The Roman Catholic position on sex outside marriage comes from the Bible which strictly forbids it. Some feel that the prohibition in the Bible was just a rule made by God to test us. The Roman Church feels that it is because sex outside marriage denies the language of sex which speaks of committing to another completely and forever. We can be sure that the Roman Church is wrong but we can also be sure that to start teaching that God made laws to test us or for a mysterious good purpose is fanaticism. It speaks of putting faith before people. The Roman Church knows that its reasons for condemning sex outside wedlock are wrong – it is a philosophically trained faith. But it just ignores the facts and is a dishonest religion.

The big advantage the Church sees in the idea that sex says to the person that you give yourself to them forever is in this total self-giving for it gives the Church an excuse to trick people into accepting or at least not opposing its stance on contraception. The Church does in fact say that since sex is self-giving using contraception is holding yourself back and is not sacrificially giving yourself to the other person. Sex must be great fun when it is all about sacrifice! Who in their right mind would marry if it were? So sex then for a Catholic says, “I give myself to you so much that we leave our union open to life and hold nothing back.” Obviously oral sex must be a sin for it is not open to life. Logically the man should simply get on the woman and forget about foreplay and all the rest. Anything else is holding back. But what if they plan to have full sex? It makes no difference. The other acts do not involve the self-giving in the way that full sex does. It would be like putting the ring on every finger but the correct one at a wedding before you put it on the correct finger. If the couple were having sex for the total self-giving reason they wouldn’t need the other acts. There is actually more self-giving and sacrifice in sex that takes place without much enjoyment than there is with sex that does. The Church says that we only show love by sacrifice.

Surely then a barren couple cannot give themselves as well as a fertile couple can? Surely their relationship is being said to be defective.

Does the Church forbid sex outside marriage because of the danger of catching venereal disease?

It doesn’t forbid going to public hospitals and clinics where diseases are frequently caught. It doesn’t forbid boxing with its dangers and the danger of infection. It doesn’t command that men and women getting married go and get checked up first. It forbids condoms which help step venereal disease and holds that a rapist using a condom sins more than one that does not. It holds that God’s law sometimes requires suffering – for example, under religious persecution it is still not right to abandon your Catholic faith so suffering venereal disease is not a proof that sex outside marriage is wrong for the Church. The Church teaches an inhuman morality that has no relevance to modern life.

Does the Church forbid sex outside marriage because of the danger of pregnancy?

The Church holds that sex outside marriage is still seriously sinful even between a barren couple or a couple that are not just using the pill but condoms as well to be double sure that they are safe so the fear of pregnancy is not a major reason for forbidding sex outside marriage. The Church doesn’t forbid sex in marriage when the wife has been warned by doctors that she will die if she gets pregnant again. The Church holds that all sex must be open to life and that remains true even when natural family planning is practiced. An unwanted pregnancy can cause as much destruction in marriage as outside of it. And yet the Church forbids contraception or abortion. There is no danger of unmarried pregnancy from oral sex and the Church holds that it is a far bigger sin than ordinary sex. The Church holds that “oral sodomy” is an unnatural sin. It is putting the sex organs where they are not designed by God to be put.

The Church abhors promiscuity. If a man married and was widowed every year by the end of his life he would have slept with as many women as promiscuous men have and the Church would approve. There is nothing bothering the Church only people having sex without its permission. The Church is not concerned about promiscuity causing disease. It welcomes ladykillers to the altar for marriage to innocent young virgins. It is law and not people it cares for. It is astonishing that some people are so naïve as to be happy with the “compassion” they get from the two-faced load of Christian crap.

It is possible for a man and woman to experience total intimacy in a kiss. They might have sex later and not feel as close. Assuming that it is possible for something to express everlasting commitment. It is not necessarily the language of sex that says, "I belong to you forever". It could be anything. A man can practice and experience greater intimacy with his wife by her hospital bed when he visits her than through sex. The Church by imagining a language for sex is demeaning the intimacy of say the hospital visit. Kissing intimately is a very sexual act and yet the Church allows actresses and actors to engage in it in films.

