Designed for Sex

Note: During the next several weeks (as with the last few weeks), I will be blogging sporadically due to lack of net access. - Larry

Touchstone magazine has an article titled, Designed for Sex: What We Lose When We Forget What Sex Is For
by J. Budziszewski.

In the article Budziszewski, an authority on natural law, tackles our human nature regarding sexuality. This is not a quick read. Prepare yourself for the hard work of thinking through the issue. But when you are through, whether you agree or not with Budziszewski, you will have a better understanding of the concept of natural law, which, as Budziszewski notes, has been the "main axis of Western ethical thought for 23 centuries". Here is an excerpt.

In the case of every other biological function, only one body is required to do the job. A person can digest food by himself, using no other stomach but his own; he can see by himself, using no other eyes but his own; he can walk by himself, using no other legs but his own; and so on with each of the other powers and their corresponding organs. Each of us can perform every vital function by himself, except one. The single exception is procreation.

If we were speaking of respiration, it would be as though the man had the diaphragm, the woman the lungs, and they had to come together to take a single breath. If we were speaking of circulation, it would be as though the man had the right atrium and ventricle, the woman the left atrium and ventricle, and they had to come together to make a single beat.

Now, it isn’t like that with the respiratory or circulatory powers, but that is precisely how it is with the procreative powers. The union of complementary opposites is the only possible realization of their procreative potential; unless they come together as “one flesh”—as a single organism, though with two personalities—procreation doesn’t occur.