Religous Viewas on Masterbation?

[El_Machinae]

Ah, but there is a difference between risking your life for someone else, and ending it for someone else. If they both have an actual effect, and do indeed save lives, then I believe they are both moral; but that is not to say they are the same.

Man, if I interpose my body between a madman with a gun and a crowd (ready to die) - I think that the act was equally loving whether I was shot or not.

But that's just me. I see jumping on a grenade as the ultimate act of love that Jesus spoke about - whether or not the grenade goes off. Jumping on a grenade is merely a risk, no matter how you slice it.

But, I don't want to bicker over semantics!

PS: being moral is HIGHLY logical. Especially if you have views of life like mine.

 

[silver 2039]

It's not as if the sperm just waits around in there until we're ready to use it, it dies after like three days (if I remember Bio class correctly), whether it's inside or outside of you body- or someone else's.

Thats an excellent point actually! Its true the sperm is not utilized regardless of weather one masterbates or doesn't mastebate, plus in intercourse millions of sperm are realeased and only one is utilized.

(And I'm wondering why Silver was reading the Wiki article on masturbation....)

I was looking for new masterbation techinques to increase my pleasure and my eye wandered to the religous views and I was frankly stunned and the prudish nataure many of the monotehistic religons have in regards to masterbation.

 

[Luckymoose]

I was looking for new masterbation techinques to increase my pleasure

I seen a website devoited to that.Most of the stuff accually works.

 

[Sidhe]

Yeah, interesting stuff Silver. This is what I was hinting at when I quoted Monty Python's "Every Sperm is Sacred" in another thread.

As for the view that masturbation can lead higher spirituality, they are dead right. Just a few nights ago I saw the light and attained nirvana whilst spanking the monkey

Liar if it involved desire and not pure masturbation in a non sexual context I fail to see how you could attain Nirvana, but hey your the expert I'm all ears

I can see how in a primitive society these laws could come about, and would acknowledge that sex is way better for healthy communities than masturbation, but in a modern context it's somewhat redundant in countries that have large viable populations. Or if they have access to science one of the two.

EDIT: wasn't Diogene the alcaholic barrel dweller, I can see why masturbation would have been a personal favourite, I wonder if he was none to popular with the ladies

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

As for the view that masturbation can lead higher spirituality, they are dead right. Just a few nights ago I saw the light and attained nirvana whilst spanking the monkey

I knew all that flirting with you on the Girls and Civ thread would go to your head.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

They're seen as potential people, though. And even though people die all the time, it's wrong to intentionally kill them.

I don't support the position that sperm are people, but I've seen the argument.

I don't think they knew that back in the day, when they made rules like this. Sperm is relatively new discovery (150 years, whenever they made the microscope), as is the idea that it could cause impregnation. Of course, so is my argument against it.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I knew all that flirting with you on the Girls and Civ thread would go to your head.

The question is: which one?

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

The question is: which one?

Hence the ' '

 

[warpus]

If God didn't want us to masturbate he wouldn't have made it this fun.

In fact, I am masturbating as we speak.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

As far as masturbation in Mormonism, we don't really make a big deal of it. Yes, it is a sin to engage in sexual activity outside of marriage with one's spouse, and to make just the physically pleasurable part of sex an end in itself, but we don't hound on it, as far as I know. Maybe if I ever had masturbated I would have a better idea. But it doesn't at any rate strike me that the church would encourage anyone to be ashamed of it. Avoid it by avoiding temptation, but if you do it, repent and move on.

And not masturbating doesn't save sperm; I can guarantee its ultimate fate is the same.

In fact, I am masturbating as we speak.

Masturbating to CFC OT has to avoid lust, so I'm sure it's fine?

 

[Elrohir]

Man, if I interpose my body between a madman with a gun and a crowd (ready to die) - I think that the act was equally loving whether I was shot or not.

But that's just me. I see jumping on a grenade as the ultimate act of love that Jesus spoke about - whether or not the grenade goes off. Jumping on a grenade is merely a risk, no matter how you slice it.

But, I don't want to bicker over semantics!

PS: being moral is HIGHLY logical. Especially if you have views of life like mine.

I agree, they are equally loving acts. But I believe there is a difference between, say, jumping into a flooded river to save someone (Risking your life) and, say, setting off a grenade and holding it to kill a madman who was about to go kill others. I don't say one is more moral than the other, but they are different - but you're right, this is semantics.

 

[puglover]

In a law code for the Puritan colony of New Haven in the 17th century blasphemers, homosexuals and masturbators were eligible for the death penalty.

