1 mo

Since procreative potential is part of our sexual composition, would we be sexual mockers to try to prevent it?

Since procreative potential is part of our sexual composition, would we be sexual mockers to try to prevent it?
https://ronconte-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/ronconte.com/2011/10/06/marital-unitive-procreative-meanings/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15943184802689&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fronconte.com%2F2011%2F10%2F06%2Fmarital-unitive-procreative-meanings%2F

Do you think people who mock their sexual procreative potential by intentionally using contraception will experience sex and oneness with their partner to the best of their abilities or are they lacking some sexual togetherness when they delay or deny procreative potential?

Why not give your partner all of you, which means your potential to procreate would be a part of you sexually? Why do you think so many people are unwilling to always be open to procreative potential?
Yes because we are sexual in a 2 fold state: unitive (oneness and pleasure) and procreative
Vote A
Yes because we are trying to change our body from doing that which it was intended to do
Vote B
Yes because doing so proves you only care about sexual pleasure and not your procreative potential
Vote C
No because we as sexual beings dictate and cultivate our sex into how we want our body not to take on that responsibility
Vote D
No because taking away the procreative potential from sex is sexually liberating and I trust sexual liberation and sexual freedom to be part of my sexual plans
Vote E
No because sex is like Burger King (you have it customed the way you want your body to do)
Vote F
I'm undecided
Vote G
Select age and gender to cast your vote:
GirlGuy
Since procreative potential is part of our sexual composition, would we be sexual mockers to try to prevent it?
1
2
Add Opinion