Oral Sex and Marriage Exceptions Question


#1

A little embarrassing but I have to find out. We've been married for 8 years and have always used Oral Stimulation and not Oral Sex. I know the difference is important. Well I am pregnant and have a complication that prevents us from intercourse. Since Oral Sex would not be used to be closed to fruitful intercourse (i'm already pregnant) but as a way to avoid medical complications, would that be an exception to the "rule." I know if a man accidently ejaculates prior to intercourse this is not a sin, but because of the medical complication we would have no intention of intercourse; and the point would be to help each other climax without intercourse.


#2

Nope, no exceptions. Climaxing without intercourse is not unitive.


#3

But why? It seems to me the big problem with oral sex is that it prevents conception, when a man intentionally ejaculates outside the woman-and therefore isn't open to the intention of sex. But when the wife is already pregnant, it's obviously not for that-but in this case to protect the pregnancy. So why-I like that about Catholism that there is no "It just is OK?" but a reason why


#4

Because every single sexual act must be both unitive and procreative…even if procreation is impossible…such as pregnancy or menopause or sterilization (such as a hysterectomy).

This prevents sexual intercourse being used as a purely selfish act for one’s own pleasure. It’s a slippery slope one can go down if oral sex is permitted for one’s own pleasure…it leads one to seek other pleasurable acts such as masturbation and even adultery.

Besides…oral sex itself is considered sodomy…which is wrong according to the bible.

Oral stimulation is perfectly fine if it is a form of foreplay and leads to sexual intercourse and the man climaxing inside the woman.

The Church teaches their is no exceptions to this rule…this includes married couples who cannot conceive. The reason being is because sex is not meant for one person’s pleasure…this results in one spouse using the other for their pleasure (despite it not “feeling” that way by the spouses).
Oral sex is the man using his wife to achieve his own pleasure…which is wrong. This is no different then him masturbating or going off and committing adultery. All acts are the husband looking for pleasure outside of the marital bond.
Oral sex is not bonding…it’s one spouse looking to feel good while the other gets nothing in return.


#5

From what I understand about God's design, sex must be in the design of both unity and procreation despite whether one can actually become pregnant or not. It's not possible to separate these things and still be within God's design. Without these two properties, what is left is just lust. And lust is sin. God loved us so much that it created another person. When we express our physical love in the marital act, it's very similar. We are to love our spouse so much that we give of ourselves fully to the other person. If a man and a wife have sexual relations in which they do not give of themselves fully to the other person, that's not love. That's using. One can't give of themselves fully to the other person if they intentionally spill their seed.


#6

You both have a cross to bear, for now. You must both temporarily give up climaxing, for the sake of the mother's health. You must both be unselfish now. It is a gift each one gives to the other one.

Make no mistake about it; to deliberately climax without actual intercourse is grave sin. If you understand that, and deliberately choose to do it anyway, that crosses the line into mortal sin.

What do you want most for each other? A climax - or Heaven? :sad_yes:

Start separating yourself from this culture that sees an orgasm as the most desirable thing in the world. This culture is wrong.

To be in a marriage where each spouse wants the other to make it to Heaven is a good thing, a very good thing; it is much better than any transient pleasure.

The reason Jesus suffered and died for us is so that we could go to Heaven. We won't get there without a little suffering of our own. So make that sacrifice for each other. That is loving.


#7

Can someone explain to me the difference in oral stimulation and oral sex? Oral sex would be cunnilingus I expect. Why would one want to orally stimulate and why would that be right?


#8

[quote="billcu1, post:7, topic:309687"]
Can someone explain to me the difference in oral stimulation and oral sex? Oral sex would be cunnilingus I expect. Why would one want to orally stimulate and why would that be right?

[/quote]

Oral sex is stimulation that comes to a conclusion...as in the man ejaculates.

Oral stimulation is a form of foreplay that stimulates a spouses genitals in preparation for marital intimacy.

There is nothing wrong with oral stimulation...there is no Church teaching that says oral stimulation is wrong.

Why would one want to be orally stimulated or give oral stimulation? Because it's a perfectly acceptable and loving form of foreplay that prepares one for sexual intimacy.
As long as the man finishes inside that woman...there is no reason why oral stimulation is considered wrong....sometimes it's entirely necessary for a woman as it's a good way for a man to ensure she reaches orgasm as well.

