Craig Hill
KC Hill
Paladin
Oracle of DelphiNo public sex please - we love each other
September 2nd 2006 02:41
Over at www.philosophyblog.com.au Adrian argues that sexual intercourse in public between consenting adults ought to be made legal. His argument are based on the fallacious assumption sexual intercourse is nothing but a pneumatic physical activity with no more moral significance than combing another's hair or massaging someone's shoulders. I profoundly disagree with his assumption and offer the following alternative understanding of the sexual act.
Sexual intercourse, at it best, is the physical expression of a deeply held love between two persons, persons who themselves are inherently profoundly valuable moral beings who wish to express their profound unifying love by being as unified as physically possible. It is also the means to the miracle of procreation. It is the outward expression of a unity of two people's souls and hearts. This profound unification at the level of the soul and heart does not include others and is shattered when expressed under the gaze of another - hence the natural instinct we all have to make love in private.
Adrian nods in this direction when he mentions the sacredness of sex but argues that "It's not clear that sex should be safe from being devalued". This gets to the heart of the matter. If you don't think sex is valuable or don't think it needs to be valued you'll do it as often as possible with as many people as take your fancy in any place which seems connivent at the time. If you think there's more to it and that sex is an integral aspect of bonding strong family ties which in turn build a lasting and meaningful society - you might consider exercising a modicum of self control and restricting yourself to the bedroom.
Sexual intercourse, at it best, is the physical expression of a deeply held love between two persons, persons who themselves are inherently profoundly valuable moral beings who wish to express their profound unifying love by being as unified as physically possible. It is also the means to the miracle of procreation. It is the outward expression of a unity of two people's souls and hearts. This profound unification at the level of the soul and heart does not include others and is shattered when expressed under the gaze of another - hence the natural instinct we all have to make love in private.
Adrian nods in this direction when he mentions the sacredness of sex but argues that "It's not clear that sex should be safe from being devalued". This gets to the heart of the matter. If you don't think sex is valuable or don't think it needs to be valued you'll do it as often as possible with as many people as take your fancy in any place which seems connivent at the time. If you think there's more to it and that sex is an integral aspect of bonding strong family ties which in turn build a lasting and meaningful society - you might consider exercising a modicum of self control and restricting yourself to the bedroom.
| 85 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Go to Craig Hill's home page by clicking here
Comment by Adrian
Philosophy Blog
I appreciate your point of view. But there's something to clarify.
When you write: "His argument are based on the fallacious assumption sexual intercourse is nothing but a pneumatic physical activity with no more moral significance than combing another's hair or massaging someone's shoulders."
-- I don't think my arguments need to assume this. I believe my arguments are compatible with your assumption, that sex is sacred.
And the reason is this. I can believe sex is sacred, but also believe that it should be up to the individual to make up their own minds on the matter.
It seems to me that you're arguing that since you hold particular beliefs, they should be imposed on other people -- and that's where we differ.
Comment by Adrian
Philosophy Blog
Comment by Ross
The problem with the "let people make up their own mind" argument is that if I'm wandering around Sydney bumping into copulating couples I have no choice in the matter - sex has been trivialised whether I like it or not, whereas if it's going on behind closed doors I need to make a concious choice to go and seek it out if I really want to watch.
Comment by Adrian
Philosophy Blog
Okay, a response...
Firstly, does publicness in fact trivialise/
Well, trivialisation to whom? To the participants? To the onlookers?
Consider if Catholic masses were performed on every street corner. I think the mass would still be sacred to the participants. And if you, the onlooker, also believe in the sanctity of mass, I don't think that seeing the event so commonly performed would make you change your mind.
Similarly with sex. The couple who has sex in public might still regard it as a sacred thing. And if you, the onlooker who believes in the sanctity of sex, see them -- will you be forced to change your mind?
Secondly, assume that publicness does trivialise things, does put pressure on you to change your opinion. Should publicness therefore be banned?
I'd suggest not. Every day there are things that put pressure on us to change our opinions -- persuasive orators, advertising, conversations with friends, etc. I think it's important, both for the individual and for society, to be open to such pressures to change one's mind.
What do you reckon?
Comment by RebeccaB
Loved your blog. Sounds very romantic.
Comment by Damo
Change may be inevitable, but anarky is not.
Comment by Smiley Eyes
It might become more of an act like public urination –‘Oops nature’s call couldn’t hold… but to release!’… and also wondering what is the stake of moral standing if it’s between same gender…. [just a thought.. ]
An interesting article... enjoyed reading it =)
Comment by Anonymous
I mean, sometimes your in the mood, it might be because you just are at this time of day, maybe you had a bad day and want to forget about it, maybe it just crossed your mind, and its all physical, you want to physically relax through the act of doing it. But who are you doing it with? Someone you cherish? WHo you deserve? Or are you just going after the next best person you can find in an equally horny mood? If thats the case your doing it because you can, and it has nothing to do with emotions. You just want to do it.