Is sex necessary?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Two words: Hell yes!

How about that. Rocky and I are in complete agreement for a change.

[Archaea]

Sex a physical necessity? Probably not.

Sex a psychological necessity? Absolutely, although some women tend to think otherwise.

No further discussion.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by tooblue

Of course it is necessary and even essential! I think many of you would be suprised at just how liberal the brethren are in respects to this issue ... go ask your Bishop, he will tell you it's divinly approved for more than just making babies :wink:

As I stated earlier, it is encouraged between husband and wife for more than procreation so neither party would be tempted to stray.

Originally Posted by Archaea

Sex a psychological necessity? Absolutely, although some women tend to think otherwise.

My belief is that while it is a good thing - within marriage - it's not something that I can't live without. If I were to go the rest of my life without it, I'd be fine. The companionship of my wife, however, is something that I need.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

As I stated earlier, it is encouraged between husband and wife for more than procreation so neither party would be tempted to stray.

My belief is that while it is a good thing - within marriage - it's not something that I can't live without. If I were to go the rest of my life without it, I'd be fine. The companionship of my wife, however, is something that I need.

You're a better man than I. If had had to put up with high credit cards, complaints, needling and insults without a few moments of caring, I would probably go stark raving mad. Perhaps I'm already there.

Going without sex for a lifetime would be a terrible thing, but some must do it.

[il Padrino Ute]

I've just found that there things of more importance to me. I have yet found a reason to put it near the top of my list of "important things I need to do today".

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I've just found that there things of more importance to me. I have yet found a reason to put it near the top of my list of "important things I need to do today".

I just put it at the top of my list of fortuitous things which won't happen today and then I go on a ride, or got his somebody (in karate class, where it's legal).

In light of the fact that sex requires two, at least in my book it does, making money playing with the kids, keeping tabs on callings and trying not to fall too far behind on honeydos keeps me plenty busy.

Must dos usually include food and a modicum of sleep.

[fuegote]

As the sheep of the group I will say what Pres. Hinckly said on the matter in a fireside to college adults,

Originally Posted by Pres. Hinckley

"I heard Elder John A. Widtsoe, who at one time presided over the University of Utah, say, “It is my observation that a young man and a young woman who violate the principles of morality soon end up hating one another.” I have observed the same thing. There may be words of love to begin with, but there will be words of anger and bitterness later."

Sex is not only a physical connection, but an emotional connection.

Look at "When Harry met Sally" you can't have sex as just friends...It even was hard for Seinfeld and Elaine.

In spiritual matters, sex also provides that connection, that bond. It's nearly 99% impossible to have that kind of relationship and not have one person hate the other. you think you can avoid that you are only fooling yourself.

Sex isn't taught right by parents IMO. Sex is great, sex is fantastic. My wife's mother taught her well. Sex needs to be taught that it is fantastic, that is is something both a man and woman need for different reasons, and follow it up with the sacredness of sex and that wickedness, never was happiness, no matter how rationalized and justified it is.

I never had sex ed in my house and I really think my parents were at fault for not providing that very sacred learning experience. Instead I got to see a father cheet on his wife for 27 years. EEK.

[SoCalCoug]

in the years that I was a funeral diretor, I never saw a death certificate on which the stated cause of death was "lack of seual activity".

But I've seen it on divorce petitions. Okay, there's not actually a box for that, but I think there's another angle for you to look at it.

I think withholding sex is just as selfish as sex on demand. Sure, there may be circumstances where a person may have to go their whole life without sex.

Let's put it this way. I think sex is a necessity to a marriage. There are people (more often wives) who have very low sex drives. To force the other spouse conform their sex life to the lowest common denominator is extremely selfish. And I don't think a marriage where there is this kind of selfishness, is built on a solid foundation.

While you may not die from the lack of sex, your marriage might.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

While you may not die from the lack of sex, your marriage might.

I know a couple of marriages that were broken up because spouses went outside of the marriage for sex because the sexual spark inside the marriage had fizzled. It's easy to empathize with someone who has an affair when faced with the prospect of infrequent sex with their spouse for the rest of their life.

[Robin]

r.f.