If Sex Is A Drug, What Isn't?

kellym78's picture

I've been too busy lately to post on topics when they might actually be fresh (novel concept, I know), but I really wanted to touch on the Pope Benedict soliloquy on sex. Having read Humanae Vitae myself, I am quite familiar with the subject at hand. The Catholic Church, while progressive in some areas, most notably science, still clings to these archaic beliefs about sex and birth control. I guess that's not surprising considering that sins "of the flesh" are considered to be more grave than others, but even within the bounds of marriage, birth control of any sort other than Natural Family Planning (which differs from the commonly known Rhythm Method and is more effective, but not by much).  The HV also addresses euthanasia and abortion, rules for fair and justified war, and other issues that pertain to the creation or destruction of life.

Most interesting, though, was Pope Benedict's comment about sex "becoming like a drug" (link). There are people who deal with sex addiction, just as there are those with gambling or shopping addictions. What needs to be addressed here, though, is firstly, can a biological function become an addiction and should it be labeled as such, and secondly, the behavior of an addict is most often just the overt manifestation of a deeper issue. Often this may be a chemical imbalance in the brain, or it could also be a learned behavior primarily driven by the adrenaline rush. At any rate, if sex is a drug, then we have all the more reason to label religion as a drug as well.

Excluding those with eating disorders, which are problematic but not necessarily the result of our biological urge to eat as opposed to the ability to control oneself or self-esteem issues, is eating three meals a day a food addiction?  Even compulsive overeaters can't necessarily be labeled as addicts because their issues are often much more complex as well. 

Sex is a biological urge--something that we are literally driven to do, with a few rare exceptions. So, assuming that your sex life is normal and not problematic (ie not uncontrollable nymphomaniacs who can't stop themselves from having sex), how can we compare a normal bodily function to a drug to which we can become addicted? Is this just another scare tactic? The DARE program of sex ed? I guess the entire human race is addicted to shitting and sleeping as well.

Everything that a person experiences is the direct result of the release and uptake of neurotransmitters and neuronal impulses. A malfunction in that system, which is intricate and not well understood, could cause a cacophony of seemingly dysfunctional behaviors. The act of sex, or any physical contact, and orgasm in particular causes the release of oxytocin, which is a neurotransmitter that causes feelings of attachment and what we would call love. Childbirth and breastfeeding do as well. This is to facilitate the preservation of the family unit. Sex also causes serotonin and dopamine to be released in the brain, causing feelings of well-being and relaxation. In high concentrations, such as with the use of cocaine or amphetamines, it is dopamine that elicits the euphoric high. This cocktail of neurotransmitters is powerful--and necessary. Without it, who would really want to procreate? The fact that this has been selected for over millenia of evolution coupled with the success of the human race is an indicator of just how vital the pleasure associated with sex is.

A normal, healthy sex drive is not an addiction. One of the greatest sins of christianity, in my opinion, is the suppression of normal sexual behavior, which ironically tends to cause much more serious psychological problems than just admitting that human beings want to have sex.

Considering that the development of these responses is completely necessary for the propagation of the species, if Benedict considers sex a drug based on the neurochemical response, then he must also admit that religion is a drug. Religious practices cause stimulation of various parts of the brain, most notably the temporal lobes, and through repeated usage of those pathways, they become strengthened and the brain soon restructures itself to accomodate these neuronal connections, leaving one in a state in which they either cannot leave religion or just don't want to give it up. Going to church, reading the bible, and prayer could all be considered the "fix" craved by addicts of all sorts.

One of the most common excuses for the tolerance of religion in society is that it makes people happy or gives them comfort. Well, so does heroin, coke, or pot. As a matter of fact, if one takes it to that extreme, everything is a drug and we are all addicts. We're addicted to food, breathing, the beauty of nice spring days. The affection we have for our families is equally an addiction. Pope Ratzi can't just pick and choose activities of which he disapproves and label them as addictive drugs--to maintain his position, he must admit that everything is a drug, including his religion, and therefore the term drug is meaningless and obsolete.

Atheist Books

ProzacDeathWish's picture

Defecation must be a drug,

Defecation is a drug, too !   I must be totally addicted because no matter how many times I try to stop this really disgusting habit  I just can't do it.  It's controlling my life !

www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/misanthropy

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." Rudyard Kipling

HombreMoleculos's picture

If sex is a drug, what isn't?

Sex, Drugs & Rock & Roll, Not necessarily in that order.

EXC's picture

kellym78 wrote:Pope Ratzi

kellym78 wrote:

Pope Ratzi can't just pick and choose activities of which he disapproves and label them as addictive drugs--to maintain his position, he must admit that everything is a drug, including his religion, and therefore the term drug is meaningless and obsolete.

I dreaming of the day when the Pope can be extradited and jailed just like the Cocaine drug lords. The pope doesn't like sex and narcotics cause they are competing drugs.

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca

Hambydammit's picture

Quote:At any rate, if sex is

Quote:
At any rate, if sex is a drug, then we have all the more reason to label religion as a drug as well.

While all your points are great, (as usual) I'd like to see the religious address this one in particular.  How is it that we catch so much shit for calling theism a mental disorder, and theists are free to toss around the word "drug" as if it has no definition at all?

