That helps a lot. I've read this several times. I hope that will help me to understand your beliefs. I think that contraception is always wrong, so I don't agree with your ideas, but as you are smarter than me, that doesn't mean I personally have the ability to refute it either.
Let's see. I would agree that sex is a form of communication. But I don't see how that would ever--under any circumstance--make it acceptable to fornicate, or adulterate, or rape, or contracept. Speaking is a form of communication, too, but that doesn't mean that everything that is said is acceptable.
Yeah, that´s why "consent" is such a useful concept here: It makes sure you (or anybody) needn´t participate in a communication (sexually or otherwise) if you don´t find it acceptable.
With immoral sex, isn't it lust, selfishness, disrespect, and the willingness to use others that is being communicated?
If that´s your conviction, feel free to act accordingly.
If, however, you want to convince me of this idea you would have to do more than claim it or phrase it as a rhethorical question.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a puritan. I think that sexual feelings are very important and good, and should not be repressed. But I think that sexual freedom means actively receiving them as energy for being a more complete person, without the need to act them out.
I don´t recall postulating a "
need to act them out".
My understanding is that you don't believe that rape--or any act--is objectively wrong.
Yes, I don´t know that there´s such a thing as "objective morality". I don´t even know what that´s supposed to mean.
It´s regrettable that you are unwilling or unable to explain that which is one of your keyterms, but until that happens I won´t work with it.
As I understand it, that is why the idea of morality is not part of your worldvew.
Not really. As far as causality is concerned, it´s more the other way round: "(Objective) morality" is a meaningless term to me, that´s why I won´t make a statement involving this concept.
I believe that rape and contraception--and fornication, and inappropriate content, and adultery, and masturbation--are always intrinsically wrong, even if a person---through lack of freedom (for example, an obsessive-compulsive disorder, or mental illness, or other reason) or lack of knowledge-- is not culpable.
I have long understood that you believe this. I just see no reason to act upon your beliefs (or even only seriously considering them) - unless you can bring anything to the table that helps substantiating them.
In the context of marriage, I would see uncontracepted sex as a legitimate and wonderful way of communicating openness to new life and love (bonding), and respect, and tenderness, and permanent committment, etc. In this context or openness to new life and permanent monogamous committment, I wouldn't have a problem with seeing sex as a form of recreation and fun, also, as a form of diversion from troubles and stress.
Then I suggest
you shape
your sex life according to
your beliefs.
As far as your implicit comparing the use of a condom to the use of a telephone, I'm not sure I see the analogy. A telephone is used to improve communication. For example, I have a true friend in another state. If we couldn't communicate by telephone, we would be able to communicate much less.
If it were so important to you to maximize communication so that it includes all options you could always travel or move there.
That´s the very point: I have yet to see a good reason for the belief that if a form of communication in a way that allows for all options it is therefore "wrong, immoral,...".
So the barrier there would not be the telephone, but the distance between us. Perhaps using a condom is like inserting a distance between people more than it is like using a telephone to cross that distance.
I don´t see there´s anything wrong with reducing the communication to calling each other even though the participants are next door neighbours. People intentionally restrict their communication all the time (to certain purposes, topics, media...) - i.e. they erect "barriers" or "distances". I wouldn´t know why to call their communication wrong or immoral.