Woman can't always climax through sex. In fact...it's not common as they need a more direct form of stimulation to achieve orgasm. The marital act is more of an indirect form of stimulation.
I don't see it as a difference from digital stimulation. Digital stimulation that results in conclusion to a man ejaculating is wrong but it can be a form of stimulation that readies the couple for intercourse...this makes it perfectly fine within church teaching. Further, a man can use digital stimulation to ensure that the woman achieves climax as it is a direct form of stimulation that ensures she achieves an orgasm.

I don't see the difference from oral stimulation and kissing on the lips. It's just another way to arouse the spouse within the context of the marital act.

This is my only post on the matter. This topic gets argued and argued ad nauseam...whether it's okay or not.

People seem to think that a man or woman can just take one look at his/her spouse and be overcome with stimulation and arousal and be perfectly ready to engage in the marital act. They also think that a woman can only hope to achieve an orgasm through intercourse and if she can't...well that's too bad and any other form of stimulation is inherently wrong.
If that were the case...kissing one's spouse on the lips would be considered a form of oral sex and therefore wrong.

Once again...as long as the oral stimulation doesn't purposely conclude with the man climaxing and as long as it's within the context of the marital act...it is not oral sex and perfectly permissible.


#9

[quote="Jo1985, post:1, topic:309687"]
Since Oral Sex would not be used to be closed to fruitful intercourse (i'm already pregnant) but as a way to avoid medical complications, would that be an exception to the "rule."

[/quote]

No.

This is a misunderstanding of our sexuality in the context of the whole person and the proper ordering of our sexuality in marriage.

The orgasm is not the end, it is a byproduct of properly ordered marital relations. When you make it the end, you have disordered the act that God created for the unity of spouses and propogation of the human race. The unity and the procreative aspects cannot be separated.

If you replace intercourse with something else it is disordered and gravely wrong.

[quote="Jo1985, post:1, topic:309687"]

I know if a man accidently ejaculates prior to intercourse this is not a sin, but because of the medical complication we would have no intention of intercourse; and the point would be to help each other climax without intercourse.

[/quote]

Yes, this is gravely wrong.


#10

[quote="Jo1985, post:3, topic:309687"]
But why? It seems to me the big problem with oral sex is that it prevents conception, when a man intentionally ejaculates outside the woman-and therefore isn't open to the intention of sex. But when the wife is already pregnant, it's obviously not for that-but in this case to protect the pregnancy. So why-I like that about Catholism that there is no "It just is OK?" but a reason why

[/quote]

Sexual intercourse must be ordered to both unity AND procreation. A completed act of intercourse is ordered to both. Oral sex-- which is masterbation-- is ordered to neither.


#11

[quote="billcu1, post:7, topic:309687"]
Can someone explain to me the difference in oral stimulation and oral sex?

[/quote]

There is no difference per se. Oral sex is oral stimulation of the genitals. Like intercourse, it could involve orgasm (ejaculation in the case of a male) or not.

Some people (usually some Catholics) choose to refer to oral stimulation as oral-genital stimulation without orgasm/ejaculation. But it's still oral sex just like intercourse with or without orgasm/ejaculation is still intercourse.


#12

[quote="Jo1985, post:3, topic:309687"]
But why? It seems to me the big problem with oral sex is that it prevents conception, when a man intentionally ejaculates outside the woman-and therefore isn't open to the intention of sex. But when the wife is already pregnant, it's obviously not for that-but in this case to protect the pregnancy. So why-I like that about Catholism that there is no "It just is OK?" but a reason why

[/quote]

It's not just about conception. The man's sexual organ was made to unite with the woman's sexual organ, in sexual intercourse. Anything else is not unitive. The final act must end with the man's organ inside the woman's - that's God's design for us. Yes, that's the way children are produced but it's not the ONLY reason we need to follow God's designs. Other things happen during sexual intercourse that do NOT happen when we simply mutually masturbate each other to climax. Oral sex is an act that feels good but is not unitive in the same way as sexual intercourse. It is a selfish act.


#13

[quote="kelvinf, post:11, topic:309687"]
There is no difference per se. Oral sex is oral stimulation of the genitals. Like intercourse, it could involve orgasm (ejaculation in the case of a male) or not.

