Is masturbation immoral?

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Is masturbation immoral?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 01:51 am
Having been a practicing Catholic until a couple of months ago I was wondering what other philosopher's think.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 02:19 am
@Greg phil,
No. Heck no.

Not necessarily, anyway.
 
nameless
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 02:21 am
@Greg phil,
Greg;64518 wrote:
Having been a practicing Catholic until a couple of months ago I was wondering what other philosopher's think.

You don't need to be a philosopher to understand what a ridiculous ignorant medieval notion that is. Masturbation is immoral if you see it that way; in the 'eye of the beholder'.
'Morality' is 'sin' (pride), not masturbation.
Wank away! Enjoy your humanity!
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 02:46 am
@Greg phil,
It strikes me that certain creeds attached to certain religions are placed there to maximise potential new recruits in the form of children. Hence the distaste of homosexuality, contraception and masturbation, I reckon.
 
New Mysterianism
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 03:55 am
@Dave Allen,
Do Catholics really still prohibit masturbation?
 
xris
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 04:01 am
@New Mysterianism,
It is if you don't want hairs growing in the palm of your hand.Well thats what my baptist minister told me,and i believe him.:sarcastic:
 
Bones-O
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 04:03 am
@Greg phil,
I suppose it depends what you're masterbating. Masterbating a pig is probably immoral by any standard.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 04:09 am
@Greg phil,
Oh, dear friend, that is easy to say until you have experienced the joy of pleasuring a pig.

(I'm, of course, joking.... sick, twisted, yes, but still a joke)
 
Bones-O
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 04:11 am
@Greg phil,
Twisted, yes. As a pig's...
 
xris
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 05:03 am
@Bones-O,
Whatever turns you on, but if it honks and drinks lager who can judge its value.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 05:27 am
@Bones-O,
Bones-O! wrote:
I suppose it depends what you're masterbating. Masterbating a pig is probably immoral by any standard.

I don't think so - artificial insemination depends on it.
 
Bones-O
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 05:43 am
@Greg phil,
Do they artificially inseminate pigs? And do they gather 'by hand'?
 
Caroline
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 05:50 am
@Bones-O,
Bones-O! wrote:
Do they artificially inseminate pigs? And do they gather 'by hand'?

Yes, i saw it on tv once, i think its the only way they can do it, i think it was a bull.
 
William
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 06:46 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen wrote:
I don't think so - artificial insemination depends on it.


In all due respect, to me the question should be how moral is artificial insemination? Personally speaking any man who would allow the essense that is he, to be used to impregnate a woman of which he will never have contact with is absolutely, universally wrong. For in my deepest convictions, if a woman cant or shouldn't have children, there are good reasons for that. Going to an establishment to "pick a child" is absolutely absurd and any man that contributes to that, in my opinion, is an imbecile.
Nuff said,
William

---------- Post added at 08:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:16 AM ----------

Greg wrote:
Having been a practicing Catholic until a couple of months ago I was wondering what other philosopher's think.


Please, regard the levity in the following statement and the humor of it along with the truth of it. Considering the male sex drive, if we didn't have that little safety release mechanism, nothing with an orifice would be safe, Ha. In my opinion it's just that, a release mechanism and not a recreational activity or it shouldn't be anyway. It depends on how much we are exposed to that "temptation" which shifts our libido into high gear. Now, the exposure, to a degree, we can controll. Of course you would have to be a monk living in a monastery to eliminate it all. It depends, I think, on one's priorities in life and how active they are in that life would be a determining factor on the control needed taking into consideration the almighty orgasm is that goal that keeps us procreating to bring new life into this world.

I think it also depends on how much Joy there is in one's life that would serve as a deterrent to that temptation unless that orgasm is the "only" pleasure you have in your life. Now IMO, when you seriously stop and think about what I just said, it may be the solution to our dealing with "over population". There are many "deprived" people on this planet whose only joy is that orgasm as their existence is engulfed in misery. It's like when we lose one sense, like our sight, we become more dependent on the others. When an individuals life has no meaning, in that depravation, self indulgence can get totally out of control and that preponderant self interest is what creates excessive behavior and in this matter it would include you guys who are walking around with your arms in a sling. Ha. It's not a fault, it is a consequence of this reality and being, for whatever reason, deprived of the joy that life should offer that is not "orgasmic". Like I said, it is a safety mechanism, without it, we could easily become decadent which is the ultimate end of depravity. as it relates to those ends we will go to, to satisfy the obsessive need for pleasure. IMO. Joy is about happiness, which has nothing to do with pleasure.

