Why do most Religions say that sex is bad?

Click here for more information.

guilt is a prime motivater at the collection plate

its a sin to eat pine cones ...
have you been eating pine cones? no.......
now anty up!
naw ..I haven't eaten any pine cones

PIE is bad!
have you been eating pie......?....well. ...yyyyeeesss....
PAY PIG..now ante up!!!!
OK .....
I have been eating pie, but I don't want to burn in HELLL ( Ice cold women, Red hot beer)

It doesn't say sex is bad, just running around and screwing everything in sight is bad, oh and basically that puts one on the same par as monkeys.

You need to think about what life was like back in the early days. It wasn't people going to bars picking up something for a night of fun, it was rape and incest as the norm, and it wasn't limited to women either. Men, boys, girls, women were all equally acceptable and equally at risk any given day.

When you look at the bible it doesn't really say homosexuality is wrong it says man laying with man is wrong. Back then that meant mostly a heterosexual male raping a boy, or goat , or whatever he could. It didn't mean two homosexual males in a loving relationship.

we are on the same par as monkeys:

The bonobo is popularly known for its high levels of sexual behavior. Sex functions in conflict appeasement, affection, social status, excitement, and stress reduction. It occurs in virtually all partner combinations and in a variety of positions. This is a factor in the lower levels of aggression seen in the bonobo when compared to the common chimpanzee and other apes. Bonobos are perceived to be matriarchal; females tend to collectively dominate males by forming alliances and use sexuality to control males. A male's rank in the social hierarchy is often determined by his mother's rank.en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Blaine91555


Every child deserves to be held on their daddy's lap and called "daddy's little princess or little man".

I know, I speak from having not had a father that could claim me.

I lost 1/2 of my heritage and that is what TPTB want...........it is a conspiracy.

You break up the family unit and you destroy humanity's strongest union.

Casual sex, producing children, divorce, children in one parent households will be the downfall of our society.

WTFU................

And abortion is murder.

We need to go back to sound for the children principles.

Currently we are "for ourselves, our own immediate gratification, hedonistic, selfish, service to self.

And mark my words, that will be the downfall of humanity.

Originally posted by albertabound
This really confuses me. Sex is not a "desire", it is a necessary biological function. There is a theory that celibacy, or at the very least, forced sexual limitation, causes Neurosis (can't find the link, will post later). This would definitely explain why there is so much Pedophilia in the Catholic Church. It would explain what would drive someone to commit a suicide bombing, light themselves on fire, etc. And the evidence isn't just in religious radicals - people who commit cruel, extreme crimes are, 9 times out of 10, sexually frustrated.

I know a few girls who some would refer to as "sluts", and they are the most open minded, kind people I know. Come on, people, anybody who has had sex (with someone you care about (does NOT have to be a relationship, it can be a friend, too) is one of the best, if not the best feelings on Earth). And the people who judge them are those who limit themselves sexually for the sake of not going to "hell" and other wise tales; they are the most judgmental people I have ever known, and there are a lot of them. And, I'm sorry, but most of them are religious, either full time or causally. I thought one of the fundamental aspects of Religion was not to judge others? Hmm.

Personally I think the agenda behind Religion is simple: scare people into not enjoying their lives. Keep them afraid of punishment from some above force, that may or may not exist, so they are always obedient and desirable, until we don't need them anymore.

What are your thoughts?

Easy answer. Religious beliefs of all kinds are fu^&ing insane. The whole "sex is bad" thing is just one more in a long list of ridiculous tenets, requirements, and generalized nuttery.

The mistake in trying to understand religions comes in when you try to apply rational thought processes like you did above. The way to understand religions is to SUSPEND critical thinking with the outer cortex of the brain and try to perceive the world only w/ the inner portions of the brain that govern basic survival instincts, flight-or-fight responses, knee-jerk reactionism, and other types of binary "black & white" forms of thinking.

If perceived in this light the "sex is bad" idea could be a behavioral adaptation to limiting a troop of hominids numbers during times of famine...although for the lion's share of human history bigger numbers were "better" most of the time.

