NOYB wrote:

Perhaps the high school kids developed their working definition for the word
"sex" from the guy getting blow jobs in the Oval Office? I doubt any
*responsible* adult would teach them that oral sex is not sex.

More likely they decide for themselves.

"-rick-" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Perhaps the high school kids developed their working definition for the
word "sex" from the guy getting blow jobs in the Oval Office? I doubt
any *responsible* adult would teach them that oral sex is not sex.

More likely they decide for themselves.

I'd wager that kids growing up anytime though the late 80's considered oral
sex to be a form of "sexual relations". If kids think differently today,
then what's the reason for it?

NOYB wrote:

I'd wager that kids growing up anytime though the late 80's considered oral
sex to be a form of "sexual relations". If kids think differently today,
then what's the reason for it?

You should ask the kids who take abstinence pledges yet have higher
rates of oral and anal sex. Maybe it's a church thing, I wouldn't know.

"-rick-" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

I'd wager that kids growing up anytime though the late 80's considered
oral sex to be a form of "sexual relations". If kids think differently
today, then what's the reason for it?

You should ask the kids who take abstinence pledges yet have higher rates
of oral and anal sex. Maybe it's a church thing, I wouldn't know.

It's certainly a Catholic church thing.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"-rick-" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

I'd wager that kids growing up anytime though the late 80's considered
oral sex to be a form of "sexual relations". If kids think differently
today, then what's the reason for it?

You should ask the kids who take abstinence pledges yet have higher rates
of oral and anal sex. Maybe it's a church thing, I wouldn't know.

It's certainly a Catholic church thing.

Kind of a broad brush you're painting with there, eh Dougie?

There were many catholic girls in my neighborhood and none of them gave me
blowjobs ; )


"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"-rick-" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

I'd wager that kids growing up anytime though the late 80's considered
oral sex to be a form of "sexual relations". If kids think differently
today, then what's the reason for it?

You should ask the kids who take abstinence pledges yet have higher
rates of oral and anal sex. Maybe it's a church thing, I wouldn't know.

It's certainly a Catholic church thing.

Kind of a broad brush you're painting with there, eh Dougie?

"It's Only Me" wrote in message
...
There were many catholic girls in my neighborhood and none of them gave me
blowjobs ; )

Did you try to seduce them with a little anal first?

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 11:20:47 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"-rick-" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

I'd wager that kids growing up anytime though the late 80's considered
oral sex to be a form of "sexual relations". If kids think differently
today, then what's the reason for it?

You should ask the kids who take abstinence pledges yet have higher rates
of oral and anal sex. Maybe it's a church thing, I wouldn't know.

It's certainly a Catholic church thing.


If the couple are married, Doug, then the Catholic Church has no problems with
oral sex.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:01:40 -0400, John H wrote:


If the couple are married, Doug, then the Catholic Church has no problems
with oral sex.

Huh? When did the Catholic Church repeal Humanae Vitae? AFAIK, oral sex
is considered a form of contraception. Oral stimulation leading to sexual
intercourse is a different matter.

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:09:10 -0400, thunder wrote:

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:01:40 -0400, John H wrote:


If the couple are married, Doug, then the Catholic Church has no problems
with oral sex.

Huh? When did the Catholic Church repeal Humanae Vitae? AFAIK, oral sex
is considered a form of contraception. Oral stimulation leading to sexual
intercourse is a different matter.

In the eyes of the Church, 'intent' reigns. If one is engaging in oral sex with
the specific intent of preventing procreation, then the Church would consider it
wrong.

If the intent of the oral sex is mutual stimulation, an expression of love, a
desire to try something new, or any other reason, except as mentioned above,
then it is not wrong - for a man and wife.

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."