Pleasure is centered around self gratification which can easily get out of control especially when one associates joy with pleasure. Not good. Too much of anything is not good for us with the exception of joy, and that is what life should be about. That's why in all my posts, I stress a need for a balance in all that life has to offer. Pleasure is really a very small part of that life if all else is in balance. I think self-gratification is getting out of control as more and more people become deprived of the joys of life, the more decadent they become dependent on self gratification for they get gratification from no other source but themselves. IMO, that is truly sad.

My two cents worth.
William
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 07:04 am
@William,
William wrote:
In all due respect, to me the question should be how moral is artificial insemination? Personally speaking any man who would allow the essense that is he, to be used to impregnate a woman of which he will never have contact with is absolutely, universally wrong. For in my deepest convictions, if a woman cant or shouldn't have children, there are good reasons for that. Going to an establishment to "pick a child" is absolutely absurd and any man that contributes to that, in my opinion, is an imbecile.

Thanks for that, we were talking about pig farming though.

Friends of mine donated sperm as students - and I don't regard it as an immoral act. I rather resent the implication that it is. I wouldn't do so myself at this time, as I feel there are enough people on the planet without creating more, a fact that wasn't quite as pressing on me 15 years ago, but I also think that a couple who would make good parents but for the fact that the 'father' is unable to conceive shouldn't be split up just so the mother can find a mate (from your post you make it seem as if the women is the barren one in these cases, which isn't usually the case).
 
KaseiJin
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 07:16 am
@Greg phil,
And indeed, there may well be those occasions--the particular person at a particular time--where to prevent one from releasing sexual tension could very much be said immoral !
 
William
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 07:16 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen wrote:
Thanks for that, we were talking about pig farming though.

Friends of mine donated sperm as students - and I don't regard it as an immoral act. I rather resent the implication that it is. I wouldn't do so myself at this time, as I feel there are enough people on the planet without creating more, a fact that wasn't quite as pressing on me 15 years ago, but I also think that a couple who would make good parents but for the fact that the 'father' is unable to conceive shouldn't be split up just so the mother can find a mate (from your post you make it seem as if the women is the barren one in these cases, which isn't usually the case).


Sorry, I didn't pay any attention to the "pig" dialog for it was entirely off topic. Your statement wasn't though as it does relates to the OP.

William
 
Bones-O
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 07:20 am
@William,
William wrote:
In all due respect, to me the question should be how moral is artificial insemination?


It's a good point. I mean, without the pigs' consent, isn't it just rape by proxy?

William wrote:
Personally speaking any man who would allow the essense that is he, to be used to impregnate a woman of which he will never have contact with is absolutely, universally wrong.


Essence? Do you know you were parodied 40 years ago in a film called Dr Strangelove? (Appropriate name for the topic of pig-fiddling.)

William wrote:
For in my deepest convictions, if a woman cant or shouldn't have children, there are good reasons for that. Going to an establishment to "pick a child" is absolutely absurd and any man that contributes to that, in my opinion, is an imbecile.


Then I'm with stupid.

William wrote:
Nuff said,


Nuff and then some.

William wrote:
Of course you would have to be a monk living in a monastery to eliminate it all.


Yeah right. Like monks don't bash the bishop.

---------- Post added at 08:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:20 AM ----------

KaseiJin wrote:
And indeed, there may well be those occasions--the particular person at a particular time--where to prevent one from releasing sexual tension could very much be said immoral !

I agree with this. Surely it is better for society to let a man vent his sexual frustration on a pig than to cause him to seek human quarry. A pig in every home, I say!
 
William
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 07:44 am
@Bones-O,
Bones-O! wrote:

I agree with this. Surely it is better for society to let a man vent his sexual frustration on a pig than to cause him to seek human quarry. A pig in every home, I say!


What ever rocks your boat. If pigs are your fancy and it keeps you from raping someone, then by all means bring home the bacon. It's just I fail to see the connection between pigs and the OP. Perhaps someone could enlighten me. As far as the comment about monks, I wouldn't know for that comment was relating only to the complete isolation to temptation. As far as the comment about the imbecile, I stand pat.

William
 
salima
 
Reply Sat 23 May, 2009 09:56 am
@Greg phil,
it takes a long long time to recover from being a catholic....i know, my mother tried to make me one. she didnt succeed even in getting me through confirmation, but it did me a lot of damage anyway.

what is immoral is the priest asking from behind a screen on the other side of a young girl in a small box during confession 'what exactly did you do? how did you do it? how many times in a month? or a week?'
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Is masturbation immoral?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/23/2021 at 03:28:20