Double standard, anyone?

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism

Suicide is the only cure,

Suicide is a sure cure, life is a nasty drug.

Life is a sin, just smell your shit. ((( Prozac ....

Crucify the Pope, we need more saviors.

Science progress is the solution to abortion, and STD's , after all, we are wired to fuck fuck fuck, and fuck.

Science created the rubber, the Pope doesn't like rubbers. ( WTF? )

The Pope wants followers and murders for his lust drug.

Calling all girls, fuck the Pope's brains out, heal him. "Fuck" the enemy good, I meant "L O V E" .... ( a message from Jesus )

Did I say I want to fuck?     .....   

Kelly is a favorite dream of mine, She is REAL GOOD ! True LOVE ....   

I have only one standard, do what feels "good", rationally.  ((( buddha/hamby   
 

EXC's picture

I AM GOD AS YOU

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:


Science created the rubber, the Pope doesn't like rubbers. ( WTF? )

 

Rubbers make it difficult for him to feel the inside of alter boys.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca

This is not a joke, I sadly

This is not a joke, I sadly tell you truly, in all honesty, because I care about all of us, the Pope and his are evil ....  an arch enemy of me and my atheist old friends jesus and buddha, as we are "ONE" in the spirit of L O V E, as in caring and compassion and peace and kindness and happiness and comfort and equality and justice and .....

  I ran out of rum, damn it ....  that shouldn't happen to no one,

and people starve while the church and gov and controllers roll in mega cash ???  

       Eat them , destroy them          don't hurt them, heal them , words are powerful ....  

  Want a GOD lesson? , seek a scientist ; Want a lesson in EVIL, go to church .... 

                        "FIX MY WORDS" , said a buddha .....    

totus_tuus's picture

An interesting piece. 

An interesting piece.  Thanks for the compliment regarding the progressiveness of the Catholic Church.  It's one of the few positive things I've seen regarding religion on this site.

Understanding Benedict XVI's comments requires a deeper reading of Humane Vitae.  Specifically, it rquires that one understand the danger of the separation of the unitive and procreative aspects of the sex act.

Religious views towards birth control were fairly uniform among all denomonations until the early 1930's.  Until the Lambeth Conference of 1930, all major denominations of Christianity considered birth control to be sinful.  The Anglican Lambeth Conference of 1930 (I think it was 1930) broke with that tradition and other denominations were quick to follow suit.  In the Catholic Church, the question was considered for a further 30 plus years.  Pope Paul VI, author of the eventual definitive Ctaholic teaching on the subject, Humanae Vitae (On Human Life), realized the importance of a resolution to the issue and agonized over what that teaching should be.  So we see that the Catholic decision to keep with the original teaching was not a hasty one.

Paul VI realized that the separation of the unitive and procreatve aspects of the sex act had a couple of far reaching ramifications on the humman view of sexuality.  First, since no form of birth control is 100% effective, there were bound to be failures to prevent conception, or what are euphemistically called "accidents".   These accidents would require a "plan B" to prevent couples from being "punished" (to borrow an Obama-ism) by an unwanted pregnancy.  That plan B is abortion which has led to an overall degradation of the human view of the value of life; a degradation which has reached the point that euthanasia is legal and some nations and seriously considered in many others, and the state has assumed the right in some cases to terminate the life of disabled persons.

Secondly, and more germane to this particular conversation, Paul VI, realized that rendering the sex act sterile, that is rendering it incapable of concieving new life, removed a sense of the sacred from the act and would lead to persons using others merely as objects of pleasure rather than as persons with a purpose, deserving of dignity.  Certainly the soaring rates of teen sexual activity, marital infidelity, and sexually transmitted disease would seem to bear this out.

It is that aspect which seems to concern B16 the most about those who deny the foresight of his predecessor, Paul VI.

I find it ridiculous that folks think that the Catholic Church takes such a dim view of sexuality.  Quite the contrary, the Church sees sex within the bonds of marriage as cooperation of himanity in the very act ofCreation with God.  Further, the Church is aware that it is through sexual activity that more little Catholics come into the world.

I find it very interesting that Kelly would then follow this article with one extolling the health benefits of pregnancy for women.  Another interesting article might look into the positive danger posed to women's health by some forms of birth control.

 

 

 

"With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation." Pope John Paul II

More science and sex

More science and sex education is the solution, and teaching ethics starting grade one .... Religion "hates life", and is based on greed, power, money, fear, ego inflation ..... etc.

  GIRLS

  WARNING: The Birth Control "Patch" seems a bad idea. Get back on the pill etc. I heard an hour of this on the KPFK public radio. Forward this imfo .... from  www.notmypatch.org

Read this, the petition,
http://action.citizen.org/t/6578/content.jsp?content_KEY=4137

 

O.K.F.M.D.O.A.'s picture

Addiction is defined by consequences

Continued behaviour despite negative consequences = addiction.

So sex within a relationship would be unlikely to qualify, while regular anonymous sex probably would (consequences include STD's and feeling like crap about yourself).

Religion may not meet this definition, as it's unclear whether there are any specific negative consequences for an individual religious person.

As for being "like a drug" - can't you say that about anything enjoyable?

