Onanism

[Darth Raptor]

I'm pretty sure that every Christian sect out there frowns on masturbation. Protestant cults usually condemn it with nebulous claims of "sexual immorality". But the Catholic Church is a bit more specific. They refer to the very Biblical sin of Onan in a bass-ackwards way. For those of you who don't know, Onan was supposed to knock up this chick. Instead, he pulled out at the last minute. So god killed him. Obviously, the real sin here is refusing to take part in God's eugenics experiment, but Catholics have creatively interpereted this to mean that masturbation is a sin, specifically Onanism. The rationale here being that every cumload is a potential person and that potential is wasted in the shower drain or a rolled-up Kleenex.

Here's what I don't get: It only takes one sperm cell to fertilize an egg cell. So doesn't that mean that every sperm cell is a "potential life"? During God-condoned sex, and when a nut is busted, millions of sperm cells are released. Only one lucky champion makes it to the finish (if that). The rest die. Isn't this akin to genocide?

Question part the second: Let's assume for the sake of argument that any successful ejaculation (resulting in conception) isn't some kind of holocaust. Let's say that this allows God to choose who gets to be the new person. Is the Church not aware that the testis manufacture sperm constantly and, ejaculated or not, that these only have a shelf life of a few days at best? How is masturbation a waste by any stretch of the imagination if it has no impact on the number of innocent babies slaughtered every day? Is it because the raw materials are voided? Is THAT what God's pissed about? Would it be better if you ate it afterwards?

[Darth Wong]

The funny thing about the whole Onan story is that if you read it in context, it's obvious that God would have been just as angry at him if he abstained. You don't hear that from the pro-abstinence crowd.

[Darth Raptor]

I have concluded that in-vitro cloning is the only moral method of human reproduction. All males should be castrated before they start reproducing sperm, and all women should have their ovaries removed and put on ice. Then, the frozen eggs can be fertilized with genetic material taken from their lawfully-wedded husbands, and no innocent cherubs have to die. God really must not be a fan of his own natural order of things. This is why he has blessed us with brains capable of grasping biology.

[BrandonMustang]

I just wanted to throw in that Protestants call masturbation sexual immorality for the lusting fantasies involved in it and some references about what certain parts of the body are for and not for (I think that some conservative interpretations of those verses are wrong considering another passage in the Bible). However, I honestly believe (based on very frank talks with fellow believers) that an overwhelming amount of Christians are hypocritical masturbaters (not me).

I should also add that there is a passage in the Bible (which I will look for) that gives a free pass in the marriage bed as long as everything is consenual. It's just funny because sex (especially anything at all kinky) is such an uncomfortable concept for many Christians. Even extreme fundamental Calvinists theologians like Dr. MacArthur believe that masturbating to the thought of your spouse as well as for the enjoyment of your spouse is OK. I can't find anything that disagrees with that Biblically either. Kinda throws the old "No sex without procreation" dogma out the window, huh? God knew it was a fun activity. It's like he says "Married? Sweet. Go nuts!"

Sorry to get on a soapbox and a little off-topic from the OP. It's just not very often that a not-completely-closed-minded-sexually conservative Christian gets to speak up about God and sex.

I have talked about conception in other threads (2 in SLAM) and I know those won't "fly" in this thread but the concept of each sperm being a potential life doesn't work Biblically because the Bible says God knew us and made us before our conception so He would know which sperm was going to make it beforehand. I do not think each doomed sperm cell has it's own equally doomed soul. I know, getting way off-topic now.

I am not making any pointless arguments for the Bible here. I just thought you might like one Biblical perspective on how masturbation and "pulling out" are not mass murder in the context of the usual anti-abortion argument.

[Darth Raptor]

Yeah, I was pretty much referring exclusively to Catholic dogma on the matter. Protestants are really, really vague about why masturbation is wrong. It doesn't appear as if they think the act itself is a bad thing, but rather what you may be looking at or thinking about while doing it. I'm specifically trying to understand the Catholic angle on this, which appears to make even less sense than the Protestant stance, considering sperm and eggs are wasted all the time regardless of whether or not you're wollowing in your own lust.