Some people (usually some Catholics) choose to refer to oral stimulation as oral-genital stimulation without orgasm/ejaculation. But it's still oral sex just like intercourse with or without orgasm/ejaculation is still intercourse.

[/quote]

No...there is a big difference.

This topic has been discussed ad nauseam and there is nothing that the Church teaches that oral stimulation within the context of the marital act (i.e. intercourse that ends with the husband ejaculating in the wife) is wrong. Oral sex by itself is wrong. Oral stimulation is different and it's a form of foreplay that contributes to the bonding of spouses within the marital act.

Period.


#14

[quote="kelvinf, post:11, topic:309687"]
There is no difference per se. Oral sex is oral stimulation of the genitals. Like intercourse, it could involve orgasm (ejaculation in the case of a male) or not.

Some people (usually some Catholics) choose to refer to oral stimulation as oral-genital stimulation without orgasm/ejaculation. But it's still oral sex just like intercourse with or without orgasm/ejaculation is still intercourse.

[/quote]

[quote="Kelfa28, post:13, topic:309687"]
No...there is a big difference.

[/quote]

I have provided the meaning of oral sex that every person knows (apart from a few here.)

Sexual activity be it fornication, masturbation, intercourse or oral sex have never ever been defined on the basis of orgasm/ejaculation (or a conclusion as you call it). Fornication, masturbation, intercourse or oral sex whether they end in orgasm/ejaculation or not are still fornication, masturbation, intercourse and oral sex respectively. Any other thing is just wishful thinking.


#15

[quote="kelvinf, post:14, topic:309687"]
I have provided the meaning of oral sex that every person knows (apart from a few here.)

Sexual activity be it fornication, masturbation, intercourse or oral sex have never ever been defined on the basis of orgasm/ejaculation (or a conclusion as you call it). Fornication, masturbation, intercourse or oral sex whether they end in orgasm/ejaculation or not are still fornication, masturbation, intercourse and oral sex respectively. Any other thing is just wishful thinking.

[/quote]

Here we go again......:popcorn:


#16

Do you want a new philosophical and theological debate on the morality of preliminaries and of sexual preliminaries in the context of marital act???? Are you ready!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For tonight not, I am so tired and so bored by the absurdity coming from some catholics.


#17

[quote="fpt, post:16, topic:309687"]
Do you want a new philosophical and theological debate on the morality of preliminaries and of sexual preliminaries in the context of marital act???? Are you ready!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For tonight not, I am so tired and so bored by the absurdity coming from some catholics.

[/quote]

No, please. Just put up a link to your previous treatise, counselor.


#18

[quote="TheRealJuliane, post:17, topic:309687"]
No, please. Just put up a link to your previous treatise, counselor.

[/quote]

I agree with you.


#19

[quote="LightBound, post:15, topic:309687"]
Here we go again......:popcorn:

[/quote]

Seriously, I'm not getting into an argument here again about the so-called "sinfulness" of foreplay.

It's completely ridiculous the way people argue a holier than thou attitude about totally acceptable acts between a married couple.

By all these arguments...the simple act of kissing is totally off the table.

It is nowhere in the catechism that oral stimulation within the marital act is forbidden and therefore sinful.

I'm done...I know what the catechism says and what the Catholic Church teaches and will not let some ridiculous argument sway what my husband and I do in bed.

I feel really bad for the readers who browse this forum and see arguments like this out there. If it were me and I was reading this forum and discerning whether to become a Catholic...I wouldn't want anything to do with it due to the over the top scrupulousness of some people and their arguments that aren't true....it isn't even in the Catechism...period.

It's very simple...oral stimulation is NOT oral sex.
One is an act of foreplay that is accompanied by the marital act and one is a lustful form of masturbation that has no intention of including the marital act.

The OP even acknowledges this.

The context and the intent are totally and completely different from one another.


#20

The fact is, people who engage in oral sex or oral stimulation pragmatically do the same thing! That is, they stimulate the genitals repeatedly with their mouths. The duration, how it ends or intention does not change the name of this kind of sexual activity. And as I argued, the same holds true for intercourse, which is also a kind of sexual stimulation.... The duration, intention or how it ends does not change the name nor lead to the creation of 2 names on basis of the duration, intention, or orgasm. It is still intercourse. The same holds true for oral sex. Denying this is mere wishful thinking.

People can console themselves the way they want but that wouldn't alter anything.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.