Brian37's picture

ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Defecation is a drug, too !   I must be totally addicted because no matter how many times I try to stop this really disgusting habit  I just can't do it.  It's controlling my life !

I hated the show "Kids In the Hall" when Comedy Central first started. I thought it was a cheep knockoff of Monty Python. But, there was one skit I found extreemly funny.

It was poking fun at "Support groups". The skit shows a schoolroom, obviously after hours and shows one of the men stand up and say, "My name is John Smith", the rest respond, "Hi John". So after a few of the guys make their announcements you discover that it is a support group for guys who don't want their bladders controlling them. The skit progresses with each one being picked off by their natural need to go.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

MASTERBATION!!!!

Dont forget masterbation is also looked down apon, bur every other animal in the world does it... just sumthin to keep in mind

Knowledge is power
Power leads to corruption
Corrution leads to crime
Crime doesn't pay
So if you study you'll go broke.

skywolf's picture

sex sex sex oh and sex too

sex and people people and sex you can't have one without the other they go together like jelly and peanut butter

oh look an atheist poem about my fave subject sex

we should all buy fleshlights and enjoy masturbation

we should all buy sybians and enjoy masturbation

we should all have as many condoms as we want

we should all have as many babies as we can feed

we should all give back massages to our pregnant women

we should all give oral pleasure to our women

we should make a federal sex holiday

we should kill all the std's including aids

and by the time we finish this list

we should have no time left for religion or war

 

 

 

mohammed is mr poopy pants allah is a cootie queen and islam is a lint licker
http://seekerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/_blogger_5932_1957_1600_religion_of_peace_1-1.jpg

Ooohhh, that's cool SEX

Ooohhh, that's cool SEX wolf, did you write that ? I must write some chords for this    Pop, rap, rock?    hey, all that ....  

skywolf's picture

sometimes the words they just flow

rock i do believe it would have a nice hip grinding effect

Understanding Benedict XVI's

Understanding Benedict XVI's comments requires a deeper reading of Humane Vitae.  Specifically, it rquires that one understand the danger of the separation of the unitive and procreative aspects of the sex act.

I've read it. But, then, I was a faithful Catholic until fairly recently.

The problem as I see it is that these "aspects" are simply dreamed up. Sex performed strictly for pleasure is not only known in the animal kingdom, it is a common practice in one of our closest relatives, the Bonobo. Does this not sound striking human?

Sexual intercourse plays a major role in Bonobo society, being used as a greeting, a means of conflict resolution and post conflict reconciliation, and as favors traded by the females in exchange for food.

By attempting to stigmatize normal behavior, the Church has created a lot of damage. I can, in fact, empathize with the Popes' messages. Sex was a lot like a drug for me when I was Catholic. This was largely because I fought to repress it. I saw normal sexual reactions as a combination of demonic suggestion and the betrayal of my own fallen nature. I took about every piece of advice I could get from saints on spiritual warfare that I could. Those years were marked by constant penance. I kept my local priests busy, because I would phone them up and ask for them to hear my confessions constantly. I wonder how many full 15 mystery Rosarys I said begging Mary to intercede for me. I considered chemical castration and, at low points, even suicide, as I wanted to keep my "sex addiction" away from my children. I considered my own damnation to be a small price to pay to save them.

The funny thing is, I beat the "addiction" in the end. When my faith died, so did my attempt to repress my sexuality and, poof!, those overpowering urges disappeared. My sex life is fine now, my wife and I are a lot closer, and I will certainly never saddle my children with the suffocation I had to endure.

That, totus_tuus, is the sort of damage that the Church's sexual teachings cause. You have people like me suffering in silence. You have people with problems attempting to hide in the priesthood with the naive idea that the solution to disordered sexual urges is more devotion rather than therapy. You have children experimenting with sex as all children will, but having to hide it and living with a deadly ignorance that could mean their death.

As an aside, I think that this year it is far more likely that I will send my kids here rather than the summer Totus Tuus program. Your name just reminded me to look into it.

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.

Pope soap on a rope?

 

