Sex within marriage

[S-T]

Continuing the discussion from this thread (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21831): What about non-vaginal sex within marriage?

Does anyone have a Scriptural view on this? From your reading of God's Word, what do you think?

[Tequito-of-doom]

As far as I understand it sodomy is a big no-no.

Some of the big differences i've noticed seem to be whether sex is merely for reproduction, or if it also serves the purpose of bringing the couple closer together, but in almost all denominations I know of sodomy is a sin.

[SmellyFed]

I think sodomy is vile - period.

[Lazarus]

This is what we know from the scriptures... We know that God created Eve to compliment Adam... And we know that when she was brought to him that they began to enjoy sexual relations IMMEDIATELY and REGULARLY - This may not be clear in the King James but it is glaringly apparent in the original Hebrew text that Moses recorded... And we dont know how many years they lived in complete sinless innocence in the Garden, enjoying sexual relations, before they sinned by eating the forbidden fruit...

Thus, sex (within the boundaries of the institution of marriage) was a gift from God to mankind and its primary function was RECREATION - Procreation was a secondary function as a result of the fall of Man... Now I dont mean to shock anyone here, that's not my intent, but if this statement offends you, you'll just have to get over it... God invented sex between husband and wife primarily as recreation and a more perfect recreation has never been invented to replace it... It is a perfect gift from God, intended to function within the boundaries of marriage, and is nothing dirty or to be ashamed of...

People tend to read into the scriptures their own personal taboos and prohibitions that simply are not in the scriptures... I go strictly by what God recorded for us... So Im going to make this dogmatic declaration: The Bible has absolutely NO prohibition in sex between a husband and his wife within the boundaries of their marriage...

There certainly are prohibitions regarding the inclusion of animals or extra-marital persons, but aside from that, whatever both husband and wife agree upon is sanctified by God - Period...! Its a matter of privacy and personal taste...

Sex is intended as a holiday for both spouses from their assigned roles of leadership and submissiveness, and whatever is mutually agreed upon is fair game... There are certainly some places where Wife and I dont go, but whether my neighbor and his wife wish to go there or not is between them and God and NO ONE ELSE'S BUSINESS...

[SmellyFed]

There certainly are prohibitions regarding the inclusion of animals or extra-marital persons, but aside from that, whatever both husband and wife agree upon is sanctified by God - Period...! Its a matter of privacy and personal taste...

Sex is intended as a holiday for both spouses from their assigned roles of leadership and submissiveness, and whatever is mutually agreed upon is fair game... There are certainly some places where Wife and I dont go, but whether my neighbor and his wife wish to go there or not is between them and God and NO ONE ELSE'S BUSINESS...

I generally like what you post Lazarus, but I don't agree with a thing you just said.

A man must treat his wife like a queen - not like a whore. I don't think there's any Biblical justification for what you're espousing. Everything I see in the Bible teaches me to honor my wife and in building her up and encouraging her, I'm able to please God.

I think God is fairly clear how he feels about sodomy so I can't see any justification for sodomy in marriage. She's not an amusement park - she's your wife.

No one hates his own body but lovingly cares for it...” (Eph 5:28-29). “So I say again, each man must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband” (Eph 5:33). “You wives must submit to your husbands, as is fitting for those who belong to the Lord. And you husbands must love your wives and never treat them harshly” (Col 3:18-19). “In the same way, you husbands must give honor to your wives. Treat her with understanding as you live together. She may be weaker than you are, but she is your equal partner in God's gift of new life. If you don't treat her as you should, your prayers will not be heard” (1Pet 3:7).

[brilliantLiberal]

The two become one flesh.

There is no such thing as sodomy between husband and wife, because it is a sanctified union blessed by God. If certain sexual activities give pleasure to both the husband and the wife, then that is their discretion. Period. Whether you wish to perform such acts with your partner or not, you have no right to condemn any act that gives pleasure to another couple.

As Jesus said so many times, "He that can accept it, let him accept it."

I do not condone marital rape or acts of violence performed ones spouse. However, mutually consentual intercourse, whatever the form, is well within the sanctity of the marriage.

[Lazarus]

...I think God is fairly clear how he feels about sodomy so I can't see any justification for sodomy in marriage. She's not an amusement park - she's your wife.
I knew my post would confuse and upset some people... Fed, go back and read every word I said - I chose them carefully... I said "whatever is MUTUALLY AGREED UPON by both spouses"... Nothing in that statement implies any form of disrespect or abuse or lack of love... I personally dont indulge in anal sex, but the Biblical definition of Sodomy is in reference to homosexual activity, not marital relations... The phrase "MUTUALLY AGREED UPON" excludes rape or forced sex or any form of sex that both parties do NOT wish to be involved in... In fact some wives, some very spiritually mature Christian wives, prefer their husbands to be rather aggressive in their lovemaking... I know a lady who loves to be tied up by her husband - I never presumed to understand the thrill of this, but it turns them on, so....

You and your wife must define between yourselves what is MUTUALLY AGREED UPON... And whatever that is, as long as it doesnt involve animals, or corpses, or additional persons, it is sanctified by God... If you disapprove of anal sex, as I do, then dont indulge in it... But if one's wife wishes her hubby to ply various fruits or veggies or indulge in the pretzel position, then, as they say, enjoy...

This reminds me of a story that Paul Harvey reported once on the radio - This actually happened to Paul Harvey... He was working in his yard when he heard cries of help coming from his neighbor's house... He couldnt get in and his neighbor's wife called out and told him to call the fire department... When they finally broke in they found wife tied naked spread-eagle to the bed posts... Husband was dressed in nothing but a Batman mask and cape - and apparently was knocked out cold on the floor...

Apparently the game was that she was a damsel in distress and Batman was "swooping" down to save her - and to indulge in a little Bat-Love too I suppose... However in his swooping, Batman failed to include the ceiling fan in his trajectory calculations... This is a true story...:grin:

[SmellyFed]

..you have no right to condemn any act that gives pleasure to another couple.

Political Corrected Bullcrap - if it's morally repugnant I have every right to condemn it.

[SmellyFed]

I read the whole post and I dont need to read it again. The act of sexually gratifying yourself through anal intercourse is lewd and disgusting and I think the Bible is clear about that.