The sex outside marriage ban is just about religious rules not people. It is sheer nonsense and only hypocrisy can inspire people to support it. The Catholic Church pretends that its attitude towards sex stems from it regarding sex as very very holy. The Jehovah's Witnesses use the same excuse to ban blood transfusions and cause lots of sickness and death. They say that the Bible says the life of the flesh is in the blood and so to respect blood is to respect life. The Catholic Church says that the Catholic should be prepared to die in defence of the Church's teaching on sex. Comparing the two you can see that the attitudes are really just pretending to reverence something as sacred. If you hate people enjoying themselves what better way to do it than to say fun is so holy and sacred that it can only be engaged in in very strict circumstances?

Christians don't mind a man sleeping with his wife even if he intends to leave her. They do mind him sleeping with her when he is not married though he intends to spend the rest of his life with her and feels the sex shows her that. It is not about people but rules. The rules are vile hypocrisy and the Church has always been good at being hypocritical.

You always know when you are telling a lie. If sex outside marriage is saying to a person that you will be with them forever and you cannot mean that unless you are married then you cannot have sex outside marriage with a good conscience. You lied in the sex and you knew it was a lie. The Church sees lying as a sin. Lying through sex is seen as a very serious lie and a grave sin. You will never be able to say that you believed the sex was not wrong. Even if you could sincerely believe it was right you would still be a bad person. A murderer who thinks he or she is doing right is still doing wrong. He or she is still a bad person.

The Church says we must hate sin but love the sinner. The Church says it is a sin to recognise sin but to fail to be angry at it. And it is worse to even condone it or laugh at it. When people do wrong, what they fear is people having condemnatory feelings for them not the people saying they are doing wrong. People do not fear people who don't care what they do or even laugh at their sins. It is not being judged to be doing bad or wrong that people fear but others feeling condemnatory towards them for what they do. God doesn't have feelings and we are expected to put God first so it would be surprising if the God concept ever genuinely managed to stop anybody who wanted to do evil from doing it. Rather it would encourage it for it says we should be worried not about the condemnations of others but about the wrongness of the evil we do. It says worrying about the condemning feelings is a sin.

The Church likes to claim that if a couple live together before marriage, the marriage is more likely to fail. The argument is that as living together is wrong it will have bad consequences. In other words, the Church wants to think that cohabiting before marriage encourages the couple to break up after getting married. But think of it this way. Cohabiting as a kind of trial marriage should make the marriage stronger. If it doesn't, then it is not the cohabiting that is to blame but something else. Perhaps the couple got married because they were under some kind of pressure. Perhaps their living together reflects a suspicion about marriage that it doesn't work for most people. If a couple feel that way, even if they don't admit it, it could lead to problems if they get married. The Church has no right to accuse cohabitation of causing or helping to cause the marriage break-up - it is only a trick to get people to abide by its rule that sex must be confined to marriage. The nonsense it spouts plainly shows that it is lying when it says it loves the sinner and hates the sin. How could it be doing that when it falsely accuses cohabiters of endangering their future marriage by the mere fact they are cohabiting? It is like saying you hate a sin somebody has committed when the sin is in fact not a sin at all.

The Church says that looking at erotica is a sin even if there is no chance of you being titillated by it. It says that looking at it is giving the producers and participants a reason to sin. It is looking at sin when you should be repelled by sin and despise it. All that follows from the notion of sex outside marriage being wrong. Sexy erotic images have to portray the models as sexually available. They have to make you want to have sex with the models.

It is said that porn, even when it depicts loving healthy sex, is treating the person as a body and not a person. It is said that the goodness and virtue of the person does not matter. If that is true then it must be a sin to look after your beauty and for people to gaze upon it. People who see your beauty enjoy it because it is physical attractiveness and they admire that more than your goodness or virtues.

The Catholics warn about the dangers of lust and how Jesus said it will land you in Hell unless it is repented. Yet actors and actresses are allowed to kiss on screen even though attraction and “chemistry” are needed to make this look authentic. Many married actors and actresses will look forward to love scenes to enjoy kissing somebody without the stigma of adultery. The Catholics are hypocrites.

Ignore the Church. Ignore its Jesus. Have sex but have it responsibly.


No Copyright