However, I think it's just largely a means of recruitment into the cult. Think about...even the famously sexually repressed Puritans had a tendency to reproduce like rabbits...right? It was only a "sin" when it didn't happen in the strictly controlled and indoctrinated "light of god" or whatever. So long as man and woman take part in an orthodox ceremony, conducted by a religious leader of some type, and the offspring are properly indoctrined/baptised/circumcised/or initiated into the cult in some other way almost immediately upon birth...most religions say that it's OK to screw one another's brains out.

Likewise...is it any wonder why homosexuality is such a "sin"? IT DOESN'T PRODUCE ANY NEW "RECRUITS" TO MILK TITHES/TAXES/SOLDIERS FROM!! Same reason sodomy and oral is often considered a "sin" even between hetero couples. Quite simply...that hole doesn't produce more robots for the cult.

Remember...even though sex is so "immoral"...every religion on planet earth considers big families to be a "blessing".

Go figure.

Originally posted by Danbones
guilt is a prime motivater at the collection plate

its a sin to eat pine cones ...
have you been eating pine cones? no.......
now anty up!
naw ..I haven't eaten any pine cones

PIE is bad!
have you been eating pie......?....well. ...yyyyeeesss....
PAY PIG..now ante up!!!!
OK .....
I have been eating pie, but I don't want to burn in HELLL ( Ice cold women, Red hot beer)

Ah...interesting angle on the "guilt".

See my post above. I was thinking more along the lines of how the only sex that is "approved by God" is that which is destined to produce more little robots for the church.

But you bring up a good point w/ the guilt thing.

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

Every child deserves to be held on their daddy's lap and called "daddy's little princess or little man".

I know, I speak from having not had a father that could claim me.

I lost 1/2 of my heritage and that is what TPTB want...........it is a conspiracy.

You break up the family unit and you destroy humanity's strongest union.

Casual sex, producing children, divorce, children in one parent households will be the downfall of our society.

WTFU................

And abortion is murder.

We need to go back to sound for the children principles.

Currently we are "for ourselves, our own immediate gratification, hedonistic, selfish, service to self.

And mark my words, that will be the downfall of humanity.

Funny. I always thought religion was the downfall of humanity. You have to admit, it has pretty abysmal track record.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Right you are............because all religions have been corrupted, twisted and rewritten by greedy and nefarious men.

A new commandment I give unto you...................LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

If EVERYONE treated each other EXACTLY like they would want to be treated we would have a paradise on earth.

But, for now, our Creator isn't running the show. He is (for now) allowing the fallen ones to operate this principality.

The day will come when their rule will be over and there will be two sides of the fence........love |||||||| hate.

Which side you chose to stand on will determine your eternal fate.

I don't pretend to know the all of it. That's just the way I see it.

As far as sex being bad..............I've had sex with and without love.

Sex with someone you love is holy.

Sex with someone you don't even know is meaningless.

And what is love?



Has anyone else noticed that the more casual sex there is the higher the divorce rate and the more one parent households have gone up???????

It is the children that suffer when two people decide to bang each other without courting first.

Silly, laughable word, courting..............but if a girl honors herself, truly honors her body - she doesn't sell out because she is either pressured to put out or cannot control her horniness.......one can always satisfy themself without resorting to cheap, meaningless and casual sex.

Aren't humans suppose to be the "thinking" animal?

Most religions say sex is not bad, only when it's casual, like eating ice cream or taking a roller coaster ride.

Having casual sex compared to having sex with someone you truly love and are committed too - there is no comparison.

Don't know how to explain it better.

After having been married for 38 (almost 39 years) I couldn't go back to casual sex, it would, for me be meaningless - repulsive.

My husband and I are one soul in two bodies. Two hearts beating as one.

Safe journey.

Religions are very human institutions. There isn't one of them that doesn't counterbalance wisdom in one area with folly in another.

Sex is a problem for people and for religions because it is a powerful biological process with serious personal and social implications.

Sex never muddles along. People can be intellectually muddled and easily stifled but they are rarely sexually muddled and are sexually stifled only with great difficulty.