Corn-hole all you want but it's filthy and your argument against homosexual marriage just went into the shitter, along with your pecker.

[Lazarus]

Now you're saying things that I never said... I said the Bible denounces homosexual sex, not condones it... I also said I do NOT indulge in anal sex... I happen to think anal sex is disgusting too - as I clearly stated and any reasonable person could see...

Your beliefs are based on your interpretation of certain scriptures - I happen to believe your interpretation is in error... There is no need to be offensive with your posts... Im sure there are some activities you indulge in that someone else finds disgusting - that doesnt mean that God prohibits it... If the Bible doesnt specifically prohibit an activity, we dont have the right to prohibit it... We have the right to personally choose agaisnt it, but not to choose for others... If this subject upsets you so then maybe we should drop it...

Lighten up and maybe get some glasses... Sheesh!:rolleyes:

[SmellyFed]

Now you're saying things that I never said... I said the Bible denounces homosexual sex, not condones it... I also said I do NOT indulge in anal sex... I happen to think anal sex is disgusting to - as I clearly stated and any reasonable person could see...

Lighten up and maybe get some glasses... Sheesh!:rolleyes:

I will not lighten up because you're clearing the way for homosexual marriage. Homosexuals are giggling everywhere because you just condoned anal intercourse between a husband and wife.

Bit by bit their sordid lifestyle is working its way into the mainstream and folks like you are falling for it hook, line and sinker.

[Lazarus]

I will not lighten up because you're clearing the way for homosexual marriage. Homosexuals are giggling everywhere because you just condoned anal intercourse between a husband and wife.

Bit by bit their sordid lifestyle is working its way into the mainstream and folks like you are falling for it hook, line and sinker.I'll have you know that opinion is based entirely on scriptural evidence... It does not condone homosexual marriage in the wildest possible interpretation... You are reacting emotionally and subjectively... And your accusation is offensive and unfounded...! This is apparently your personal taboo - I dont happen to like anal sex but I dont roll in the floor and froth at the mouth at the mention of it... And I dont even want to know if my neighbors indulge in it...

But that does NOT imply justification of homosexualism, nor beastiality, not necrophilia, etc....etc...etc.... Marriage by definition is ONLY the union of a man and a woman... Or didnt you get that memo?

[SmellyFed]

I'll have you know that opinion is based entirely on scriptural evidence... It does not condone homosexual marriage in the wildest possible interpretation... You are reacting emotionally and subjectively... And your accusation is offensive and unfounded...!

Your opinion is based entirely upon sloppy scriptural interpretation and I'm glad you're offended. You should be.

[Lazarus]

Question Fed... Do you disapprove of oral sex?

[SmellyFed]

Question Fed... Do you disapprove of oral sex?

I suppose that depends on how you're defining oral sex. The book, Song of Soloman seems to describe more "traditional forms" of oral sex - and therefore, I think oral sex might well be within the boundries... but if you're asking if I approve of felching, no I do not.

Under your logic though, felching would be within the boundries of a normal "spousal sexual relationship" and with God's blessing And again, I'm going to have to heartily disagree with you.

You might want to consider, God is in the bed with you too.

[DoctorDoom]

The aft aperture is NOT a sexual organ. It has a specific purpose in the human body, which is the elimination of solid waste.

God designed men and women with complementary sexual organs, hardwired into the brain so that sexual activity is pleasurable to both the man and the woman. The rear portal is not thus connected. If it were, purging the bowels would be sexually stimulating.

We were given organs specifically designed for intercourse. If they are not sufficient to satisfy the needs of married couples, then one is led to wonder why not.

If one has the urge to play in a sewer, that's his business, but it's not natural.

[Lazarus]

I suppose that depends on how you're defining oral sex. The book, Song of Soloman seems to describe more "traditional forms" of oral sex - and therefore, I think oral sex might well be within the boundries... but if you're asking if I approve of felching, no I do not.

Under your logic though, felching would be within the boundries of a normal "spousal sexual relationship" and with God's blessing And again, I'm going to have to heartily disagree with you.

You might want to consider, God is in the bed with you too.Well Im not as sophisticated as you so I dont know what felching is... But as I understand it, homosexuals indulge in oral sex, and indeed it is the preferred activity of lesbians - Does this promote homosexual marriage? Dogs and other quadrapeds breed in a particular position which Im sure you're familiar with... Would it be prohibited for humans to utilize this position under your religious beliefs?

No doubt there are people out there who find your sexual preferences disgusting and abhorant - no doubt for some, sex is a necessary evil and should only be induged in for procreation purposes... But God does not prohibit these things... A married couple need limit their sexual activities to what God prohibits first, and to their personal tastes second... I may not care to indulge in oral sex, for whatever reason - the idea may be abhorant to me - but I have no right to criticize anyone else for what God is silent on in the scriptures...

We were given organs specifically designed for intercourse. If they are not sufficient to satisfy the needs of married couples, then one is led to wonder why not.

If one has the urge to play in a sewer, that's his business, but it's not natural.Exactly my point... Doc and I are in agreement 100%...

[S-T]

Lazarus, as to that "Batman" story:

http://www.snopes.com/risque/kinky/hero.htm

[Lazarus]

Sorry S-T... Im at work and I that particular site is blocked to me... Does it repeat the story? I heard it on Paul Harvey years ago and it cracked me up... Just thought I'd repeat here to "lighten the mood"...

[Human_Error]

http://1uppictures.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/shocked.jpg
I can't believe I am reading this!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Let me ask you this..."Would you guys like to have sex in your arse?"



So I say again, each man must love his wife as he loves himself

What about the golden rule?
Do as to others as you would have done unto you?


If a man suggested anal sex, I think a woman would have to question why and to be honest, I think any woman would wonder if the man had homosexual fantasies.

[SmellyFed]

Let me then define for you the practice of felching. Since this is perfectly acceptable marrital behaviour to you, I would have suspected you were already familiarized with the practice:

Felching is a sexual practice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_practice) in which a person sucks semen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen) out of his or her partner's vagina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagina) or anus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anus). The semen is usually that of the person doing the sucking, though this is not always the case.
The term can also refer to sucking enema (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enema) fluid from a person's vagina or anus, though this definition is much less common. Water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water), urine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine), beer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer), or wine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine) are often used in this kind of enema, though introducing alcohol into the anal cavity carries the high risk of death through alcohol poisoning.