Kelly, you did a great job on this article! The thing that impresses me is that even though you are not a neurologist or a psychologist (at least I don’t’ think you are), as a lay person you were able to form a much more cogent argument to support a well thought out position than the Pope. The thing that strikes me about his statement is that it is a perfect example of how pop-psychology can be used by religious leaders to justify positions that they honestly are completely ignorant about.  The fact is that sex CAN be used as a drug. However, now that the Pope has decided to label it as one, the religious community will be working to intervene in our sexual freedoms even more, and to prevent the use of contraception on all fronts. This stance is not only immoral, but it interferes with any genuine social discourse about a very real public health concern. It makes me crazy. I have to say. Again and again the dogma of religion prevents us from discussing grown-up issues, because again and again the religious zealots of the world say “I want things to be this way because God wants them to be this way, and you can’t talk me out of it.” I shudder at the social consequences of the Pope’s stance both here in the bible-thumping USA and in HIV infected Africa. Never mind it’s consequences for global suffering in general. The Pope’s statement is an excellent example of religion’s failure as a transmitter of cultural wisdom. Sex is a mind altering behavior. So is abstinence (as any frustrated teen-ager can tell you). Any behavior that alters your state of mind can be used to avoid coping with life’s stressor’s and frustrations. This is a common coping tactic that all human beings use.   As such, sex can and does lead to addiction. People have been using sex to alter their mental and emotional states forever now, and sexual addiction is a very real psychological phenomena. But here’s the thing. Rather than using his status to educate the world about the nature of addiction (a worthy goal in my opinion, and one that the church is traditionally interested in), he instead uses sexual addiction to justify his immoral policy toward contraception. Of course I guess if I were cynical I might point out that a common strategy of recovering addicts is to replace their addiction to the drug/behavior with their addiction to the religion/belief. One of the functions of religion is that it helps people to structure their experience so that they can undergo psychological transformation. Granted, it does this by introducing a bunch of bullshit beliefs, but it does do this. Addiction is just the sort of behavior that religion actually has an at least not completely bad track-record of handling. Eastern religions are much better at this than Christianity in my view, but hey we are talking about the Pope here.So if the pope came out and said”“One of the great barriers toward knowing God and Christ is addiction and we need as Catholics to take this issue seriously, and start looking at what makes us addicts. This includes not only drugs and alcohol, but sex, gambling etc.” I would at least give him some props for concern for the wellbeing of his flock. If he said” as human beings we have the ability to alter our states of mind, and we have a responsibility to create a state of mental peace and harmony for ourselves and each other. This includes a responsibility to learn how to use sex in a responsible and respectful way.” I would count him as a moral teacher. Instead he said: “No mechanical technique can substitute the act of love that two married people exchange as a sign of a greater mystery:” When he starts talking like that, all I can think of is “sex is only a great mystery if you happen to be an 80 year old virgin. Edit:  One thing I would like to add to this model of addiction is that the process of psychological addiction is not a simple vicious circle.  It's not just that you get the "rush" or the stress release or whatever, and this leads to additional stress down the line.  Most often the "rush" is something that one gets to more or less of a degree from the behavior.  Think of a friday night when you went out and partied, and you started out really stressed out, and you eneded up feeling just great the next morning.  Then you went out again on saturday and partied again, but on sunday you were feeling worn out and hung over.  So you can see, the same behavior creates different results for the practitioner.  What this does is create a  random intermittent reinforcement schedule for the person (a la behavioral psych).  This random payoff is what really drives the psycholgocal addiction, because the person makes the mistake of  trying to chase the rush.  This is all it takes to explain the existance of the city of Las Vegas.

 

O.K.F.M.D.O.A.

O.K.F.M.D.O.A. wrote:
Continued behaviour despite negative consequences = addiction. So sex within a relationship would be unlikely to qualify, while regular anonymous sex probably would (consequences include STD's and feeling like crap about yourself). Religion may not meet this definition, as it's unclear whether there are any specific negative consequences for an individual religious person. As for being "like a drug" - can't you say that about anything enjoyable?
 

I think your definition is way too simple. I continue to work my desk job in spite of the negative consequences of my growing mid-rift. This is not addiction even though it has real and significant health consequences for me. In my own mind I divide addiction up into two parts: Physiological and Psychological addiction. Each of these can exist independently of the other. For example, I am currently on pain killers due to some dental work. When I stop taking them, I not only suffer pain, but I also experience a generalized sense of malaise and “heebee-jeepees” that I recognize as physiological withdrawal. In addition, I recognize that I am starting to need a higher dose to get the same effect – this is a phenomena called drug tolerance. I have good insight about these symptoms, and I know that while I am developing physiological addiction to the drug, I am not psychologically addicted, because I do not use the drug to manage my internal states (other than my tooth pain). Psychological addiction is a bit more subtle. We all suffer stressors, emotional pain and low self-esteem from time to time. Psychological addiction is the practice of using a substance or behavior to alter one’s state of mind to cope with these feelings. This practice has the side effect of creating additional stress, pain and/or low self esteem, which the person then attempts to manage by engaging in the addictive behavior yet again.  OFTEN these behaviors have mind-altering properties all their own. For example, using alcohol alters your state of mind AND is physiologically addictive. Self mutilation is an example of a self-stimulating practice where the practitioner cut’s themselves which releases endorphins which reduce stress, but of course it also activates your body’s defense mechanisms, which adds to your stress load as well. Exercise can be used this way as well, but for most of us, you have to be pretty extreme in your exercise practices to get to the part where it starts damaging your health. Sex is an interesting case, because in addition to being a mind-altering practice in-and-of itself, it also primes the practitioner to create an emotional bond with their sex partner. This emotional bond is normally expressed in the neurological process of falling in love, which has been studied pretty well, and has a well-known neurological profile in the brains of subjects. The interesting thing is that many addicts exhibit the same pattern of brain activity in response to their drug of choice. In effect the drug becomes the love object of the addict. It is if the disease of addiction is co-opting the evolutionary mechanisms for pair-bonding to sustain itself. Or put another way, it’s as if the all lovers are addicts. Might as well face it, your addicted to love!

 

Summary in Song, couldn't

Summary in Song, couldn't resist, I AM impulsive,

Tina Turner - Addicted To Love (Barcelona 1990)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgt8uWR422w

Original - ROBERT PALMER Addicted To Love 12" Extended Version 1986
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYqPy9KD72c&feature=related

  Geezz , damn, girls got the moves !

