Replies

I Perhaps you believe that God ordained the USA into existence for some reason, probably to be found in an Old Testament Bible verse, and that the USA has value only to the extent that it serves as the Sword and Shield of the Church. I don't. Our creed, the Declaration, was written by a Deist, who authored the first Act of Religious Toleration in world history. You can be who you want to be and do what you want to do over here, as long as you understand the same applies to everyone and support the ideology and government which makes it possible. Rational self interest is the sum of the whole affair. The substitution of religious euphoria and blind acceptance of arbitrary authority based on pathological moods resulting from that euphoria is one of the things that the USA was designed to protect us against.

You imagine this statement: A satisfying sex life with one's husband or wife is necessary for that happiness shallow, somehow. I have observed that a marriage devoid of sexual satisfaction is a nuthouse able to maintain a carefully maintained mask of sanity. Religious delusions figure prominently in maintaining that fragile guise.

"Did you actually manage to find a spouse who shares this shallow view?"

Mind your own bloody business. One thing I find extremely distasteful in the religiously pre-occupied is how they feel entitled to invade the privacy of everybody and anybody, total strangers, working acquaintences, whoever. Anyone is fair game. It's irritating beyond belief.

"So love and intimacy tend culminate from sex is only for it's own sake?"

Have you ever held a woman you love passionately in your arms? Do you have any idea of the kinship between love and death? Do you know what love is? Have you ever been in love? This is the kind of question only a sexless alien or a sentient robot would ask. I am flabbergasted that any adult would be able to ask it.

"...become problematic, as does the happiness which results from that love and intimacy.

This is a view of sex as nothing more than a drug."

If you derive no happiness from the sex, bonding and intimacy with that absolutely necessary other without whom life is not worth living, then you need some serious professional help.

"...and as it detracts from individual happiness, is morally wrong.

A morality of self gratification? This is called hedonism."

Read the Declaration of Independence. It deals with rational self interest, and if you think that's hedonism, then you need to go back to the 8th grade.

All else proceeds from that. This other comment:

"Can I then assume that you believe that sex for procreation is morally wrong? "

is something your 8th grade English teacher should call you out on.

I hope that you are a junior high school student and not of voting age.

I have observed that a marriage devoid of sexual satisfaction is a nuthouse able to maintain a carefully maintained mask of sanity.

Let's hope you or your spouse doesn't get impotent. Your view of marital commitment doesn't seem to extend beyond mutual sexual self-gratification.

It is perfectly acceptable in an ethical debate to point out how totally unworkable an advocated lifestyle position may be.

This is the kind of question only a sexless alien or a sentient robot would ask. I am flabbergasted that any adult would be able to ask it.

A fallacious Ad Hominem attack followed by a quick dodge of the question.

If you derive no happiness from the sex, bonding and intimacy with that absolutely necessary other without whom life is not worth living, then you need some serious professional help.

Most people can and will live without sex. The alternative you advocate is in itself a potentially self destructive addiction that is widely regarded as needing the "professional help" you refer to.

Read the Declaration of Independence. It deals with rational self interest, and if you think that's hedonism, then you need to go back to the 8th grade.

You must be referring to the French revolution. Our Declaration of Independence dealt with enlightened self interest. The hedonism you that you seem to be advocating is, at its core, the ideology holding that the only good is in seeking pleasure. It is not a sustainable philosophy.

?...is something your 8th grade English teacher should call you out on. I hope that you are a junior high school student and not of voting age.

Just more Ad Hominems. Throughout your comments here you have advocated the pursuit of sexual self gratification as the supreme objective of human happiness and as a necessary condition for a fulfilling existence. The sad irony of this hedonistic view is that the singular pursuit of your own happiness and self-gratification will ultimately leave you with neither.