The term is also used in reference to several other sex acts, specifically:


the act of inserting animals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal) (more specifically, rodents such as hamsters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamster), gerbils (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerbil), mice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse), etc.) into the anus or vagina, which is a form of zoophilia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia), see gerbilling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerbilling); or
the act of defecating (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defecation) on one's partner's torso, which is a form of coprophilia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprophilia).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felching
Yes, I'm close minded. I think this behavior is vile - call me a bigot, I'll welcome the title warmly. If you really think lesbian sex stops or is largely limited to oral sex, you're watching way too much Mary Poppins.

[Lazarus]

So would you guys like to have sex in your arse?

I think I have made my personal preference crystal clear on that subject - I cant speak for others here... :rolleyes:
But then that wasnt the premise of the thread...

My, My, SmellyFed - You are indeed more sophisticated than I am... That activity never entered my imagination, though apparently you are an expert on that and far more - I'll be sure to refer any other wierd sex questions to you in the future...

You must have watched a different version of Mary Poppins than I did... What section of the video store are you shopping in? No, wait, dont tell me - You've already told me far more than I ever wanted to know... And like I said, that's private between you and your wife...:rolleyes:

[SmellyFed]

[/b]

I think I have made my personal preference crystal clear on that subject - I cant speak for others here... :rolleyes:
But then that wasnt the premise of the thread...

I'm not doubting your personal preference.

You're contesting that this is perfectly acceptable behavior between married couples and using lazy interpretations of scripture to <strike>defile</strike> defend it.

If you can't stand up and say this is vile then I don't really see the point in debating this issue. You've clearly surrendered sovereignty of your morals to the will of the minority.

[Lazarus]

I've surrendered the sovereignty of my morals to the will of my God, Jesus Christ - Not to the religious taboos of you or any man... I'll take my directives from him and only him... I've only stated what I know to be in the scriptures, and I never felt I had the authority or arrogance to add to them...

[SmellyFed]

I've surrendered the sovereignty of my morals to the will of my God, Jesus Christ - Not you or your religious beliefs... I'll take my directives from him and only him...

We must be studying different Bibles then because my Bible gives me no reason to think that God is ok with anal sex or felching nor do I see any scripture that would support these activities being sanctified for the marriage bed - which is a Holy place.

[Lazarus]

Well I would certainly like to see the passage where God specifically lists the sexual acts that are allowable...

Where the Bible is silent, I am silent... That is MY position...

[brilliantLiberal]

Political Corrected Bullcrap - if it's morally repugnant I have every right to condemn it.
Views like yours are more likely to lead to the state regulating what married couples can do in the privacy of their own bedroom far more easily than it can lead to gay marriage (which is an impossibility because a marriage involves one man and one woman). Neither is acceptable.

Frankly, I don't care what your opinion of oral or anal sex is. That's between you and your spouse. As for others, keep your notions out of their marital bed. I don't know if my friends or neighbors engage in sexual devience or not, nor do I care so long as it pleases them and does not effect me.

There are more more important things to worry about then what triggers your neighbors' orgasms.

[Human_Error]

Felching is a sexual practice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_practice) in which a person sucks semen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen) out of his or her partner's vagina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagina) or anus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anus). The semen is usually that of the person doing the sucking, though this is not always the case.
The term can also refer to sucking enema (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enema) fluid from a person's vagina or anus, though this definition is much less common. Water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water), urine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine), beer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer), or wine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine) are often used in this kind of enema, though introducing alcohol into the anal cavity carries the high risk of death through alcohol poisoning.

http://www.f6rider.com/images/Say_It_Aint_So.jpg

[Lazarus]

Look - Yall keep mentioning this weird crap and Im not going to be able to enjoy my supper tonight... :uhh:

[SmellyFed]

I think what we do with our peckers is of concern to God and indeed where the semen goes was of interest to him on at least one occasion.

Genesis 38:8-10
<SUP id=en-NIV-1128>8</SUP> Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother." <SUP id=en-NIV-1129>9</SUP> But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother's wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. <SUP id=en-NIV-1130>10</SUP> What he did was wicked in the LORD's sight; so he put him to death also.

I think you've allowed yourself to be mislead.

1 Timothy 4:1
The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.

Colossians 2:4
I tell you this so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments.

[SmellyFed]

Views like yours are more likely to lead to the state regulating what married couples can do in the privacy of their own bedroom far more easily than it can lead to gay marriage (which is an impossibility because a marriage involves one man and one woman). Neither is acceptable.

Frankly, I don't care what your opinion of oral or anal sex is. That's between you and your spouse. As for others, keep your notions out of their marital bed. I don't know if my friends or neighbors engage in sexual devience or not, nor do I care so long as it pleases them and does not effect me.

There are more more important things to worry about then what triggers your neighbors' orgasms.

Your relativism does not surprise me.

[Lazarus]

...I think you've allowed yourself to be mislead....See... You coulda said that in the beginning and the whole discussion could have remained on a civil level... I'll expect you to pray for me...

[SmellyFed]

Are you 100% sure this doesn't apply to the marriage bed? You better be sure because the stakes are pretty high

1 Corinthians 6:9
<SUP>9</SUP>Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders (NIV)

[SmellyFed]

See... You coulda said that in the beginning and the whole discussion could have remained on a civil level... I'll expect you to pray for me...

I believe you're assuming invective where none was intended. I've not "shouted" or lost my temper. I've just stood my ground.

I'm sorry if you've taken offense at that - it was not my intent to brow-beat you into submission.

I guess I need to use more of these => :grin: :smirky: :tongue: :laugh: :blush:

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Thus, sex (within the boundaries of the institution of marriage) was a gift from God to mankind and its primary function was RECREATION - Procreation was a secondary function as a result of the fall of Man...

:moo: You're assuming that Adam & Eve had no children, until after "the fall". The Bible says that after the fall, they had Cain, & then they had Abel, but nowhere does it specifically state they were their first children.