   The Pope needs some Hoochie Koo bad .... poor guy ....

Atheists have been fighting for birth control a LONG time

Nice post.  I linked to it in mine on "Neo-Malthusianism" (birth control in Victorian England).  Funny how nothing much has changed.  For a glimpse of the history, check it out.

 

 

Popes and science do not mix

The mention about sex as a drug is yet another incursion of Pope Benedict XVI in areas he does not know much about. He should not need the artificial appearance of a scientific base for his opinion (which must be taken as revealed truth by "real" catholics). This is yet another case of the argument that goes like:

"You only need faith to know this is true, but just to show the strength of my God, here goes the scientific proof."

Almost every time this argument is used, the scientific half is dismal. And Benedict is a repeat offender like no other, demonstrating that his knowledge came all from the seminars, not from acceptable high school courses in History, Philosophy, Biology, or any other subject.

So, the simple truth is the Roman Catholic Church (the organization, not the religion) desperately needs sex being a drug, not the other way around. The Church needs control over the sexual aspects of human life for its own survival. Science has no such need.

Hambydammit's picture

Quote:So, the simple truth

Quote:
So, the simple truth is the Roman Catholic Church (the organization, not the religion) desperately needs sex being a drug, not the other way around. The Church needs control over the sexual aspects of human life for its own survival. Science has no such need.

Lionel Tiger makes some interesting observations about this kind of thing in "The Pursuit of Pleasure."  He notes that those in power derive pleasure from controlling other people's access to pleasure.  The argument (and it's admittedly speculation) is that evolution favors males who gain a lot of power, and since controlling other people's access to pleasure is one of the easiest ways to keep them in line, evolution favored males who gained pleasure from taking it away from others.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism

 Kelly you're hot! Sorry I

 Kelly you're hot! Sorry I couldn't resit. But she's gorgious

 KELLY [THE BEAUTIFUL]

 KELLY [THE BEAUTIFUL] STATED: Everything that a person experiences is the direct result of the release and uptake of neurotransmitters and neuronal impulses.

 

MY RESPONSE: If that is true, then on what basis do you critisize theists for their beliefs? After all, according to your view, we only believe in God because of the "uptake of nerurotransmitters and neuronal impulses." Second, if everything humans experience is the result of these chemicals, then all opinions are equally valid because they are nothing but the result of such chemicals. So, on what basis does the atheist give superiority to their belief [or lack thereof] over classical theism? After all, your atheism is nothing but the product of chemicals.

 

 

Well J, we lively chemicals

Well J, we lively chemicals want it our way. Arguing is part of our chemical "evolution" obviously. I know not why !

Hey, I want "beautiful" Kelley's brain preserved for future prosperity !  

EXC's picture

Jerud1711 wrote: KELLY [THE

Jerud1711 wrote:

 KELLY [THE BEAUTIFUL] STATED: Everything that a person experiences is the direct result of the release and uptake of neurotransmitters and neuronal impulses.

 

MY RESPONSE: If that is true, then on what basis do you critisize theists for their beliefs? After all, according to your view, we only believe in God because of the "uptake of nerurotransmitters and neuronal impulses." Second, if everything humans experience is the result of these chemicals, then all opinions are equally valid because they are nothing but the result of such chemicals. So, on what basis does the atheist give superiority to their belief [or lack thereof] over classical theism? After all, your atheism is nothing but the product of chemicals.

 

 

True religion is another drug. The problem is if you take this drug, you can't understand what is happening to you. You can't study this drug and know it's effects and side effects. You can't listen to people who have kicked this drug. You can't listen to stories of how destructive religious addiction can be. You must believe that religion is not a drug in order for it to work. Religion must be the preeminent drug/thing in your life in order for it to work. There is tremendous fear placed into believers, so they won't quit the drug. This is why religion is the most destructive drug there is.

As an adult,  I can study the effects of liquor, cigarettes, sex, cocaine, pot, etc... before deciding to indulge in them. I can decide to quit them without fear of what will happen to me(except maybe heroine). Religion is nearly always indoctrinated into children and very young adults prone to peer pressure. Is it OK to force children to have sex, smoke, drink, etc...? No, drugs should be something an adult studies and understands before indulging. Childhood should be about learning and playing, not having your parents drugs forced on you.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca

Yeah EXC, as you say,

Yeah EXC, as you say, "religion is the most destructive drug there is."

Indeed ....

Dear totus_tuusIn regards to

Dear totus_tuus

In regards to your statement:

"Understanding Benedict XVI's comments requires a deeper reading of Humane Vitae"

I hear this argument a lot from religious folk and it really frustrates me. The term "deeper", in this context, to me insinuates that just because I disagree with what has been stated by some religious leader (which is usually some irrational rant) that I've just "misunderstood" the "deeper" message. If you read the The God Delusion and said to me "I don't agree with a lot of what Richard wrote" and I rebutted "It just requires a deeper reading" would that convince you at all to review the book again? I doubt it.

Take care,

Bobby

Created sick and commanded to be well

Don't Catholics see how perverted this is (of human nature)? If their beliefs are true, we where created by God, having these urges to do certain things that He then prohibited. We where created sick (or addicted) and them commanded to be well! Does that sound like something a loving God would do?

