better questions are, how did sex ever get seperated from love ? or how did sex ever come to be associated with love? isn't sex an expression of love? or an entirely different irresistable compulsion that we can't live without, just like food? what ya think?
2007-08-01 04:28:27 · 12 answers · asked by Ed II 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
I say sex started to get more separated from love during the "free love" period of the 1960s.
2007-08-01 05:58:16 · answer #1 · answered by Karen 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Sex without love, if every one was to adopt
that philosophy, would not only corrupt the individuals, but society as well....You're
describing something that's already been tried and failed.
In the two ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, from the book of Genesis, loveless sex led to all out wickedness.And
for that reason the Lord destroyed these cities along with the people residing in them.
Sex without being in love is like purchasing a house without any doors or windows-for once inside you become trapped and is; therefore, the prisoner of your own short-
comings.
Sex would no longer hold any true values without love being placed into the equation.
It's cheapened and rendered meaningless
when the two are separated. It becomes a processor without the monitor. A TV without
the satellite or cable. A dinner or meal without the food.....absolutely worthless. A vast waste of time.
Sex got separated from love when people
decided that love was irrelevant and that sex
could be used to create capital, or as an instrument of vengeance, or as a vehicle for
an expression of "free love" and pleasure.
Sex become associated with love as a direct command from God (also found in Genesis). And, unless you're some type of
sociopath; or a victim of rape or molestation
and etc.; we were pretty much born with the
tendency to lump love and sex together.
Yes, sex is an expression of love proving that you comprehend that love has to be present in order for you to express it in the first place. Why express something that you don't even feel or believe in to begin with?
Finally, if sex has evolved into an entirely different irresistable compulsion that one can't live without then it sound like a psychosis that needs to be treated by a psychiatrist, such as nymphomania or satyriasis.
2007-08-01 05:18:55 · answer #2 · answered by sylvester m 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think that we're like all other animals on this planet. Our basic instinct is to survive, to make sure our species lives on. There are certain things that a species must do to survive and those are eating, pooping and procreating. The things I think that make humans slightly different from the rest of the animals on this planet is that we have opposable thumbs and we have a brain that allows us the ability to reason and have emotions. Is it ok for people to have sex without being in love? To each his own. I think if it's mutual and understood between two parties that the act that they are about to embark upon lacks any emotions and is pure lust, and they take the necessary precautions (condom), and they are of a mature age to make intelligent decisions, then yeah, I think that's ok. As long as no-one gets hurt.
2007-08-01 04:47:48 · answer #3 · answered by bizhead 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
you're truthfully in the incorrect class. From what I keep in mind of my historic previous, intercourse grew to become into used broadly speaking to procreate and for excitement. Love is probably no longer needed. For an occasion, many cultures, in the previous and now, have arranged marriages. The couples have babies even however they could no longer love one yet another and that's appropriate by using the cultures in touch. i think of it grew to become into in the process the Renaissance era (i think of - ought to've been the midsection a protracted time) wherein romantic love grew to become into popularized and linked with intercourse and marriage. the version between intercourse and making love is a controversy of concentration. throughout intercourse, your concentration is on captivating your self. that's a organic urge, like wanting nutrition and that's ok. it is the reason the international's oldest occupation is prostitution. throughout love-making, the concentration is on captivating your spouse and that's an expression of affection.
2016-10-08 23:36:32 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well first, individuals can live without sex. it's not a neccesity like love. Love is indeed a neccesity. Only if everyone on this earth stopped having sex would we be indanger of our population dying off. Couples can say that sex is an expression of love, but i don't think so. It's more of an innate desire for physical satisfaction-it's a pleasurable luxury.
2007-08-01 04:34:19 · answer #5 · answered by rockingballerina 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Sex is a natural instinct. Love is the icing on the cake
2007-08-01 05:15:42 · answer #6 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't see any big deal by having sex without being in a sentimental relation on any level whatsoever.
My answer is this: Go for it.
2007-08-01 04:41:59 · answer #7 · answered by Neo 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why do you keep posting this lame question in the HISTORY forum? Are you just stupid, or are you a spammer? Cease and desist of be reported for spamming.
2007-08-01 05:36:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why do you keep posting this same question. Three times in ten minutes? A bit excessive, dear.
2007-08-01 04:34:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
sex is ment for love between two married ppl or with your life partner (male n female) otherwise its fornication but these days ppl can't live w/o sex. n u can get aids or other disease
2007-08-01 04:42:52 · answer #10 · answered by the mrs:) 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