[tacitus]

:moo: You're assuming that Adam & Eve had no children, until after "the fall". The Bible says that after the fall, they had Cain, & then they had Abel, but nowhere does it specifically state they were their first children.

Very true Moo. If Cain and Abel were their first children, where did these people come from?

Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of Jehovah. And he lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.
Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and he called the name of the city according to the name of his son, Enoch.

[Lazarus]

You're assuming that Adam & Eve had no children, until after "the fall". The Bible says that after the fall, they had Cain, & then they had Abel, but nowhere does it specifically state they were their first children.

Well you are certainly free to follow that particular speculation - Ive heard it before but I dont think it has any merit... I think its pretty well established that as part of her punishment for committing her sin Eve was cursed with bearing children, and in the context of the passage its apparent that this was a new development - Its hard for God to punish someone with something that is already happening naturally, dontcha think? Also in the Geneology of Jesus which is listed in Luke, the family tree follows all the way back to Adam... It lists Seth as his heir because Cain was tossed out for murder and Able was defunct... We know that Seth was their third born child, so it stands to reason, again, that there was no procreation before the fall of Adam...

[brilliantLiberal]

:moo: You're assuming that Adam & Eve had no children, until after "the fall". The Bible says that after the fall, they had Cain, & then they had Abel, but nowhere does it specifically state they were their first children.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top noWrap align=right><BDO dir=ltr>16</BDO>. </TD><TD vAlign=top align=left>Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Genesis 3:16



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Childbirth and submission, then was a consequence to Eve's actions.

[SmellyFed]

I agree with Lazarus - don't see any reason to believe they may have had kids running around the Garden with them, the Bible certainly makes no mention of children in the Garden of Eden.

[Lazarus]

Very true Moo. If Cain and Abel were their first children, where did these people come from?Legitimate question... The scriptures list Adam and Eve's first born males because the geneology is calculated thru the males (with some rare exceptions)... It doesnt list their female children... Its reasonable to assume that they also produced not only several other children but that a number of these were female...

Whereas we have the prohibition of incest in the Moseic law, this was not strictly the case in early times, and clearly Cain hooked up with one of his sisters or possibly a neice - Remember they lived a long time back then and Cain could easily have a neice who would be mature enough to marry... I would point out that this is not mentioned by Moses in this passage as a condemnation but only as a point of info...

Im not completely sure why this is the case other than the fact that the human genetic pool was more or less in its purest state during this time and the union of brother and sister was not particularly problematic... Apparently by the time of Abraham God was establishing new boundaries in this issue... Again im not 100% sure as to the reasoning so dont hold me to that...

Incest is obviously not acceptable now, but in those first few human generations it was not prohibited nor condemned... It seems strange to us today but there were different rules in the beginning...

[UnkHiram]

I read over this string and I was struck by one little thing. What a Husband and a wife do in their bedroom is none of my business or anyone elses. It's not the Governments, the Preachers or the next door neighbors. There is a name for folks who worry about what other folks are doing in their bedroom. The name is Nosey Busybodies.

[Peachdiane]

Hmm, to be honest I'm not sure what the answer is. But, if I may, I really believe God intended sex for mutual pleasure and requires giving by BOTH husband and wife and HONEST communication. We all have lists of what is "off limits." Mine is short... including blood, violence, piercings, and animals... I'm not comfortable with those extremes. My ex however had a long list of what was off limits including oral and anal sex. The sex was defined by HIM according to how he interpreted the Bible. And that was that! So I went along and I kept thinking as long as we got along pretty well outside of the bedroom, we'd be ok. Boy was I wrong, our marriage disintegrated after 10 years.

I think I've said enough so let me just say Lazarus and bL are spot on, IMO.

Edited to add: Unk too! http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/applaud.gif

[SmellyFed]

There is a name for folks who worry about what other folks are doing in their bedroom. The name is Nosey Busybodies.

That's a crock of shinola - I'm not the bedroom police BUT IF PEOPLE ASK ME MY OPINION then I have every right to say what I think.

[UnkHiram]

That's a crock of shinola - I'm not the bedroom police BUT IF PEOPLE ASK ME MY OPINION then I have every right to say what I think.

What a crock of Sh** -- That is my opinion of people who worry about what is happening in the bedrooms of other married folks.

[SmellyFed]

What a crock of Sh** -- That is my opinion of people who worry about what is happening in the bedrooms of other married folks.

It's not just what I think - it's what God thinks. That's really what we should be trying to figure out. And since our salvation could well be on the line, I think it's important to stand for righteousness and share what God's Word says.

Thats what I've done - presecute me all you want, but I've said what the Book says.

[UnkHiram]

It's not just what I think - it's what God thinks. That's really what we should be trying to figure out. And since our salvation could well be on the line, I think it's important to stand for righteousness and share what God's Word says.

Thats what I've done - presecute me all you want, but I've said what the Book says.

You a tad on the paranoid side aint ya? As far as I know no one is persecuting you, just giving our opinion. Is disagreeing with you and your interpetation mean I am persecuting you?

[SmellyFed]

You a tad on the paranoid side aint ya? As far as I know no one is persecuting you, just giving our opinion. Is disagreeing with you and your interpetation mean I am persecuting you?

Well you've labeled me a nosey busy body for answering this thread and sharing what I believe God's Word says on the matter. You've labeled what I've presented here ostensibly to be a crock of sh**, so no I'm not paranoid. I think I've rightly indicated where you're coming from - that you think taking a Biblical perspective on this is a crock of SH** and that God and Christians trying to follow his word are Nosey Busybodies.

If that's not persecution, then you pick a better word for it. I'll of course go along with anything you say.

[UnkHiram]

Well you've labeled me a nosey busy body for answering this thread and sharing what I believe God's Word says on the matter. You've labeled what I've presented here ostensibly to be a crock of sh**, so no I'm not paranoid. I think I've rightly indicated where you're coming from - that you think taking a Biblical perspective on this is a crock of SH** and that God and Christians trying to follow his word are Nosey Busybodies.

If that's not persecution, then you pick a better word for it. I'll of course go along with anything you say.

BS

I labeled anyone including you that spends time worrying about what other married people are doing in their bedroom as a nosey busybody. If the shoe fits wear it.