Religion says sex is bad because sex . . . is something that just doesn't behave the way Storybook God says that good little boys and girls should. Bad, bad, bad sex.

reply to post by ofhumandescent

The bonobo is popularly known for its high levels of sexual behavior. Sex functions in conflict appeasement, affection, social status, excitement, and stress reduction. It occurs in virtually all partner combinations and in a variety of positions. This is a factor in the lower levels of aggression seen in the bonobo when compared to the common chimpanzee and other apes. Bonobos are perceived to be matriarchal; females tend to collectively dominate males by forming alliances and use sexuality to control males. A male's rank in the social hierarchy is often determined by his mother's rank.

Source: en.wikipedia.org...


If men had more sex this would be a more peaceful world. Maybe the men who created religions knew that ...

Right you are............because all religions have been corrupted, twisted and rewritten by greedy and nefarious men.

You won't hear me argue against that.

But, for now, our Creator isn't running the show. He is (for now) allowing the fallen ones to operate this principality.

Agreed. The Rothschildes, Rockefellers, Warburgs, and Morgans are running the show.

Has anyone else noticed that the more casual sex there is the higher the divorce rate and the more one parent households have gone up???????

Yes, but remember..."correlation does not equal causation". It's chief tenet of the philosophy, logic, mathematics, and the sciences. In order to establish with even reasonable certainty that there is a causation or causal corollary you have to also illustrate that all of the other variables that one would likely hypothesize as contributing to the divorce epidemic WEREN'T at play.

For example, think about these possible variables:

1. The decline of the DOMESTIC purchasing power of the dollar and/or economic parity. Any time the economy sucks...divorces, abandoned children, and runaway spouses increase exponentially. Think of all the stories in the depression of men bailing out on their entire families. Granted...it might not have been a "divorce"...because at that time you could move a few states away, assume a new name, remarry...and more or less no one was the wiser.

2. If you look at correlations amongst instances of "casual sex" across generations you find that there is remarkably less instances of divorce amongst the later-half of GenX and the Millennials than there were amongst baby boomers...despite living in a society in which casual sex is even MORE the norm than it was in the '60's. This tends to support a theory where casual sex is almost entirely irrelevant to the rates of divorces as it has more to do with the psyche of the generational archetypes as they play out in the generational constellation. (see: Generations: The History of America's Future by Strauss & Howe) Link:www.amazon.com...=nb_sb_ss_i_0_26?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=generations+the+history+of+america%27s+future&sprefix=generatio ns+the+history+of%2Caps%2C236

3. Compare the graphs here between "crop yields" and "per capita divorce rates" in the United States. As soon as the "green revolution" of the 70's hit you can see a correlation between per acre crop yields and an increase in divorces...they follow the same curve more or less, although since crops are affected by droughts and whatnot you get a little more of a jagged upward trend. Does this mean that mechanized farming causes divorces? Of course not...they were just two simultaneous events that just so happened to ALSO correspond w/ an exponential increase of the population.

4. Does this mean that an exponential increase in the population has driven BOTH farming AND divorce rates? I'm not sure. Possibly. It does make sense that divorces, casual sex, and the need to produce more food per acre would ALL correlate to an increase in the population. After all...there isn't much spousal infidelity if there are no other mating options available...right?
Crops Link: www.bryanmarcel.com...
Divorce Link: issuepedia.org...

It is the children that suffer when two people decide to bang each other without courting first.

Yes...but only when birth control isn't used, fails, or the unwanted child is still brought into the world without being aborted. I don't want to turn this into an abortion thread...I respect your views and I don't want to try changing them. All it takes is a little responsibility and then casual sex doesn't hurt any children at all.

Aren't humans suppose to be the "thinking" animal?

If so...then we have appear to have failed miserably on many, many, levels. I think of our species more as exceptionally clever monkeys...but monkeys nevertheless.

My husband and I are one soul in two bodies. Two hearts beating as one.

Good for you. It's a difficult thing to find.

Well the OP wasn't exactly speaking of completely casusal sex, though that wasn't targetted either way, and no one should judge at all. I don't believe 2 consensting adults, even teens getting carried away, are committing a "sin" in any way shape or form, though some might be committing a rather big mistake that might cause unhappiness.

But I thought he brought up more free spirit kind of Love, friendships and even alternative relationships so to speak.

I wasn't taking it mean cheating on your spouse either, for those all different aspects.

