Why the law of Moses prohibits anal sex

[Lyndon]

I can understand gay men having no other way to have intercourse than anal sex, but as far as straight people's obsession with it I find it quite disgusting, I think the main appeal of anal sex to straight men is that they find it demeaning to women, and that turns them on. I mean look at it this way, if you are a straight man, which female orifice was designed for sex and which was not, you can have vaginal or oral sex without having to wash of the feces from your member, what is so appealing to men about sxxt that they want to be that close to it. This is in no way referring to gay men, they have a good excuse, no vaginas!!

 

[SkepticThinker]

The question seems flawed. The problem isn't blood or crap by itself. Its about improper exposure or consumption. This is why the Torah outlines what is acceptable and what is not. The same goes for the animals. All animals have purpose in life but only some are meant for human consumption.

You had responded to this comment made by gsa:

“But not, so far as we know, through the spontaneous generation of bacterial and viral agents. But it is interesting to note that your god would then be responsible for making all human beings walking pathogens, since we all have blood, and we all poop”

You responded by saying:

“This is why God told us to avoid poop and blood.”

Which is why I asked why this god would fill us with poop and blood. You also suggested a few pages back that you believe that in the future a new disease will arise or be detected that is caused by the mixture of blood and poop.

So do I conclude that this god intended for human beings to be walking pathogens?

 

[Simplelogic]

You had responded to this comment made by gsa:

“But not, so far as we know, through the spontaneous generation of bacterial and viral agents. But it is interesting to note that your god would then be responsible for making all human beings walking pathogens, since we all have blood, and we all poop”

You responded by saying:

“This is why God told us to avoid poop and blood.”

Which is why I asked why this god would fill us with poop and blood. You also suggested a few pages back that you believe that in the future a new disease will arise or be detected that is caused by the mixture of blood and poop.

So do I conclude that this god intended for human beings to be walking pathogens?

I think God intended us to operate on this earth within His guidelines which leads to life. God creates everything for a purpose but when that purpose is distorted is when it becomes hazardous. The problem then isn't the creation itself but the distortion of intended function.

 

[muichimotsu]

The problem here is assuming that there is some absolute risk involved with anal intercourse that is somehow not able to be forestalled and prevented with prophylactics and proper hygiene. I'm a virgin, but anal sex is not something that's to be entered into lightly (no pun intended). There's some preparation involved, it's intended to be done with the utmost safety, not just some carnal lust.

As much as there may be risk with sex, that applies to any act of sex when done irresponsibly, I think we agree on that. But you're going a bit too far in saying that because there's more obvious risk with one type of sex that it must be outright prohibited when the text of the Hebrew, far as I'm aware, doesn't seem to specify the sex acts itself, but merely that you treat a man as a woman, which gets into gender role debates more than sexual morality.

 

[Simplelogic]

The problem here is assuming that there is some absolute risk involved with anal intercourse that is somehow not able to be forestalled and prevented with prophylactics and proper hygiene. I'm a virgin, but anal sex is not something that's to be entered into lightly (no pun intended). There's some preparation involved, it's intended to be done with the utmost safety, not just some carnal lust.

As much as there may be risk with sex, that applies to any act of sex when done irresponsibly, I think we agree on that. But you're going a bit too far in saying that because there's more obvious risk with one type of sex that it must be outright prohibited when the text of the Hebrew, far as I'm aware, doesn't seem to specify the sex acts itself, but merely that you treat a man as a woman, which gets into gender role debates more than sexual morality.

The risk is not assumed. It is a proven fact.

Whenever you find the term "to lie with" in this context it is talking about sexual intercourse.

Another common term is "to uncover another's nakedness". It doesn't really mean to see someone naked

 

[muichimotsu]

But intercourse is varied, as you admit, so it cannot be merely anal intercourse they are condemning, but any form that can manifest. And reducing sex to mere penetration is hardly reasonable either, though it's certainly the most common form.

The risk doesn't mean that it is evil in itself to do so, but only if performed irresponsibly without care of the risk. Mutually consensual sex between unmarried people may be seen as immoral, but being married is hardly the sole standard of sexual morality to begin with. As long as both parties communicate concerns and are safe, why should you condemn them?

 

[Simplelogic]

But intercourse is varied, as you admit, so it cannot be merely anal intercourse they are condemning, but any form that can manifest. And reducing sex to mere penetration is hardly reasonable either, though it's certainly the most common form.

The risk doesn't mean that it is evil in itself to do so, but only if performed irresponsibly without care of the risk. Mutually consensual sex between unmarried people may be seen as immoral, but being married is hardly the sole standard of sexual morality to begin with. As long as both parties communicate concerns and are safe, why should you condemn them?