I labeled your response to me as a crock of SH** not God's word. IN case you have forgotten your response was to label my opinion as a crock of Shinola because I disagreed with you.

I asked if your paranoid because you think I am persecucting you because I disagree with you. I am not persecuting you, I am disagreeing. Go look up the two words in the dictionary. Lets be clear on this, I didnt label the biblical perspective as a crock of SH** I labeled your response as a crock of SH**. You are not the Bible.

I do not appreciate your attempt to color me as anti-christian because I disagree with you.

[PrezLeefun]

ok lets see...

that flechting thing...gross not happening in my marriage.

anal sex? I honestly dont know.

Does this whole thread topic include oral sex?

[Lazarus]

That's a crock of shinola - I'm not the bedroom police BUT IF PEOPLE ASK ME MY OPINION then I have every right to say what I think.True, but we're all friends here and we should try to maintain a civil discussion... If we disagree, then we disagree...
It's not just what I think - it's what God thinks. That's really what we should be trying to figure out....I think it's important to stand for righteousness and share what God's Word says.Which I think is precisely what I based by position on... And why I answered the initial question...

We disagree on a point of doctrine - maybe we should leave it at that...

...Does this whole thread topic include oral sex?I would presume that it does based on S-T's original question...

[S-T]

While things have got a bit heated here, I do appreciate everyone's answers and opinions. I could have gone the rest of my life without reading some of the definitions of behaviors though. Excuse me while I go lobotomize myself.

...

...

...

...

...


OK, I'm back. That really hurt, so don't try it at home.

The sin of Onan seems to be the strongest Biblical argument here. I do have a question though. Was Onan punished for disobedience in refusing God's direct order to produce children, or for the way he disobeyed? Would God have struck him dead if he refused to marry his brother's widow?

I guess what I'm looking for is a clear Biblical directive. As Christians, we have to base our lives on what Scripture teaches.

Here's my thought. If you have two choices before you, one of which you know isn't a sin and one you have some doubt on, you should choose the path you know is not sinful.

[Peachdiane]

We disagree on a point of doctrine - maybe we should leave it at that....

I agree. There seems to be two major camps here.

One where people believe ANY acts which cannot lead to babies are "unnatural" and therefore sinful.

The other camp believes God created sex with the intent that it be enjoyed between a married couple. Physical intimacy and emotional intimacy go hand in hand. So mutual sex other than intercourse is ok as long as there's no shame on either side.

I'm guessing many of us fall in between. I was taught growing up that male masturbation was a major sin then I got really confused because I really didn't see anything in the Bible that directly addressed this. Also, my ex said sex during female menses was sinful and avoided me during this time. Just wondered where God states that?

Anyway my first and foremost principle is mutual consent. The God I know designed our bodies, minds and emotions so that sex could, and should, include intense physical pleasure, and even better, a deep emotional interaction and connection that continues AFTERWARDS! There is a spiritual union that we can't understand.

I believe that God gave couples stewardship over each other's sexuality and sexual liberty with the acts mutually agreed to. And as has been mentioned on this thread, what's acceptable to one couple could be bad for another. i.e. One couple uses porn TOGETHER to enhance their relationship while another avoids it because one of the partners has an addiction and it harms the relationship....

Ok I think I've said way too much! :eek:

[Melz]

Continuing the discussion from this thread (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21831): What about non-vaginal sex within marriage?

Does anyone have a Scriptural view on this? From your reading of God's Word, what do you think?

This was the question and pretense of the thread, so anyone saying "don't worry about what others do in their bedroom" should only be saying that to the one who started the thread. Others were just answering, and I find each answer very curious and most are thought provoking. I had never thought of what I do in my bedroom with my husband as something potentially sinful, but then, I am not all about experimenting and such. I don't know how some of this which was mentioned even could come into my bedroom.

To sum my answer up...it is all about positions, nothing I have ever done would be included as sodomy, and never felt wrong with my husband. I don't have an insight as to what Jesus or God would think of my sexual happenings, but it seems mild even compared to music videos I have seen.

[UnkHiram]

This was the question and pretense of the thread, so anyone saying "don't worry about what others do in their bedroom" should only be saying that to the one who started the thread. Others were just answering, and I find each answer very curious and most are thought provoking. I had never thought of what I do in my bedroom with my husband as something potentially sinful, but then, I am not all about experimenting and such. I don't know how some of this which was mentioned even could come into my bedroom.

To sum my answer up...it is all about positions, nothing I have ever done would be included as sodomy, and never felt wrong with my husband. I don't have an insight as to what Jesus or God would think of my sexual happenings, but it seems mild even compared to music videos I have seen.

Melz

My original comments were not directed towards anyone in particular, and as far as i can tell only one person was offended by them.

[Melz]

Unk dear, I was not referring to you specifically (nor anyone), just saw that "what I do in my bedroom is my own business" thing come up. Which of course IT IS. we like it that way. I hate folks (especially government ones) watching what goes on. dang pervs. ewwwwwww.

[Shadow]

I'm not doubting your personal preference.

You're contesting that this is perfectly acceptable behavior between married couples and using lazy interpretations of scripture to <STRIKE>defile</STRIKE> defend it.

If you can't stand up and say this is vile then I don't really see the point in debating this issue. You've clearly surrendered sovereignty of your morals to the will of the minority.

What is acceptable consentual behavior between man and wife is opinion since the Bible clearly lists no restrictions. It's not an example of lazy interpretation. It's an example of what clearly isn't specified.

[DoctorDoom]

Random thoughts in no particular order.

Onan's sin was disobedience to God's law, and had nothing to do with the physical way in which he did it (withdrawal prior to orgasm, NOT masturbation).

Gen 38:6 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar.
7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.
8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.
10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

The basis for the condemnation is this.

Deut 25:5 If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.
6 And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.
7 And if the man like not to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.
8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him: and if he stand to it, and say, I like not to take her;
9 Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother's house.
10 And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.

<hr>
Also, my ex said sex during female menses was sinful and avoided me during this time. Just wondered where God states that?There is no indication that it is sinful, only that it is ceremonially unclean.

Lev 15:19 And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.
24 And if any man lie with her at all, and her flowers be upon him, he shall be unclean seven days; and all the bed whereon he lieth shall be unclean.