Originally posted by Unity_99
I don't believe 2 consensting adults, even teens getting carried away, are committing a "sin" in any way shape or form, though some might be committing a rather big mistake that might cause unhappiness.

emphasis added by tovenar

Funny; some religious people might say that you just came up with a great working definition of "sin."


edit to add: Could it be that you don't like using the word "sin" because it sounds "judgmental?"

If so, I can understand that. Religious people of all stripes sometimes appear judgmental, because they have hard and fast notions of right and wrong, etc. But I don't mean to "judge" them. Or anyone else.

Originally posted by tovenar

Originally posted by Unity_99
I don't believe 2 consensting adults, even teens getting carried away, are committing a "sin" in any way shape or form, though some might be committing a rather big mistake that might cause unhappiness.

emphasis added by tovenar

Funny; some religious people might say that you just came up with a great working definition of "sin."


edit to add: Could it be that you don't like using the word "sin" because it sounds "judgmental?"

If so, I can understand that. Religious people of all stripes sometimes appear judgmental, because they have hard and fast notions of right and wrong, etc. But I don't mean to "judge" them. Or anyone else.

edit on 8-6-2012 by tovenar because: (no reason given)

I'm not sure what religious people might say...but the dictionary defines a "sin" as being:


sin- [sin] noun, verb, sinned, sin·ning.
noun
1. transgression of divine law: the sin of Adam.
2. any act regarded as such a transgression, especially a willful or deliberate violation of some religious or moral principle.
verb (used without object)
3. to commit a sinful act.
4. to offend against a principle, standard, etc.
verb (used with object)
5. to commit or perform sinfully: He sinned his crimes without compunction.
6. to bring, drive, etc., by sinning: He sinned his soul to perdition.

Thus...I would say no...a "mistake which causes unhappiness" is a pretty inaccurate definition of the word "sin".

Also...what religious people have hard and fast notions of what's "right" or "wrong"? I've never once witnessed this phenomenon...unless of course you accept that "right" is whatever Is convenient at the moment and "wrong" is whatever that individual happens to disagree with. I suppose if you are including this sort of hypocrisy I could go along that statement....but otherwise it seems a bit askew as well.

reply to post by AllIsOne


Well, mine isn't complaining and we've been married 38 years.

reply to post by ofhumandescent


That's what I'm talking about ...

Well, you got everyone going, eh? In my opinion, I don't think there is any doubt whatsoever that all major religions frown on sexual intercourse beyond a single life mate sanctioned by the governing temple. The answer though, is much simpler than you might think. In more ancient times, the religious temple of an area was also the government and in some countries today, that is still the case. Take Abraham in the bible for instance, he had a wife and concubines and was able to amass a family that was pratically a nation. If you had 100 kids and they had a hundred kids and so on, you could be a huge threat to the ruling class. So not only do we promote a single wife and a nuclear family, but also kick those kids out as soon as you can!

My opinion, just saying.

Originally posted by The Old American
because sex was created for one reason: to propagate the species.

Actually, if you take the Gnostic viewpoint, sex has a dual purpose....Reproduction and Ascension / Salvation.

The tradition is to have actual matrimonial intercourse while resonating love, and instead of committing the "animal spasm", the orgasm, one strongly guards those waters which have been blessed below and instead of releasing them, (which would holds the potential power to create an entirely new sentient being), one guides those (now blessed with love) waters up the spine.. al l33 vertebrae (33 yrs of Christ's life, 33 degrees of masonry) to the place of the skull (Golgotha) to baptize the head at the throne of god.. (the pineal gland)... which cascades hormones through the endocrine system causing a slow yet steady metamorphosis of the body into one of divine ability and immortality.

This is what all religions teach at the root level, albeit hidden in riddles and metaphor, for those with eyes to see.

And this, IMO, is why all corrupt religions decry this form of sex, and teach the opposite of truth, while practicing it in secret.

I tend to think that before the transition into 'breed and lead', that some of the restrictions on sexuality was more about sustainability, that is, a Tribe that was more in balance with Nature and therefore recognized that with a higher population comes a higher strain and drain on resources and what have you (they're not infinite, even with technology). which, in turn, endangers the tribe. By that observation, one can see why some tribes to this day maintain lower levels of population and while others took another route, of which History will enform you.