
First off, let me congratulate you for not posting a flame about "You sick
perverts, you are immoral, you are all going to hell.", which seems to be the
usual "religious" post found on the alt.sex.* hierarchy.  Hopefully, you won't
get flamed, either.

You will, however, be argued with.  I personally think that your project is
built on unsteady ground.

First, I do not believe that there is any way to find an "objective morality". 
Morality and value are inherently subjective - they represent the beliefs of a
person or a group of people.  They can be widely held, perhaps even
overwhelmingly held, but they are never and _can_ never be objective.


Second, I do not accept the assumptions that you make here.  If, as you say,
you are trying to be objective, then why accept a morality to begin with by
using the Christian Bible?  You're defeating your own purpose by doing so.
 

Third, call me a pessimist, but you won't stop the flamage.  There will always
be people who pop upin alt.sex.* to tell us how sick and twisted and evil we
all are.  Just out of curiosity, do alt.sex readers show up unprovoked in the
religion groups to tell you all that you are narrow-minded, censoring,
overbearing totalitarianists?
 

Hm.  Let me provide an example.  Four people get together over dinner, to
discuss morality: you, me, a rather conservative Moslem, and a sociopath.  I
start off by saying that I think it's immoral to force people to have sex with
you.  You agree, but also say that it is immoral to have sex with someone of
your own gender.  (Just a note: I really don't know your views on
homosexuality, I am just using this as a common view of morality for the
purposes of this example.)  The Moslem says that it is immoral for women to
have their faces uncovered.

The sociopath, who has become bored, kills all three of us and eats us, but
feels no guilt because he has done nothing wrong morally in his own mind. 
                                                                         

	(Evidence deleted)

I'm not going to accept your evidence for this.  You ask us to accept "The Word
of God" that everything good comes from God.  This is only a valid argument for
a person who shares your beliefs.

Still, I must say that cataloging the major themes and motifs in erotica could
be interesting for other reasons than yours, so good luck with this next part.


Hmmm...do I detect just a wee bit of condescence here?
                                                      
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
				not very objective. 


One could construe this to mean that beautiful people are better, or "more
good" than non-beautiful people.  I would hope that people relize that this is
not necessarily true.
                     
                    ^^^^
      Might I suggest the word "penis"? It seems more in line with the tone of
your post. 
          

Bravo!  I respect you and your sense of humor, sir. 

                                                 
Yes, and this theme is usually what the better stories are about.  However,
they are not always selfish - I could point to examples in the work of Elf
Sternberg, for example.


It serves the same purpose as it does in pornographic movies: it affirms the
virility of the male involved, as well as assuring the reader that he (the
character) has orgasmed.                      


Your Whole Picture [TM] unfortunately only applies to people who accept your
church.
         
In addition, if sex is for procreation, then

1)	Why did God make it pleasurable, so that people would want to do it,
rather than building it in as instinct?
2)	Why did God make it fallible?  Not every sexual encounter results in
pregnancy, even among Catholics.  Does this mean that they have sinned?
 
 
Granted.


Pornography would not tend in those directions if there were not a demand for
it.  Many people have violent fantasies that they would never act out in real
life, but will think about and read about and mull over.

Later,
						Jeff                                   