2931. tame', taw-may'; from H2930; foul in a relig. sense:--defiled, + infamous, polluted (-tion), unclean.

5079. niddah, nid-daw'; from H5074; prop. rejection; by impl. impurity, espec. personal (menstruation) or moral (idolatry, incest):-- X far, filthiness, X flowers, menstruous (woman), put apart, X removed (woman), separation, set apart, unclean (-ness, thing, with filthiness).

Many of God's laws involved health matters at a time when the medical arts were essentially nonexistent.

<hr>
Human sexuality is unique in the animal kingdom in that God has given us the ability to engage in it for its own sake, as an intimate, enjoyable union of husband and wife apart from procreation. It is nonsense to say that sex must have no rationale other than making rugrats. That, however, doesn't justify sexual behavior that clearly violates the natural functions of the human body. Anal sex involves a part of the body that by its physiology is not intended for sexual activity.

<hr>
It is dangerous to use the assumption of silence = assent in biblical matters. The fact that the Bible says nothing about a specific sexual act does not make it acceptable. E.g., there is not a word in the Bible about coprophagia, necrophilia, sadomasochism, B&D, rimming, fisting, etcetera. That doesn't mean that God approves of them. Where the Bible is silent on highly questionable behavior, it means only that such things were simply not done or even considered by the people, and therefore didn't need to be addressed.

Obviously, there is no sexual activity that does not involve technology that hasn't been indulged in for thousands of years. No doubt the pagans of biblical times were familiar with all the variations. However, the OT is the history of the Jewish people, not of the pagans. Whenever pagans were discussed, it was in condemnation. There is no reason to assume that the Jews ever adopted pagan practices without God's judgment being visited on them.

<hr>
In the context of heterosexual marriage, the scripture may seem less specific about whether anal sex is acceptable behavior for God's followers. There are, however, basic principles in scripture that will help us answer the question. Here are some points to consider:

1. Anal sex uses body parts in way contrary to their designed purposes (i.e. perversion): The anus and rectum are specifically designed for expelling waste from the body. The tissue in those areas is designed for things passing out of the body, not vice versa. Also, since there is no natural lubrication in the anus or rectum, intercourse can cause fissures in the wall of the rectum, leading to infections and diseases such as AIDS. Additionally, the urethra in the penis can become infected from exposure to the bacteria in the anus and rectum. (for a doctor's perspective, click here)

The vagina contains tissue that is designed for both penetration (during sex) and expulsion (birth or menstrual cycle). The nerve endings in the clitoris, vagina and surrounding tissue provide a perfect match for the male sexual design. When the "conventional" sex position (face to face) is used, the man and woman are positioned for the ideal amount of stimulation for both partners to experience orgasms simultaneously. Alternate sexual positions may provide more enhanced stimulation for one partner or the other, but may lessen the potential for both people having simultaneous orgasms.

2. Anal sex gives lust a foothold: The sex industry goes to great lengths to promote the idea that anal sex is a natural and exciting way to express love. The truth is that anal sex is based on lust, not love. Tolerating lust in our lives will slow down our transformation into the "new man," and give the devil potential footholds for other forms of evil in us.Anal Sex (http://www.porn-free.org/anal_sex.htm)

This is the page referred to as "a doctor's perspective".

Do you think it is acceptable for a husband and wife to engage in anal sex?

Anal sex is a practice that typically causes conflict between husbands and wives, is thought of as what the Bible condemns as sodomy (although many believe that sodomy is a reference to homosexual anal sex only), and tends to be initiated and desired by men whose interest got sparked by pornography. Many sexual experts and medical personnel discourage anal sex because of the danger of transmission of infection and tearing of the blood vessels in the rectum.

The penis and the vagina are clean passages, which are free of disease producing microorganisms. The anus/rectum, on the other hand, is a highly contaminated passageway. When the penis enters the rectum, the urinary and reproductive tracks of the man are invaded with the germs from the rectum of the woman. If the man enters the woman's vagina after having entered her rectum, her reproductive passageways are then contaminated. Both can incur chronic infections like prostititus, vaginitis or a pelvic inflammatory condition. But you might ask, what if we use a condom? The fact is condoms have a significant failure rate when used to prevent pregnancy, yet sperm are much larger than the microorganisms that infect. In addition, a woman can only be impregnated several days per month, but men and women can acquire an infection at any moment of the month. So condoms are not a sure protection against being infected especially when entering the tight muscle of the rectum.

The muscular structure of the anus is different than that of the vagina. The vaginal passageway is controlled by muscles, that expand or tighten to fit any size penis; the vagina is an organ of accommodation. The vagina can tighten so tight as to not allow anything to enter and can expand to allow the birth of an infant. The rectum cannot. That is why the blood vessels in the rectum break when the penis enters it causing damage to the anal/rectal area and raising the possibility of transfer of disease producing microorganisms.Anal Sex (http://www.passionatecommitment.com/analsex.html)

The Bible may not condemn anal sex, but the design of the human body makes it clear that God did not intend that the rectum should be a sexual organ.

[LadyHawk108]

I totally agree with Unk and Peach.....why would anyone go to extremes to worry about other married couples sex lives that only include the 2 of them?? This can of worms could open up to many different issues...what about sex toys, etc. etc...I think my God said whatever the two agree upon....who says the neck is an errogenous (sexual area), does that mean that shouldn't be kissed? What about breasts? Are there only purpose for nursing our young?? I personally think this whole thread is ridiculous.

[DoctorDoom]

Frankly, I don't care what anyone does with anyone else in the bedroom, on the beach, or on the sidewalks of New York. They can torture, maim or kill each other if they get their rocks off doing it.

However, the fact that this or that sexual act is biblically unaddressed does not translate to God approving of it. Nor does the fact that one can perform this or that sexual act without breakling bones mean that it's natural.

...who says the neck is an errogenous (sexual area), does that mean that shouldn't be kissed? What about breasts? Are there only purpose for nursing our young??There a fundamental difference between kissing a woman's neck and shoving a tumescent willy up her strada chocolata.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Personally, I've never had a hankering for storing my junk in the shit shack. I just never saw the 'added value' in it. I prefer to go money. And we all know that the ATM machine is where the money is.