[Raw Shark]

Yeah, I was pretty much referring exclusively to Catholic dogma on the matter. Protestants are really, really vague about why masturbation is wrong. It doesn't appear as if they think the act itself is a bad thing, but rather what you may be looking at or thinking about while doing it. I'm specifically trying to understand the Catholic angle on this, which appears to make even less sense than the Protestant stance, considering sperm and eggs are wasted all the time regardless of whether or not you're wollowing in your own lust.

Growing up in a Catholic household and attending Catholic Sunday school for twelve years brought me exactly zero mentions of the Onan story. Various other explanations more along the lines of the view you're assigning to Protestants were given in the rare cases that it was mentioned at all. My personal favorite for comedy value was the one who tried to tell the class that when you masturbate or fornicate "you're cheating on the person you're going to marry someday."

[Spoonist]

As usual this is based on some Christians not being able to read the bible and then just propagating their own interpretation. This usually happens when you have an oral tradition given by priests without anyone actually reading the source.
The sin was breaking gods law not actually spilling your semen, this by not impregnating your dead brother's widow. (Probably the practical side of the law being there so that your brother's inheritance wouldn't fall outside the family, instead you would sire a son with your brother's widow to trace inheritance.)
So the whole premise that masturbation was Onan's sin is false and a complete misunderstanding of illiterate priests in the old days. Every argument about life's worth after that is an ignorant extrapolation from that misunderstanding.

The biblical chapter with onan for reference.

The law in question for reference as well.

[Darth Servo]

To the best of my knowledge, the whole "no-masturbation" thing came from the old (and proven false) idea that the ejaculation contained miniature people and that the woman's womb just provided a place for it to grow for nine months. As such, by blowing your load anyplace other than inside a vagina constituted killing those people.

Over the centuries, the religion forgot the original reasoning behind the rule and the rule became morality unto itself. Even now that the original justification for the rule has been shown to be bullshit, the rule remains.

[Twoyboy]

To the best of my knowledge, the whole "no-masturbation" thing came from the old (and proven false) idea that the ejaculation contained miniature people and that the woman's womb just provided a place for it to grow for nine months. As such, by blowing your load anyplace other than inside a vagina constituted killing those people.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the same religion whose major church also condones the use of the rhythm method and withdrawl... thus killing all those little sperm every time anyway?

[Superman]

I'm pretty sure that every Christian sect out there frowns on masturbation.

I don't know about that. I grew up in a ridiculous evangelical non denominational type of church, and it wasn't really frowned upon. As far as I know, it's mostly the Mormons who go out of their way to condemn it.

[Drooling Iguana]

To the best of my knowledge, the whole "no-masturbation" thing came from the old (and proven false) idea that the ejaculation contained miniature people and that the woman's womb just provided a place for it to grow for nine months. As such, by blowing your load anyplace other than inside a vagina constituted killing those people.

Over the centuries, the religion forgot the original reasoning behind the rule and the rule became morality unto itself. Even now that the original justification for the rule has been shown to be bullshit, the rule remains.

I thought the point was to just to make sure the <insert religion here> outbred their competitors.

[Darth Servo]

To the best of my knowledge, the whole "no-masturbation" thing came from the old (and proven false) idea that the ejaculation contained miniature people and that the woman's womb just provided a place for it to grow for nine months. As such, by blowing your load anyplace other than inside a vagina constituted killing those people.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the same religion whose major church also condones the use of the rhythm method and withdrawl... thus killing all those little sperm every time anyway?

Like I said, the original reason behind the no-whacking-off rule has been proven bullshit. Since sperm cells obviously don't contain miniature people, rhythym and withdrawl methods don't constitute murder. We know that now. They didn't know it 2000 years ago. As far as I know, church endorsement of rhythym and withdrawl methods of birth contol are fairly recent additions to church dogma; hell ANY birth control method is a recent development for Western religions.

[Patrick Degan]

And to sum up, that most appropos quote from Monty Python:

Every sperm is sacred

Every sperm is great

If a sperm is wasted

God gets quite irate

[sketerpot]

Like I said, the original reason behind the no-whacking-off rule has been proven bullshit. Since sperm cells obviously don't contain miniature people, rhythym and withdrawl methods don't constitute murder. We know that now. They didn't know it 2000 years ago. As far as I know, church endorsement of rhythym and withdrawl methods of birth contol are fairly recent additions to church dogma; hell ANY birth control method is a recent development for Western religions.