This is so dumb. New Haven Puritans don't represent all of Protestantism.

Personally, I think masturbation is a healthy activity when controlled, but it can easily become an unhealthy practice (when using impure thoughts)

 

[Kyriakos]

"Impure thoughts", "if i ever had masturbated"... This is a bit medieval, to say the least.
As for morality: it is not equal to the concept of sin. Some type of morality existed in all societies, whereas the concept of sin mentioned here is characteristically of the judaic tradition. Secondly it is a set of rules, for those who for whatever reason need rules so as to avoid acting in manners which would inevitably make them unpleasant to others. No sensitive person would agree with behaviors that would lead to hurting someone, but no logical person would seek a set of rules so as to avoid such an outcome of his actions.
The sexual drive, and also the sensitivity of the nerves to sexual arousal, is there for biological reasons. Man was not expected by anyone to be able to develop as complicated ways of thinking, and moreover from a biological viewpoint the ensuring of survival of the species (which happens by sex) is infinitely more important than anything else. This is why there had to be biological safelocks in place, to ensure that sex would remain to be seen as a goal. Enter the church, with its braindead views about anything, and now a pleasant human ability is seen as something to struggle against. However if one did not want to be involved with sex or masturbation he could decide not to; the dogma on the other hand is about enforcing a rule against it, and regulating it.
The reason for the support of such a regulation was/is the various fears, dissapointments, frustrations of those who come to accept it. Only that in reality that religiou stance was not created with them in mind, but just found someone of credentials to accept it by tricking himself into thinking that his own negative issues were prophesised of in a book of a historically backward and weak ancient culture.
It is no wonder that christianity found followers in the weak/poor/miserable/ill. They were sufficiently in despair by the time it reached them so as to view it as a final hope of managing to keep on living. Sadly this was just that: a final hope, and not a solution to what had lead to their state in the first place.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

You have basically said, "masturbation is not wrong, because Christianity is". That may or may not be true but it hardly sheds light on the issue. I see sexuality as an inherently good thing, but one that can easily become perverted to cause problems, so it is important to treat it with care. And as far as I know, I am the only person here who has never masturbated - that is due as much to my inherent squeamishness as morality.

And out of curiousity, why do you think a religion would come up with rules so antithetical to human nature, as you see it? It couldn't be just out of spite.

 

[Methos]

On a Christian nudist forum I read about a Christian who believed masturbation was not a sin if, and only if, you were thinking about your spouse while doing it. He even discussed certain instruments he used. I found it very odd to read, and noticed that none of the other Christian nudist ever replied to him.

BTW, I am not a nudist, but when I came across it [Christian nudist] I found it rather interesting as to their beliefs.

 

[Rambuchan]

I knew all that flirting with you on the Girls and Civ thread would go to your head.

Oh man, that one hurts.




I deny everything.

The question is: which one?

Ahem. No commment. Please remember, thread topic, not poster's appendage.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

On a Christian nudist forum I read about a Christian who believed masturbation was not a sin if, and only if, you were thinking about your spouse while doing it.

That actually makes some sense. Jesus said that looking on a woman to lust after her was adultery, but obviously if it your wife it doesn't count. I imagine that nude pictures of one's wife would not count as pornography, either.

 

[ironduck]

But, interestingly enough, while the Bible goes into detail in saying that adultery, homosexuality, and even lust are all sexual sins, masturbation isn't actually mentioned anywhere.

In that case how is one supposed to make babies without sinning?

 

[ironduck]

That actually makes some sense. Jesus said that looking on a woman to lust after her was adultery, but obviously if it your wife it doesn't count. I imagine that nude pictures of one's wife would not count as pornography, either.

Main Entry: por·nog·ra·phy
Pronunciation: -fE
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek pornographos, adjective, writing about prostitutes, from pornE prostitute + graphein to write; akin to Greek pernanai to sell, poros journey -- more at FARE, CARVE
1 : the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2 : material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3 : the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction <the pornography of violence>

How can you possibly say that pictures of someone's spouse is not pornography if it's a depiction intended to cause sexual arousal and would be considered pornographic had it been of any other person?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

In that case how is one supposed to make babies without sinning?

You can procreate, but you best not enjoy it!

(Actually, I think he meant lust directed towards someone else if you are married. Having pleasurable sex is okay, just read Song of Solomon. All they do is talk about sex - God doesn't even rate a mention - and the Jews still canonized it, so it must be okay.)