but it is not a REPRESSIVE ethic.

The first 3 of the 5 precept of Buddhism are basically:

1. Refraining from harming living beings/practising loving kindness
2. Refraining from taking the non-given/practising generosity
3. Refraining from committing sexual misconduct/practising contentment

Encompassed within these three precepts are the concept that should lead you to establishing your own moral sexual code, emphasizing that good sexual conduct is basically the same as good social conduct…the practice of generosity, kindness, and respect. In the second and third precept, sexual misconduct can be construed as practice that involves that which is not given freely, involves deceit, conduct that involves violence or manipulation that will ultimately lead to suffering by a party.

As there are no commandments in Buddhism, these are regarded as individual interpretations and responsibilities, the based on the belief that "Moral judgement is never a question of blindly applying a rule."


So from my personal standpoint… based on the Buddhist view I've been given a pretty big scope of what is sexually moral…

But there is one last …mmm, guideline, and I think this is really the icing on the cake:

Whatever your choice of sexual undertaking...you must honour it.
Should you take a vow of celibacy, abstain! If you have entered into a monogamous relationship, you should only participate in sex within the confines of that relationship. Otherwise, what is it if not deceit? Beginning with the deceiving of yourself.
I once read somewhere, quote by a meditation teacher about sex that I wish I could tattoo on my own sexual moral code; "there's nothing wrong with dancing lightly with your desires, so long as both can hear the music and all hearts are open."

I could swoon, or at least dance the dance of desire from the wonderfully heady, insightful, heartfelt, and nonjudgemental exchange so far, in a few hours this thread has existed...

And between sea cat and bullets prolific output of stories I wonder if I'll ever have time to work on my own humble forays into erotic shorts stories, as I will be glued to my screen for the next few days just reading your wonderful work. (From what little I've managed to taste of the story Sea's currently working on, I'm already hooked- he did me the honor of sending me the first 2 chapters, thanks mate!)

(Not to leave you out dear Princess, you produce delights that don't require the eyes, but simply a working set of ears, a dark room...and perhaps even a towel ;) )

There is so much I want to respond to from all of you...Would that we could all pull up a chair in some pub for an evening of discourse and draughts of our favorite beer. (Since I started reading Sea Cat's latest opus my mind has drifted back to what has to be my favorite watering hole in all the universe- Alabama Jack's in Card Sound...with bottles of Key West Ale and a plate of Conch Fritters, and a discussion of my two favorite subjects Spirituality and Sex, God and Garter Belts...mmmm HEAVEN.)

But before I get accused of hijacking my own thread :) I will take a nod to being a gentleman and respond to the ladie's first...

Princess, I believe you have summed up the what should be the moral benchmark to live our lives... Harm no one & Give to yourself fully partner/partners...

[
U]Whatever your choice of sexual undertaking...you must honour it.[/U]
Should you take a vow of celibacy, abstain! If you have entered into a monogamous relationship, you should only participate in sex within the confines of that relationship. Otherwise, what is it if not deceit? Beginning with the deceiving of yourself.

This rings the biggest bell of agreement with me, not just about sex, but how we live our lives....I'm reminded of Sea Cat's confession (Can't recall if it was private to me or in his early post-I won't dare violate any confidences if it was private) but it dealt with having a moral code whether it was conventional or otherwise.



Whatever your choices you must honour them... Otherwise, what is it if not deceit? Beginning with the deceiving of yourself.

Know thyself, accept thyself, and treat thyself and others, with dignity, honor and respect...

OOOPs, I must do some work..I must duck out and take care of some family business. I will return- (Order me another beer!)
 
Last edited:
mcopado said:
... God and Garter Belts...mmmm HEAVEN.)..

God in garter belts??? I KNEW she was a woman...oh wait...God AND Garter Belts...ok. hehe move along, nothing to see here :rolleyes:
 
SeaCat said:
Bullet,
I have struck out, not in anger but in defense of others.
Cat

But is that not one of the noblest- most morally sound reasons for violence/taking a life, in defense of those who need our protection? I know that is the only way I would ever consider harming or killing another...Not for fun, not for propert, not to further my agenda, but to protect those who are dear to me...

