Showing posts with label Human sexuality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Human sexuality. Show all posts

Thursday, July 26, 2018

Agape or eros?

Unlike other religions, Unitarian Universalism does not hammer its members about sexual morality. UUs see sexual behavior as a part of higher values like dignity, respect, and love. Unitarian Universalism has one of the healthiest attitudes towards sexual behavior  of all the religions in the world.

What does sex have to do with spirituality? Very little. Jesus and Buddha teach very little about it. Since we are not bodies with a spirit, we are spirits with a body, bodily functions are not a focus of healthy spirituality.

Unfortunately, sex is a pre-occupation, though, with religions. Probably because it is a powerful bodily drive like eating and drinking, defecating and urinating. Sexual behavior is something that religions can attempt to control people with.

Religions have made sex an idol. It is placed before their teaching about the love of the Divine. If religions can control the bodies of their members, they can subjugate and oppress millions of people and keep them captive to their control.

The spiritually mature have come to realize that the religious focus and control of sexual behavior is nonsense. Moral condemnation is further attempts to judge and separate not accept and join. With the focus on sexual behavior the Atonement is delayed and thwarted.

Sexual morality is a side show for religious circuses. Religions showcase sexual behavior that is titillating and tempting and focuses on  the very behaviors it is condemning.

Avoid the sideshow and stay focused on the importance of forgiveness, compassion, and agape.

At the end of the day, spirituality is about agape not eros.


Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Unitarian Universalism and sex.

Lucy, your question about sex and Unitarian Universalism is appreciated. As you mentioned, other religions and Christians denominations have many teachings and rules about sexual behavior that sometimes seems way out of proportion to other moral issues.

Unitarian Universalism is neutral about sexual behavior being neither for it or against it. UU respects the person's right to conscience and the free and responsible search for truth and meaning. UU also insists on the inherent worth and dignity of every person. Having said that, UU leaves the topic of sex alone.

The main purpose of sex, of course, is procreative to assure the continuation of our species, homo sapiens. Mother Nature has also made sex enjoyable for the most part so that humans will engage in it. On the ego plane, humans have wrapped sexual behavior into a belief about special relationships which becomes called romantic love. This emphasis on special relationships when it comes to sex contributes to huge amounts of drama as evidenced in our songs, our movies, our TV shows, and literature.

When it comes to sexual attraction and behavior, the emphasis is on the body with less attention to the soul. Pornography carries this dynamic to the extreme wherein lust is stimulated by images and interactions which have nothing to do with the spirits of the people engaged in the activity. This emphasis is in violation of UUs first principle and the fourth and so may diminish the deeper awareness of the possible meaning and purpose of sexual behavior which may be to transcend the physical and enhance deeper spiritual communication. Psychologists have found that sexual satisfaction is not enhanced by mechanical actions but by the quality of friendship of the people involved. 

And so we come back again to the question behind your question which is "What is the purpose of sexual behavior?" The answer is procreative and recreative and it is in the procreative aspect that unconsciously we experience the most guilt because we believe that we have usurped the creative power of God. God is the creative energy of the universe who uses us to extend God's creation and we should realize that this creative power is not ours, but comes from the Godhead working through us. Do we understand ourselves to be the extension of God's creative energy in the world when we engage in sex or do we think we have stolen this power to ourselves alone? It is this unconscious guilt that we have stolen the fire of creation from God that leads to the myriad rules that religions make about sex without being fully aware of what they are doing.

Unitarian Universalism is not a guilt inducing religion. It does not teach the belief about Original sin but of Original blessing. UU does not believe in sin, guilt, and fear as other religions do and so it is neutral when it comes to sexual behavior. Unitarian Universalism is one religion which is not into the guilting business. If UUs teach anything about sexual behavior, it is that  sex should always be loving, and respectfully engaged in with an awareness of our contributing with the Godhead to the interdependent web of all existence.

Love,

Uncle David


Monday, March 23, 2015

Humanae Vitae, Catholic Identity, and the state of the world today

From "Does Method Matter? Contraception & Catholic Identity" from Commonweal, March 20, 2015, by Lisa Fullan, pp.20-21

Humanae vitae also presumes a degree of self-determination that many women do not enjoy, especially (but not exclusively) in the developing world. Paul VI warned that contraception would leave women vulnerable to sexual exploitation by men. Sadly, such abuse long predated the Pill. What reliable contraception does—especially contraception that women control—is give women greater determination over their reproductive lives, even if their partners are indifferent to their well-being and that of their children. What Humanae vitae described as self-indulgence sounds to many women like self-defense, or at least self-care and more responsible parenting.
...................................................
During the papacy of John Paul II (one of the few members of the birth-control commission who had supported the line taken by Humanae vitae), adherence to the church’s teaching against artificial contraception became an unofficial criterion for ecclesiastical promotion, a policy that eventually unified the church’s leadership in opposition to a practice accepted by most lay Catholics. Over time, a culture of silence took hold in parishes; people stopped confessing the use of birth control, believing in conscience that it was not sinful (even as confession itself became rare for most church-going Catholics). Priests, many of whom also harbored private disagreements with the teaching, largely dropped the question.
..............................................
And now? The church stands uneasily divided: many bishops continue to argue that the teaching of Humanae vitae is an important marker of Catholic identity, giving this aspect of moral teaching an unwarranted significance. Most of the laity find the teaching unconvincing and so disregard it. Priests stay quiet, lest they be caught between their congregations and their bishops. A few bishops are calling for a new look at the teaching in light of its near-universal lack of reception by the laity. It remains to be seen whether Pope Francis will revisit the question.
............................................
Doctrine should reflect the way those basic values are incarnate in the lives of Catholics, and especially women, whose voices have largely been absent from the formulation of the church’s teaching on this question.
............................................
To double down on a doctrine that presents an unnatural vision of sex to Catholics who know better would only exacerbate the atmosphere of distrust between the laity and their bishops. Silence is not the answer. 

  • My ex-wife and I had 9 kids. We were married in the Catholic Church and raised our children Catholic. We used birth control and Natural Family Planning to space our children.
  • I have never found the RC's teaching on birth control convincing but its teaching on human sexuality has some good aspects to it which I find empowering and affirming.
  • It could be argued that the RC's teaching on birth control has been more oppressive and disempowering to women than respectful and protective.
  • Jesus, the God of Christianity, had very little to say about sex and I think would be supportive of birth control as a means of limiting reproduction while supporting what the RC calls the "unitive" contribution of human sexual behavior.
  • Unitarian Universalism has little to say about sex other than it needs to be respectful of the inherent worth and dignity of every person and it should promote justice, compassion and equity in our human relations.
  • Roman Catholicism has been hurt by the teachings of Humanae Vitae because it does not fit with the lived experience of most Catholics who have followed their own consciences which has brought them into opposition to the teachings of their church. This phenomenon has led to demoralization and defection from RC to other Christian denominations or religions or none.
  • It would seem that at this point in human evolution, the limiting of human reproduction is a desirable thing for the planet and the survival of our species and other species. Out or respect for the interdependent web it would appear the teachings of Humanae Vitae, while perhaps well meant, are unethical and immoral.
  • I don't regret having nine children and I believe it was God's will for me and my partner, but today this might be considered self indulgent and anti-social.


Print Friendly and PDF