Welcome to Gaia! ::

Hmm. Well I see no reason why anyone should complain. xd It's your choice. 3nodding

Personally, the idea of asexual marriage, and, really, being asexual seems strange to me. But maybe I'm just too sexual a person to understand. And if that's what you want, why should anyone stop you? It's none of their business. 3nodding

I completely see what both of you are saying and thank you soooo much!
When researching this, many catholics oppose it because it's not complying to god's plan on being "fruitful." But of coruse, it's nice to hear what other people think.

rolleyes This thread is about asexual relationships. More importantly, this thread is about asexual relationships within the Catholic Church. So saying, "The Catholic Church is bad, you should ignore them!" is a really awful response.

Well then you tell me. I'm sure a devoted member must know.

But either way, I am saying this- Disregard the church. I am exactly on subject when I tell you- If you do not want sex and the church wants you to have sex, go with yourself. Screw what the church says about your love.

Orly? And why now would the church want people to have children? Could it possibly be that they want more followers? More members?

I'm about three steps ahead of your logic. I never claimed they wanted people to have rampant sex- However, they ARE for marital sex, and a lot of it, AND are against birth control and abortion... Connect the dots now. What motivation may they have for this? Perhaps, and I agree, they may sincerely believe that every sperm is sacred and all that nonsense. But it seems just as likely that it is a way to keep the population up.

Thus, they want you to have sex to make them more catholics. Either way, it is a rule of the church, which has NOTHING to do with the actual God and nothing to do with the love you feel personally. So disregard it. It is irrelevant. What will they do, excommunicate you for not following their rules? Tell God that you're choosing to show emotion rather than have sex? Bah, let them. They have no real power.

Edit on families- Can there not be a family of two? Can not two people love eachother without having sex or having children? And how could this be worse than two miserable people who are married with kids? Not to say that all families are miserable or unhappy, but it does happen. Which is better- A family with kids with the parents unhappy, or a family of two who are happy? Hypothetically speaking ,of course.

You really need to L2Logic. Who said they were forcing marriages? I never said anything of the like. Strawman and/or Red Herring logical fallacy for you. While they do not force marriages, they DO, as you have said, force SEX in marriages.

And as for priests/nuns, no, they do not have children. So? They are also part of the power-structure. They are not only followers, but "employees" if you will take the term loosely. Which I know you won't, so I will expect you to tell me how they volunteer and how priests are paid very little. Not my point. Just nipping that strawman in the bud.


BUT WAIT- If the "Marriage must include sex" logic must be followed, why not the "You must not use contraceptives" logic? If you like the church so much, why aren't you following EVERY rule? I hope you've never had premarital sex, or masturbated.

Or could it be that SOME rules CAN be ignored, if they don't make sense to you?

And then I would argue that it is possible to have a holier, more spiritual relationship without being married, if being "married" by your definition would make the couple unhappy. And thus, marriage is useless and moot to these individuals.

I'm also Roman Catholic and I would have thought myself to be asexual with a preference for male companionship...if I didn't occasionally feel tempted to get into my fiance's pants.

Lyme and I.Am have already laid the foundation as to why sex is a part of marriage. But an asexual couple actually can have a Catholic marriage.

I.Am points out that marriage is meant to be the foundation for a family. Asexual doesn't necessarily mean "sexless" but rather someone who does not prefer sex. I've known asexuals who do have sex but only to procreate. But for them, sex outside of the effort to have children is not an expression of love. They don't enjoy being with each other that way. Catholic married couples do express their love through sex...but they are also expected to find alternative ways to express their love for each other so they the relationship does not become dependent on sex. If you REQUIRE sex from your spouse to feel close, it becomes all about self gratification. That's lust.



The Church is against abortion (as well as the death penalty and euthanasia) because we see it as a destruction of human life.

The Church is against contraception because contraception exists for one reason...so that a couple can have sex as often as they want, whenever they want, without being afraid of pregnancy. This has lead the the increased objectifying of each other. With that pesky pregnancy out of the way you can give me the pleasure I want when I want it with no consideration for the way your/my body works. Fertility is not a disease so why do we do stuff to make our bodies NOT work properly?

Then, if contraception fails and a pregnancy results, it's gotta be SOMEBODY'S fault. It's your fault for not wearing the condom properly (even if you were). It's my fault for skipping a pill (even if I didn't).

My fiance (who is NOT religious) and I decided that we're not going to use contraceptives when we get married. Instead we're taking a class to learn how to read my body signals and learn when I am fertile and when I'm not. And I'm going on a tangent here but....it's really COOL being able to do this! I get excited thinking about it. This way we can have sex during my infertile times if we're not looking to have a kid now. But we can reverse it and have sex during my fertile time when we're ready. I have to tell him what's going on with my body every day and he makes up a chart showing where I am in my cycle. That way we're on the same page for everything. If we get lazy or decide to have sex knowing that my ovulation time is getting closer and I get pregnant, it's OUR responsibility because no one was responsible for additional equipment. I can't control my cycle. If we want to risk having a child, then that's the responsibility we take upon ourselves.

"But...but that means less sex!"

Yes...that means LESS sex. Abstinance is just as important in a Catholic marriage as intercourse. Sexual gratification should never be the reason for creating a lifelong partnership. Whether you marry someone with whom the sex is GREAT or you are a virgin couple who can't wait to FINALLY have sex...it's poor judgment. During the periods we don't have sex, we must find other ways to express love for each other (liiiike...asexual couples do). Because you never know if the day will come when you suddenly CAN'T have sex. My spouse or I may be disfigured or paralyzed...or just have old age catch up to us. What does that mean for our relationship if the only way we were able express love was through sex? Did really really love each other after all? Or just love the pleasurable feelings?

And I'm kinda tired of the "every sperm is sacred" chorus (though it is a funny Monty Python tune). It's not the release of sperm that constitutes the sin. Masturbation is basically considered to be a form of personal adultery. You are having sex with yourself when you should be having sex with your spouse. The pull-out method is an incompletion of the marital act. And there is absolutely NOTHING sinful about nocturnal emission.