This is actually a classic sales (and con) technique: "You my friend have a very serious problem you might not know about, but fortunately for you I have the solution right here!" It's powerful stuff.
 

XLINT point Nelson Cruz 

XLINT point Nelson Cruz 

God of Abe is an our devil invention, all of religion poison  ......

  

kellym78 wrote:At any rate,

kellym78 wrote:
At any rate, if sex is a drug, then we have all the more reason to label religion as a drug as well.
And by comparison, sex is like chocolate (it makes you feel good but doesn't do very much) and religion LSD (it makes you see wierd things if you believe too much). Sticking out tongue

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:
Crucify the Pope, we need more saviors.
You try to get ahold of him and I'll start working on a nice cross. Should it come with a built-in screen for viewing atheistic de-convention material?

HombreMoleculos wrote:
Sex, Drugs & Rock & Roll, Not necessarily in that order.
It's supposed to be porn, tea and melodic death metal.

 We can live without sex,

 

We can live without sex, but we cannot live without food, air, water, sleep, or sun light. The pope is right in that people use sex as an escape from reality and the pain of their lives. So in that sense, it can act like a drug.

EXC's picture

Jerud1711 wrote: We can

Jerud1711 wrote:

 

We can live without sex, but we cannot live without food, air, water, sleep, or sun light. The pope is right in that people use sex as an escape from reality and the pain of their lives. So in that sense, it can act like a drug.

These are all drugs too. If you eat, breath, drink, sleep or get UVs, you induce a chemical change in your body that makes you feel better. So these are all drugs as well. Everything is a drug.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca

Hambydammit's picture

Quote:The pope is right in

Quote:
The pope is right in that people use sex as an escape from reality and the pain of their lives.

I've noticed that every time I have sex, my real body is doing things that actually feel good to her real body, which, with any luck, is also feeling good feelings.  We need to be careful about calling things an escape from reality.  Drugs, sex, and religion are real, and the feelings and perceptions they create are real.  It is certainly true that some people use drugs or sex or religion to avoid other parts of reality that they don't particularly like, but the activities they use as escapes are just as real as the activities they're trying to avoid.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism

Whether there's an

Whether there's an endogenous or exogenous chemical factor (drug) in the cause and effect of certain types of compulsive behavior is rather superficial and not really the point, but the compulsive nature speaks more to whether it is addictive. Jung is quoted as saying whatever is not made conscious is experienced as fate, and an avoidance of sex or anything else because it is considered addictive and 'bad for ya' is only going to keep it repressed in the unconscious. One can be subject to all sorts of forces with little to no awareness or control over their behavior, but if it is evenly distributed without being focused on one thing in particular it is typically not considered addictive. Of course, this does not change the fact that the same individual may be sleepwalking through life and may in fact be very hooked on that particular combination of experiences, so the deeper question is whether there's any self awareness for that person. If one lives by an accepted religious authority's simplistic rationalizations, for example then that person is at best an immature human being.

Deeper Understanding

Petee wrote:

Dear totus_tuus

In regards to your statement:

"Understanding Benedict XVI's comments requires a deeper reading of Humane Vitae"

I hear this argument a lot from religious folk and it really frustrates me. The term "deeper", in this context, to me insinuates that just because I disagree with what has been stated by some religious leader (which is usually some irrational rant) that I've just "misunderstood" the "deeper" message. If you read the The God Delusion and said to me "I don't agree with a lot of what Richard wrote" and I rebutted "It just requires a deeper reading" would that convince you at all to review the book again? I doubt it.

Take care,

Bobby

Bobby,

The "deeper understanding" to which Totus Tuus referred was hashed out between 1979 and 1984 by the then Pontiff JPII in a lecture series called "The Theology of the Body". The premise of those lectures and the sought after deeper understanding is that through sexual union we most closely resemble the image and likeness of God, in which we were created. Humanae Vitae was just the beginning. TOB has been called the most radical reconfiguration of Catholic thought since the Reformation. If you look here for the deeper understanding, you will not find appeals to pop-psychology, repression of urges, or arbitrary authority. You will find a complete picture of human sexuality as understood through the lens of philosophy, metaphysics, theology, and experience.

If someone criticized the atheist mentality and you retorted they lacked understanding, you might not refer them to the things they've already read, but those things that expanded on those ideas and brought them to fruition. I invite you to explore the full teaching of the Church on human sexuality before claiming victory.

"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church— which is, of course, quite a different thing.
- Bishop Fulton Sheen

Would this be an attempt at

Would this be an attempt at distinguishing between the official teachings of the church and impression one derives from observing the members of the church? So what would does that say then?

 

Anonymous_ wrote:

"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church— which is, of course, quite a different thing.
- Bishop Fulton Sheen

How about name dropping,

How about name dropping, appeal to authority and the like? Come on, metaphysics, theology - those has to inspire some respect in spite of the fact no substantial argument is made in the reply!!

