What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Catholic_Lady]

I agree that it is natural. It is also natural for me to lash out at my husband when I'm upset about something that he is no part of.

But we, as humans and not cows, can still make the choice. We can choose to fantasize about having sex with the people we see on the street while our spouse is at home waiting for us, or we can choose to simply acknowledge their sexiness, and move on. I can choose to be snippy with my husband when I'm in a bad mood about something else, or I can choose to put aside my natural feelings and treat him with kindness.

I think that the problem might be how we have a view that is so radically different than yours that I don't know how we would ever reach an agreement on this issue.

To me, there is nothing wrong with having a sexual fantasy about someone other than my husband as long as I don't dwell or become obsessed with that person. I don't feel threatened if my husband has a fantasy about someone else either. This doesn't have to do with self control because it isn't something I see as negative. ( I know that you said that we aren't cows but I assume that you meant that we have more self control than animals)

That is fine. I respect your differences.

But would you still agree that we are perfectly capable of not acting on impulses, and that sometimes it is best not to? Not just with sexuality, but in general?

And yes, that is what I meant. We are more self aware.

---

( I know that you said that we aren't cows but I assume that you meant that we have more self control than animals)

Which is something that always makes my hair stand on end and also one of the thing bothering me the most about organised religion. This looking down attitude on the world surrounding us.

Just to clarify, I am a huge animal lover.

I just meant that humans are more intelligent and more self aware.

---

My consideration of the lust conversation requires me to reference the earlier conversation here or another thread regarding *the act* of sex being sacred. If I remember correctly, CL opined that the act is considered sacred because life is considered sacred. I would agree that lie is sacred, if the religious overtones of the word are dropped. My life is special because of its brevity in the grand scheme of things and the fact that I only have one shot at it. 

I cannot agree that sex should be considered sacred simply because of the value placed on life. Indeed sex can result in life, but as has already been established there are plenty of other reasons to enjoy sex. Are only those times where sex is engaged in specifically for procreation considered sacred? The only reason to clump other variants of sex into the sanctification of *the act* is for crowd control purposes. The prohibition of spilling seed can be used to support this idea.

I understand that sex has other purposes besides procreation, and that it is perfectly moral to have sex even when procreation isn't intended.

But what I have said is that despite those 2 things, sex is still *the* act that creates life. Even though it doesn't create it all the time, even though it doesn't need to be the intended result, the fact still remains that sex is the means by which we create life.

For that reason, I believe sex is intrinsically, in and of itself, sacred. Regardless. I know you don't agree, but do you understand what I am saying?