Good post Yabby,

No doubt the brain itself is conditioned for pleasure too, via target-branching of the neurons and neurochemicals. I wonder how many misters and partners would give-up sex, after the wide has passed menapause?

From a gene's perspective, of course, we need to have the species [conduit shell] survive. From our own perspective, we enjoy our hormones and orgasms. Kids are great, but it is not the only fair journey for our sex organs. Enjoying sex is natural, that is the idea.

Post Script: "These feet were made for walkin'", but they can dance too. [metaphorically speaking]

Ya, and you can get athletes foot too. Be careful where and with whom you dance. :-)

Yabby, How many times? Not many (largely due to bad luck!) but enough for you to make your point. But, it was not an ideal thing to do, as it involved me in a pretence that sex is not all that it is.

But, I’m not talking about me here. Neither am I lawmaking.

Yes, I think we are higher than our ancestors. I know we are still beasts – not a put down, I just mean visceral, muscular, bloody, chemical etc. But, we are more as well. While my evolutionary forebears help me to understand myself, I do not regard them as role models. I am capable of more understanding than they. I can do better, so I think I should.

Robert, I have to admire your candour, thank you. My own life enables me to understand a good deal of what you say. (For example, a counsellor revealed to me that one of the reasons I am tactile towards others is that, by touching them, I am incidentally touched myself.) Also, I am conscious that people with strait-laced views like the ones I’m describing have been very hard hearted, even ruthless, when dealing with people they see as having “strayed from the straight and narrow”.

It’s hard for a Christian talking about sex to avoid sounding like a hanging judge. I’ve tried, but I might have failed. I actually believe that God would prefer that we have a great life, and that The Rules are designed to encourage this, not block it.

The only “Jesus episode” that relates directly to sexual ethics is the occasion when he stopped the people stoning the woman who’d committed “adultery”. He was both –

i) extremely tender in his handling of her; and

ii) very clear that what she had done was wrong.

Both.

Many of us are starving for affection and human warmth, and I know it’s tempting to see sex as a shortcut. I’m not trying to throw stones, and I’m really sorry if it seems that I am, I’m just saying sex is not a shortcut to love.

Pax,

goodthief, no offence taken, your approach to discussion is a refreshing change from what I've become used to from some of our more "CHRISTIAN" posters.

I'm largely in agreement with you, I don't think that prostitution is an ideal solution or a genuine substitute for relationships based on love, care etc. My point is that for some people it's the best they can get and I don't consider it appropriate for society to try and deny them that.

If we want to intefere then it should be in the areas of ensuring the transaction is as safe as possible for all concerned, doing our best to ensure that participants have better options available to them and minimising the impacts on those not involved.

R0bert

aqvarivs,

I walked into that one ;-).

Actually, I wasn't promoting frequent trips to the gym. Rather, I was suggesting sex even with an exclusibe partner is more than having children. Both are important. Not promoting promiscuity.

O.