Oh sure, some people rob banks. They pull out their gun, wave it around, tell everyone to hit the deck. That's what the FDIC is for I suppose. But, robbing a bank is going through the back door.

The terd cutter has always been off-limits for me. Its like 1982 and trying to play Dig Dug in a Pac Man world. Sure, people have played Dig Dug, but not everyone. However, everyone has played Pac Man.

I suppose if you were so inclined, you could fake it and go doggie and just pretend without jabbing the one-eyed pink cyclops in the cornea. By all means, do what you must do. However, my wife and I will remain ass virgins.

As to the Biblical injunctions yea or nay, I just don't see an anatomical run-down. Its a bit of a stretch. Sodomy, at least in my opinion, was translation for man-on-man porking, and had little to do with heterosex.

Obviously, the reproductive nature of the organs themselves screams for straight up cop, but we aren't robots either. It isn't my fault God intentionally seasoned those areas with an over abundance of happy nerves. Perhaps the Man Upstairs(when we went downstairs) needed to give us a reason to fool us into logging 25,000 diaper wipes, 40 more decibels in the house and working overtime to keep the cupboards full for our machine-like eating spawn. And for that little trick, perhaps we should get a little time off for good behavior and if that means going to funky town once in awhile. I don't think it would raise His eyebrow. He's a holy God, but not a prude. He's our Creator who made all 'the stuff', the high performance, action packed, no warranty, limited time only stuff. Sure we can abuse that stuff, but then it becomes idolatry. Idolatry is the sin. Not the way in which two bodies git their hitch in their git along.

Just my 2 cents.

[S-T]

Also, my ex said sex during female menses was sinful and avoided me during this time. Just wondered where God states that? It's in the books of the Law. Don't remember which one though. You can find it on www.BibleGateway.com (http://www.BibleGateway.com) As Doom said, it isn't sinful, just ceremonially unclean. That law was fulfilled by jesus and no longer applies. There is a spiritual union that we can't understand. 1 Corinthians 6:15-17 (http://biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=6&verse=15&end_verse=17&version=9&context=context).One couple uses porn TOGETHER to enhance their relationship Porn = lusting after someone else's body, who is not your spouse. Jesus said that is adultery.

[S-T]

I personally think this whole thread is ridiculous. Then don't post in a thread you find to not be useful. http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/rollingeyes.gif

The point here is to explore what The Bible teaches. That should be the most important thing in every Christian's life.

[Lazarus]

...Onan's sin was disobedience to God's law, and had nothing to do with the physical way in which he did it (withdrawal prior to orgasm, NOT masturbation).Well said, Doc... I didnt have the energy to address this issue at the time it was brought up but you are absolutely correct... The incident must be analyzed in context......there is not a word in the Bible about...necrophilia...Ummmm... Not sure about that one, Doc... Isnt this addressed directly in the Moseic Law? I'll see if I can locate the verse... It sticks in the back of my head...


The Bible may not condemn anal sex, but the design of the human body makes it clear that God did not intend that the rectum should be a sexual organ.I personally agree with this position, but my point was that I cant justify it from any direct scriptural reference... And thus I dont feel authorized to condemn it for any other mutually consenting married couple... But we can agree in principle...

...why would anyone go to extremes to worry about other married couples sex lives that only include the 2 of them?? ...what about sex toys...I think my God said whatever the two agree upon....who says the neck is an errogenous (sexual area), does that mean that shouldn't be kissed? What about breasts? Are there only purpose for nursing our young?? I personally think this whole thread is ridiculous...Well your final sentence seems out of place since your other statements are well thought out and address S-T's question perfectly... All excellent points, LH...

And as usual Wyatt states my position far more eloquently than I ever could... :grin:

[Nutrider99]

I'm guessing many of us fall in between. I was taught growing up that male masturbation was a major sin then I got really confused because I really didn't see anything in the Bible that directly addressed this. Also, my ex said sex during female menses was sinful and avoided me during this time. Just wondered where God states that? :eek:
One must keep in mind the context of what was written.

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.
10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

And why would this be so?

In those days, other then being a wife, a servant or a whore, there wasn't a lot of work for women. By taking a brother's wife, one made sure that she did not fall into disgrace, and that the family blood line continued. Also, the survival of the small nation depended upon having warriors. A man who spilled his seed on the ground wasted an opportunity to create warriors. At least in the "belly of a whore" there was a chance of a male being born.

Onan took his pleasure with his brother's wife, and then wasted his seed, in essence treating her like a whore for his pleasure and denying the reason he was given sanction to take her in the first place. This was displeasing to the Lord because such behavior endangered the nation, which desperately needed warriors. Likewise, masturbation wasted seed which could have fathered more warriors.

Menstration was misunderstood and considered to make a woman unclean, in essence because there was not a plentiful supply of bathing water and soap, and tampons were not invented yet. Pork was called unclean because it was. It contained trichina worms which, if not properly cooked (another concept they did not know about) would cause trichinosis. Beastiality was called unclean because it was. Most if not all of our venereal diseases came from beastiality.

Germs were not understood. They knew only clean and unclean. The law was handed down to the people and rigidly enforced, because it kept them at full fighting force. Had they not remained strong, they would have been destroyed.

The application in modern day life is different. We know to cook pork thoroughly. We know not to leave raw chicken out. We don't have to worry about our tribe being overrun for want of warriors, so we can waste our seed if we wish. There are other jobs available for women, so our brother's wife does not need to be protected by our family.

The sexual practices of each couple are for them to decide. Canadians, for example, always have sex doggy style. That way both can watch the hockey game. Many nations of Europe, lacking proper birth control, engage in anal sex on a regular basis. Sometimes even with members of the OPPOSITE sex. French women like to have sex lying on their stomachs with the man behind them, so that they can pretend it's anything other than a Frenchman on top. Australian women always walk funny because their men like sex "down under." Russian women usually get on top so their men can stroke their breasts under their chest hair. German couples have sex according to strict time schedules.

It doesn't matter what you do in bed with your spouse. What matters is that you love each other, even as Christ loved the church. If you do this, nothing you will do will displease God. Lusting after others, betraying the intimacy God intended you to have, forcing the other to consent to something they don't want to do; these are activities that indicate that you do not love your spouse as much as you are instructed to. Love is a wonderful gift. Enjoy it to its fullest.