Petee wrote:

Dear totus_tuus

In regards to your statement:

"Understanding Benedict XVI's comments requires a deeper reading of Humane Vitae"

I hear this argument a lot from religious folk and it really frustrates me. The term "deeper", in this context, to me insinuates that just because I disagree with what has been stated by some religious leader (which is usually some irrational rant) that I've just "misunderstood" the "deeper" message. If you read the The God Delusion and said to me "I don't agree with a lot of what Richard wrote" and I rebutted "It just requires a deeper reading" would that convince you at all to review the book again? I doubt it.

Take care,

Bobby

Kevin R Brown's picture

Well, I'm not sure sex is a

Well, I'm not sure sex is a drug - but I can assure you that just about anything can be equivocating as being sex.

You're looking at stuff through your eyes? Guess what - the photo receptors at the back of your eye are having sex with photons to make the image your brain sees.

You're typing at a keyboard? Guess what - your fingers are having sex with it's key in order to make the digital text.

You're pressing a button? Plugging something in? Taking a drink out of something? giving anything a squeeze, rub or turn? Sex, you terrible harlot!

 

No wonder our parents insist we wash our hands so often. Sticking out tongue

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940

anonuhmas wrote:Would this

anonuhmas wrote:

Would this be an attempt at distinguishing between the official teachings of the church and impression one derives from observing the members of the church? So what would does that say then?

 

Anonymous_ wrote:

"There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church— which is, of course, quite a different thing.
- Bishop Fulton Sheen

 

That is part of what it is. Another part is that many practicing Catholics do not call attention to themselves so you never notice them. Additionally, it says that people take a particular teaching, disagree with the "rule" and don't consider the possibility that there is significant reason for teaching that, or worse don't care and just condemn ("if only the Church understood the relationship that I have they would agree with me..wah wah" well if only you understood the teaching of the Church you would agree with it). What does it say, it says that members of the Church are imperfect and sinners. I don't think honest person would argue otherwise.

anonuhmas wrote:How about

anonuhmas wrote:

How about name dropping, appeal to authority and the like? Come on, metaphysics, theology - those has to inspire some respect in spite of the fact no substantial argument is made in the reply!!

Petee wrote:

Dear totus_tuus

In regards to your statement:

"Understanding Benedict XVI's comments requires a deeper reading of Humane Vitae"

I hear this argument a lot from religious folk and it really frustrates me. The term "deeper", in this context, to me insinuates that just because I disagree with what has been stated by some religious leader (which is usually some irrational rant) that I've just "misunderstood" the "deeper" message. If you read the The God Delusion and said to me "I don't agree with a lot of what Richard wrote" and I rebutted "It just requires a deeper reading" would that convince you at all to review the book again? I doubt it.

Take care,

Bobby

 

The name dropping and appeal to theology and metaphysics what not meant to be pursuasive, it was not meant to induce submission, it was an invitation to learn why the Church teaches what she does and notice that you will not find what you predicted. The Theology of the Body is ~500 pages, I can't give it all in a comment, but I will give you two lines that are kind of a starting point for the catachesis: "The body, in fact, and it alone, is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and divine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the world, the mystery hidden since time immemorial in God, and thus to be a sign of it." and "Thought the fact that the Word of God bevame flesh the body entered theology...through the main door."

 God created the universe.

 

God created the universe. The universe is finite.  Atheists are ignorant.

 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQTALEIMRKY

J says it knows god !

J says it knows god !       Jerud1711 , you dummy... every word of that .... and "creator" my ass, and as if you know jack fucking shit ..... Can we now please see you in worship ritual of your MASTER CREATOR thingy. Do you hear head voices?

   KELLEY , MODS  ..... Kelley's resent blogs take a long time to open   ..... the hour glass hangs ....

   Ahhh , the hour glass is a deception .... IGNORE the hour glass .... OK  

                          

                          

    

            

It's the catholic church,

It's the catholic church, enough said. They are full of hypocracy. Many Christians such as I can't even begin to understand the Catholic Church, their doctrine is an absolute mess.

 

 

i like boobs as much as the next guy....

but seriously Kelly, why are you using RR as your own personal pornsite? I really dont get it!! I think you're fine, the guys attracted to your post think you are fine...and you KNOW you are fine...but why this distraction? its creepy, and makes it impossible to take the Rational Response team seriously. If you want to exhibit yourself, get a porn page....featuring YOU and your boobs that you are so damn proud of. As for me, i never thought i'd hear myself saying this, but i have seen enough of them. This just isnt the place for it, and i am logging off this site until i can return to it (or your Youtube posts) and not be given a woodie on a site that is supposed to be a " rational response" to religious fascism...would we take, say, Sam Harris seriously if he lectured in Speedo's?

planetoftheatheistsYou dumb

planetoftheatheists

You dumb shit elitist. Log off .... Kelly, is a cool "free spirit" making a mockery of all anti freedom tradition crap. She is making fun of herself and society, and is simply exposing the silly sexual repression and quilt so ingrained by life haters like you.

    Kelly is too modest, because of dick heads like yourself. Set the girls free, dumb ass. Give the kids what they want too ....

We need, National naked Day!  Hell is a place of "shame and guilt", called Earth.

Kelly represents positive progress, and you ain't seen enough, you miserable prude.      