It is the true code of the warrior...(Not the tin soldier)...But the true Warrior. Robert Bly and others of the Men's Movement make the distinction.
 
mcopado said:
and a discussion of my two favorite subjects Spirituality and Sex, God and Garter Belts...mmmm HEAVEN.)
QUOTE]


Hmm..There's a meaning on that Garter Belts..lol..I know there is a reason why women wearing garter Belts..hmm..lemme get back to you..I have to review my theology notes about this...Im pretty sure we had discussed this matter when I was still in college..lol ;)
 
Whatever your choice of sexual undertaking...you must honour it.
Should you take a vow of celibacy, abstain! If you have entered into a monogamous relationship, you should only participate in sex within the confines of that relationship. Otherwise, what is it if not deceit? Beginning with the deceiving of yourself.
You picked up the key line in what Asian Princess wrote, IMHO. Choose your principals and live by them. With your partners: give them the respect and love they deserve. And treat them as you would be treated.

But mostly, define your principals and stick to them. It's really not that hard. One becomes committed to the right as one defines the right.

In my personal experience, I had what can only be described as a run of unbelievable luck a number of years ago: I was propositioned by 5 different women I knew within about two days. One was a twenty year old virgin. She was totally delightful, bouncy: perky I guess is the word. Who understands the mind of a woman? She had chosen me to be the one to take her virginity. At the same time the wife of my business partner also propositioned me: he was a very proper but stodgy stick-in-the-mud, and I was definately the party type. She was a very sophisticated beauty. A couple of other girls I knew came on to me at the same time.

Talk about an embarrasment of riches! But you know what? I turned them all down, hopefully gratefully, hopefully gracefully. Geez, I was a married man. I figured if I could weather that storm, I could weather any damn thing. Been with my wife for 29 years and have been totally faithful.

But geez, if Jimmy Carter was right, I'm guilty as sin.
 
thebullet said:
In my personal experience, I had what can only be described as a run of unbelievable luck a number of years ago: I was propositioned by 5 different women I knew within about two days. One was a twenty year old virgin. She was totally delightful, bouncy: perky I guess is the word. Who understands the mind of a woman? She had chosen me to be the one to take her virginity. At the same time the wife of my business partner also propositioned me: he was a very proper but stodgy stick-in-the-mud, and I was definately the party type. She was a very sophisticated beauty. A couple of other girls I knew came on to me at the same time.

Talk about an embarrasment of riches! But you know what? I turned them all down, hopefully gratefully, hopefully gracefully. Geez, I was a married man. I figured if I could weather that storm, I could weather any damn thing. Been with my wife for 29 years and have been totally faithful.

But geez, if Jimmy Carter was right, I'm guilty as sin.


Wow..for that I admire you..*hail* to you for being strong enough to say *NO* to tempataions..your one of a kind and yur wife is sure thing lucky;)

The choiced you made is definitely right..maybe if you tempt to go and take the proposition of any of those women...you'll have pleasure and would enjoy it one time but karma is you never know..what will the cost of those act,right? So Good choice dude! ;)
 
virgin_not said:
mcopado said:
and a discussion of my two favorite subjects Spirituality and Sex, God and Garter Belts...mmmm HEAVEN.)
QUOTE]


Hmm..There's a meaning on that Garter Belts..lol..I know there is a reason why women wearing garter Belts..hmm..lemme get back to you..I have to review my theology notes about this...Im pretty sure we had discussed this matter when I was still in college..lol ;)



OOOOHH the metaphysics of garterbelts, they didn't teach me that in seminary...You've got me excited! :nana:

but don't forget the beer (definitely the beer) and food definitely food...Conch Fritters...mmmmmmmm

12 :rose: 's for you.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top