[TheRealLobo]

I'm not doubting your personal preference.

You're contesting that this is perfectly acceptable behavior between married couples and using lazy interpretations of scripture to <STRIKE>defile</STRIKE> defend it.

If you can't stand up and say this is vile then I don't really see the point in debating this issue. You've clearly surrendered sovereignty of your morals to the will of the minority.

Ummm, just for the record SF, you stated earlier that oral sex IS acceptable.

Main Entry: sod·omy http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?sodomy01.wav=sodomy'))
Pronunciation: <TT>'sä-d&-mE</TT>
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1-11
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex

Basically, sodomy is any act from which pregnancy cannot result.

If a couple practices oral sex, then they are committing sodomy.

It's a moot point as far as I'm concerned, and I don't support "homosexual marriages" (though you'll likely claim that I do), as marriage BY DEFINITION is between a man and a woman. If the homos decide to change the name of what they want from "marriage" to something else, then I really couldn't care less.

They're wrong, but I'm in no position to make a decision as to whether they are condemned to hell or not.

As for Laz's opinion, he has shown himself to be against homo "marriage" time and again, and as far as I'm concerned, you're out of line.

[TheRealLobo]

Add the following to the above.

Not trying to change anyone's opinion about anything.

My above post is to show disapproval of the responses to Laz by SmellyFed.

I have finished reading the rest of the thread and indeed note that SF and Laz have cleared the air (so to speak), and I'm glad to see it.

[DoctorDoom]

The Bible may not condemn anal sex, but the design of the human body makes it clear that God did not intend that the rectum should be a sexual organ.I personally agree with this position, but my point was that I cant justify it from any direct scriptural reference... And thus I dont feel authorized to condemn it for any other mutually consenting married couple... But we can agree in principle...People are free to do whatever suits them, but IMO a truly loving couple would not do things that are known to be injurious and medically dangerous.

As well, anal sex is not rewarding to the woman, inasmuch as the rectum is not equipped with nerves for sexual stimulation. Thus it is selfishness on the man's part as well as a heath hazard to both of them. A man who uses his wife as a piece of meat is not my concept of a man who truly loves her.

If he is so self-centered that he must have orgasms without concern for his wife's sexual needs or health, then he should whack off in the john.

[Human_Error]

Well said Doc!!!! :claps:

[PrezLeefun]

well said Doc. But I have to ask about the oral sex thing...does the bible condone that?

[Lazarus]

People are free to do whatever suits them, but IMO a truly loving couple would not do things that are known to be injurious and medically dangerous.

As well, anal sex is not rewarding to the woman, inasmuch as the rectum is not equipped with nerves for sexual stimulation. Thus it is selfishness on the man's part as well as a heath hazard to both of them. A man who uses his wife as a piece of meat is not my concept of a man who truly loves her.

If he is so self-centered that he must have orgasms without concern for his wife's sexual needs or health, then he should whack off in the john.I agree with you, Doc... I admit I have never understood the fascination with it... But its not just a male thing - I have actually heard some women express an interest in it... Which makes me scratch my head... Do ya think it has something to do with some kinda humiliation fetish? That's the only answer I can come up with for it...:unsmile:

[DoctorDoom]

But I have to ask about the oral sex thing...does the bible condone that?Not to my knowledge. However, it's wise not to interpret from silence, since, e.g., the Bible also does not address child pornography. Those things that it mentions specifically were issues familar to the people of the time.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

[/color][/size][/font][/b]
I think its pretty well established that as part of her punishment for committing her sin Eve was cursed with bearing children, and in the context of the passage its apparent that this was a new development - Its hard for God to punish someone with something that is already happening naturally, dontcha think?

:unsmile: Children born prior to the fall would have been born without pain. It's the pain that became the punishment.

[BarryG]

the purpose of sex is procreation, period. anal and oral to not serve a purpose, therefore are sin. they should be illegal as well, not only for moral reasons but for reasons related to public health.

[PrezLeefun]

Illegal??? thats overdoing it.

[Nutrider99]

the purpose of sex is procreation, period. anal and oral to not serve a purpose, therefore are sin. they should be illegal as well, not only for moral reasons but for reasons related to public health.You are so wrong it's hardly worth considering this post.

Animals use sex strictly for procreation. If you consider yourself on that level, then behave accordingly.

Human beings are hardwired for sexual gratification, which is why we have orgasms. In human biology, there is something called an "orgasmic cleft." It details the post orgasmic physiological status of men and women. Male climax involves a great release of energy followed by a rapid decrease in stored energy. This is why males are more likely to fall asleep right after sex. On a scale of 1-10, five being homeostasis (normal functioning), they will drop to a level 3 (more or less). Women have a period of 1-2 minutes of extreme sensitivity. Their orgasmic peak falls, but at a much lower rate. After 1-2 minutes, they will be closer to 8 or 9 on the same scale. This is one reason women like to cuddle afterward- they are still aroused. Continued stimulation will cause them to respond with another orgasm much more easily. Repeated stimulation leads to repeated orgasms. Thus, all women are multiple orgasmic, but most men loose interest after climax.

The female genitalia are not conducive to sexual climax through ordinary penetration, but are highly conducive to climax through oral sex. This would indicate that their bodies are designed for such stimulation. In fact, since female lubrication is tied to sexual arousal, it would indicate that biologically speaking women were designed to have oral sex as natural foreplay.

In God's world, nothing is accidental. Nothing occurs without design. He designed men and women to derive pleasure from each other's bodies. This assures strong bonding between husband and wife. This bonding helps provide a stable home environment for the rearing of children. Adultery is so destructive because it erodes that bonding, offers opportunities for gratification without marital bonding, and erodes at the family nucleus.

In short, husband and wife deriving pleasure from each other is pleasing to God, who designed their bodies for this purpose. If it were not the case, he would not have so designed their bodies. Enjoy your soul mate in body, mind and spirit. Pay no attention to those who look down their repressed noses at the sexual habits of others without knowledge of biology, religion, or interpersonal human behavior.

[PrezLeefun]

That was educating Nutrider