Natural Family Planning

Thanks for the post Kelly.  Just wanted to make one point- you say that Natural Family Planning is not much more effective than the Rhythm Method.  Here I disagree.  It is a great form of "birth control", and can be 98% effective when practiced correctly.  It requires some time to learn and chart the goings-on of your body, especially if one is getting of a chemical method of birth control.  I advise women to use a barrier method until they have regular cycles for up to six months.  This sounds like a commitment, but I absolutely love the freedom it gives me, and am one of many who hate the side effects of hormonal birth control, including weight gain and loss of sexual appetite.  Jeez, maybe the Catholic church SHOULD endorse the pill, from anecdotal, personal, and empirical evidence it seems to kill sex drive in a lot of women.  Then they won't be in danger of becoming addicts Smiling

kellym78's picture

planetoftheatheists

planetoftheatheists wrote:

but seriously Kelly, why are you using RR as your own personal pornsite? I really dont get it!! I think you're fine, the guys attracted to your post think you are fine...and you KNOW you are fine...but why this distraction? its creepy, and makes it impossible to take the Rational Response team seriously. If you want to exhibit yourself, get a porn page....featuring YOU and your boobs that you are so damn proud of. As for me, i never thought i'd hear myself saying this, but i have seen enough of them. This just isnt the place for it, and i am logging off this site until i can return to it (or your Youtube posts) and not be given a woodie on a site that is supposed to be a " rational response" to religious fascism...would we take, say, Sam Harris seriously if he lectured in Speedo's?

Well, I'm sorry that you find it difficult to accept, but this does happen to be my personal site, and I can do with it whatever I choose. I choose to work to throw off the shackles of religious indoctrination--and that includes the idea that sex is bad, the human body is disgusting, the patriarchal mindset that pretty, openly sexual women cannot be intelligent, etc. It's a pity that more atheists can't understand the connection there.

This is the place for...whateverthefuck we here at RRS decide it is. If I didn't have to deal with attitudes such as this, there would be more nudity/porn--and not necessarily solely of me. If you feel that there is something wrong with nudity or a natural human response to titillating material indicated by your discomfort with getting a "woodie" on this site, perhaps you need to consider why you feel that way instead of asking us to change. Of course, since you're never coming back, you may never read this. Oh well. My boobs have brought more people to this site than they have lost. That equals more people--everyday people, mind you; not ivory tower elitists--who are exposed to the concept and idea of atheism. That is a net gain in my mind.

Sam Harris' wardrobe preferences do nothing to validate or invalidate his argumentation. Neither do mine.

And there is a page devoted to my tits: link

kellym78's picture

Amy Gow wrote:Thanks for

Amy Gow wrote:

Thanks for the post Kelly.  Just wanted to make one point- you say that Natural Family Planning is not much more effective than the Rhythm Method.  Here I disagree.  It is a great form of "birth control", and can be 98% effective when practiced correctly.  It requires some time to learn and chart the goings-on of your body, especially if one is getting of a chemical method of birth control.  I advise women to use a barrier method until they have regular cycles for up to six months.  This sounds like a commitment, but I absolutely love the freedom it gives me, and am one of many who hate the side effects of hormonal birth control, including weight gain and loss of sexual appetite.  Jeez, maybe the Catholic church SHOULD endorse the pill, from anecdotal, personal, and empirical evidence it seems to kill sex drive in a lot of women.  Then they won't be in danger of becoming addicts Smiling

The key words in your stats are "can be." It can be effective--in women with semi-regular cycles, who are willing to check the consistency of their cervical mucus and take their temperature at the same time every morning and use barrier methods or abstain from sex during the fertile period, which can be 5 to 7 days. No thank you.

A tri-phasic pill actually can increase libido in women. The loss of libido is most common with monophasic birth control methods like the patch or a pill with only one level of hormones. Weight gain is not an issue that is clearly correlated with hormonal birth control methods--some women lose weight. So many women have that perception, though, that I'm sure it's the cause of many unplanned pregnancies. Not to mention the fact that the pill IS 99% effective in all women who take it properly. Way easier than charting cervical mucus consistency. Try explaining the difference between egg-white consistency and all 5 others to a 16 year-old--and see how fast she gets pregnant.

I am quite familiar with NFP--I was a La Leche League leader and area professional liaison for 3 years and I formerly worked as an assistant to a homebirth midwife. This is an area that I feel comes down to practicality. If you find NFP beneficial--great. For the rest of us--I recommend other forms of contraception for ease of use. At least if it is important that one not become pregnant.

i know its difficult for someone with the I.Q. of a carburetor..

...like yourself to respect the views of others, but i have my opinion. If it wasnt for porn, i would have shot myself before i was thirty...and if Kelly wants to get naked, trust me dude, i'm there. Until then, i kinda think she is gratifying herself with these halfbaked strip teases she's performing. I know a closet exhibitionist when i see one. And i've seen tons of women who are way too proud of their boobs.As for me being a prude, well kid...for a short, silly looking guy, i get more poonanny than Ted Haggard has hits off a meth pipe. I am critisizing Kelly for  something i think is innapropriate on a website such as this...(and yes maybe i am bit jealous that i will never lay a hand on her hotness)..buti bet your mother's left nut if this was a guy showing himself off on his blog, and presenting a cartoon highliighting his nipples and crotch, you'd have logged off months ago