You are the one throwing around terms like "evil"….not me. I am simply talking about facts. You keep saying that anal sex is not dangerous but the entire medical community believes it is.

• The anus is full of bacteria. Even if both partners do not have a sexually-transmitted infection or disease, bacteria normally in the anus can potentially infect the giving partner. Practicing vaginal sex after anal sex can also lead to vaginal and urinary tract infections. Anal Sex Safety and Health Concerns

Obviously we all know that anal sex spreads STD's and HIV much more then ANY other form of sex.

 

[Simplelogic]

As long as both parties communicate concerns and are safe, why should you condemn them?

Here in lies the problem. Many people carry STD's for YEARS before they know they have them. Many STD's can still be transmitted to others even though they don't show up in medical exams yet.

 

[muichimotsu]

That's where the communication comes in: requiring an STD test or communicating that there is that risk is part of safe sex, is it not? Nothing is perfect and you cannot expect everyone to be monogamous either. Is using a prophylactic such a bad thing when its intent is to prevent STDs to begin with? And why should it matter whether you use it in one type of sex or another rather than using it consistently?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I think God intended us to operate on this earth within His guidelines which leads to life. God creates everything for a purpose but when that purpose is distorted is when it becomes hazardous. The problem then isn't the creation itself but the distortion of intended function.

What happens when the day comes that you predict where the simple mixture of blood and poop creates some disease? If that day ever comes we`re going to have bigger problems on our hands than mere anal sex. Changing diapers could become downright hazardous to one`s health.

 

[morphesium]

Even if science were to remove the need for these commandments you still have thousands of years of human civilization that was protected because of it.

There were/are religions that support prostitution and there were/are religions that see it as something unholy, unethical.
There were/are religions that never cared about anal sex and there are religions that punishes it with death sentence.
all of these religions existed for 1000's of year or more / or are still existing. I don't think a particular religion faded into history just because of not putting them to death.

Before human beings came to know about germs, microbes and antibiotics, people still existed and made civilizations possible. As they gained knowledge about these, population growth sky-rocketed.

(i agree I may be wrong here statistically - but you can get the idea. and i do agree that depending up on the type of virus/ bacterium , tables can be turned). I think not covering ones nose as he/she sneezes in public would be much worse than unprotected anal sex.

 

[Simplelogic]

• The anus lacks the natural lubrication the vagina has. Penetration can tear the tissue inside the anus, allowing bacteria and viruses to enter the bloodstream. This can result in the spread of sexually transmitted infections including HIV. Studies have suggested that anal exposure to HIV poses 30 times more risk for the receptive partner than vaginal exposure. Exposure to the human papillomavirus (HPV) may also lead to the development of anal warts and anal cancer. Using lubricants can help some, but doesn't completely prevent tearing.
• The tissue inside the anus is not as well protected as the skinoutside the anus. Our external tissue has layers of dead cells that serve as a protective barrier against infection. The tissue inside the anus does not have this natural protection, which leaves it vulnerable to tearing and the spread of infection.

Anal Sex Safety and Health Concerns

 

[Simplelogic]

I still maintain that the Torah's prohibition against anal sex was meant to protect humans from disease. Particularly the humans who would be tempted with pursuing this type of intercourse.

 

[Flankerl]

The anus is full of bacteria.

Well so is the vagina.


Such is life in the human body.

 

[psychoslice]

Why the law of Moses prohibits anal sex, .................who knows, they were against just about anything that felt good or even tasted good back then, thank god we don't live back there.

 

[psychoslice]

Well so is the vagina.


Such is life in the human body.

Yes I think they didn't know about hygiene back then, well lets face it, they were ignorant of a lot of things.

 

[muichimotsu]

I still maintain that the Torah's prohibition against anal sex was meant to protect humans from disease. Particularly the humans who would be tempted with pursuing this type of intercourse.

Merely pursuing it isn't the issue, but doing so irresponsibly and with mere pleasure as the goal. You haven't answered this contention in the slightest that the issue is not anal sex in itself, but any sex done with no regard for safety

 

[kiwimac]

The Law of Moses was never intended for Gentiles.

 

[muichimotsu]

And even if we tried to expand it to Gentiles, the problem still exists of whether God commands things because they are good or if they are good merely because God commands them.

 

[morphesium]

I still maintain that the Torah's prohibition against anal sex was meant to protect humans from disease. Particularly the humans who would be tempted with pursuing this type of intercourse.

Fine, that's ok. Its sort of like -I like blue car and you like red car (such beliefs are not a threat to our civilization after all).