autographedcat: (Default)
autographedcat ([personal profile] autographedcat) wrote2011-02-14 08:52 pm
Entry tags:

QOTD

"Human beings took our animal need for palatable food … and turned it into chocolate souffles with salted caramel cream. We took our ability to co-operate as a social species … and turned it into craft circles and bowling leagues and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. We took our capacity to make and use tools … and turned it into the Apollo moon landing. We took our uniquely precise ability to communicate through language … and turned it into King Lear.

None of these things are necessary for survival and reproduction. That is exactly what makes them so splendid. When we take our basic evolutionary wiring and transform it into something far beyond any prosaic matters of survival and reproduction … that’s when humanity is at its best. That’s when we show ourselves to be capable of creating meaning and joy, for ourselves and for one another. That’s when we’re most uniquely human.

And the same is true for sex. Human beings have a deep, hard-wired urge to replicate our DNA, instilled in us by millions of years of evolution. And we’ve turned it into an intense and delightful form of communication, intimacy, creativity, community, personal expression, transcendence, joy, pleasure, and love. Regardless of whether any DNA gets replicated in the process.

Why should we see this as sinful? What makes this any different from chocolate souffles and King Lear?"
--Greta Christina

(via Sex Is Not The Enemy)

[identity profile] autographedcat.livejournal.com 2011-02-15 02:26 am (UTC)(link)
Forgive me if this doesn't come out well. I've been trying to formulate this reply in such a way that I hope is properly respectful.

I'm obviously not the author, but I'm not sure she's assuming that at all. You might find completely different examples that illustrate the same basic point she's making within the boundaries of your faith. And that's certainly not to say that, if we accept her thesis, "anything goes" and nothing is bad.

And the same is true for sex. I certainly hope that, within the confines of your own marriage and the boundaries set for you by your faith, sex is still capable of being "an intense and delightful form of communication, intimacy, creativity, community, personal expression, transcendence, joy, pleasure, and love. Regardless of whether any DNA gets replicated in the process."
batyatoon: (Default)

[personal profile] batyatoon 2011-02-15 02:35 am (UTC)(link)
No worries. :)

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the author's thesis is that anything goes and nothing is bad, but it does sound to me an awful lot like "an it harm none, do what thou wilt". Which is an approach to life that I have a good deal of respect for, come to that.

[identity profile] osewalrus.livejournal.com 2011-02-15 11:35 am (UTC)(link)
I only respect this if it comes with the caveat "and blame no one else if it don't work out." Or, as Bujold so neatly put it: "You chose an action, you chose the consequences of that action."