” anyone who thought sex between a husband and wife could be for enjoyment was headed for the same homosexual-loving place as this screwy organization, I take exception”.
Again. This is the fourth time, that my argument has been deliberately misstated.
I explicitly said that part, not all of sex, part of what makes sex what it is, is the ability to procreate. I did not say all. Of course, pleasure is important too. But the whole reason that God made you male and female in the first place, is so that sex would be procreative.
If sex is only for pleasure than it doesn’t matter if it’s between men and women, or men and men or women and women. That is my point.
This door was opened at Lambeth, the same folks who were the first to start trying to marry men with men and women with women, were the first to adopt contraception.
“Paul clearly advocated that husbands of Corinth stop denying their wives the enjoyment of their bodies and “...fulfill his marital duty to his wife” and ditto.”
Absolutely. But rather than truly obey what he was saying, you’d rather contracept so you can obey without having to sacrifice. That’s the problem.
“I find nothing here with regard to conceiving children each time”
Because that is up to God. Where does it say that you are permitted to used condoms and to mutilate yourself such that you would be sterile?
Are you arguing that anything that is not explicitly prohibited is permitted?
Are you arguing that anything that is not explicitly prohibited is permitted?
I have absolutely no idea where you are going with this. But, do Catholics practice rhythm? Is this some kind of interference with the otherwise procreative work and trying to get pleasure without payment? Sorry, this is all for me on this weird topic.