That's not the half of it. Sperm are produced continuously since they have a limited lifetime and they need to be fresh when they're needed. If they're not ejected from the body, they die naturally and are absorbed by the lymphatic system. The sperm will all die unless they get to fertilize an egg, no matter what you do with them.

[Howedar]

Over the centuries, the religion forgot the original reasoning behind the rule and the rule became morality unto itself. Even now that the original justification for the rule has been shown to be bullshit, the rule remains.

You win the thread.

That's actually the answer a priest gave me once.

[wolveraptor]

The little sperm-people are known as homunculi, I believe.

Though I didn't think the ancient Jews ever had such a crazy theory.

My personal favorite for comedy value was the one who tried to tell the class that when you masturbate or fornicate "you're cheating on the person you're going to marry someday."

Suppose you're masturbating to the person you're going to marry some day. Or suppose you masturbate to a drawing. Does that count as an affair?

[Drooling Iguana]

It's an affair with yourself!

[Twoyboy]

That's not the half of it. Sperm are produced continuously since they have a limited lifetime and they need to be fresh when they're needed. If they're not ejected from the body, they die naturally and are absorbed by the lymphatic system. The sperm will all die unless they get to fertilize an egg, no matter what you do with them.

So if I'm not out trying to impregnate women, I'm killing all of God's children...

I don't think my wife would see that as an excuse.

[Darth Holbytlan]

My personal favorite for comedy value was the one who tried to tell the class that when you masturbate or fornicate "you're cheating on the person you're going to marry someday."

Suppose you're masturbating to the person you're going to marry some day.

That's pre-marital sex.

[Elfdart]

Maybe the fundies aren't against porn because they're repressed morons as I have always believed. Maybe they fear Jehovah's wrath at all the seed that gets wasted in the pop shots. Cream pies must be pleasing to the Lord. Amen.

[Darth Servo]

The little sperm-people are known as homunculi, I believe.

Though I didn't think the ancient Jews ever had such a crazy theory.

Why do you think the Bible often refers to humans in general as "the Children of MEN"? I almost makes it sounds like the woman isn't involved in the process or reproduction.

[haas mark]

Yeah, I was pretty much referring exclusively to Catholic dogma on the matter. Protestants are really, really vague about why masturbation is wrong. It doesn't appear as if they think the act itself is a bad thing, but rather what you may be looking at or thinking about while doing it. I'm specifically trying to understand the Catholic angle on this, which appears to make even less sense than the Protestant stance, considering sperm and eggs are wasted all the time regardless of whether or not you're wollowing in your own lust.

I grew up in a Catholic household as well, and if I remember right, the masturbation thing was (as it was taught to me) because of the sexual fantasies that it almost inevitably will have tied to it. I think we may have touched on the Onan story, but the moral was more not to disobey God than not to pull out/jack off/whatever.

[wolveraptor]

Why do you think the Bible often refers to humans in general as "the Children of MEN"? I almost makes it sounds like the woman isn't involved in the process or reproduction.

No, I just thought that that theory was developed in the Victorian era. It seems like the kind of thing they'd think up. The ancient Jews would've just explained it away as a miracle of God. They were too busy dying of wars and disease to care about technical stuff like that. To them, it was "penis goes in, baby comes out."

[eyl]

Why do you think the Bible often refers to humans in general as "the Children of MEN"? I almost makes it sounds like the woman isn't involved in the process or reproduction.

That's an translation issue. In Hebrew, the phrase used* is bnei Adam, which literally translates as "sons of Adam" - that is, it's specific to a particular man, not men in general. While you could argue that it still discounts Eve's (and thus women's role), adding her would make a more cumbersome phrase (particuarly since Hebrew, unlike English, has no gender-neutral tense). Turning humans into "sons of men" is the result of a Christian translation, so it says little either way regarding ancient Jewish views on the subject (as wolveraptor says, I'm not sure they evenc onsidered the question).

*everywhere I've seen, anyway; I spot-checked