Religion and sexuality

Sexual morality is a complex of concepts and beliefs by which a culture or a group (often, but not only, a religious one) intends to develop a regulation of individual behaviours in matter of sexual activities. Commonly these rules essentially distinguish between sexual activities that are practiced for biological reproduction (sometimes allowed only when in formal marital status and in fertile age) and other activities practiced for the pleasure of sex only (or mainly). In this sense, a concept of sexual morality can be expressed in any of the possible directions, and groups exist that recommend restrictive behaviours as well as groups that recommend totally free self-determination, as well as a variety of intermediate positions. The respective efficacy of these rules depends on the social position of the group that develops them, on its eventual political representativity, on its relationships with the laws of the related country.

Views on sexual morality have varied greatly over time and from culture to culture. Usually, they derive from religious beliefs, but some writers have pointed out that social and environmental conditions play a part in the development of a given society's views on sexual morality.

In Western pluralistic societies of the 20th and 21st centuries, there often exists debate on not only whether there is a common morality, but on whether it is right to expect such a common view. In most western societies, laws allowing a wide range of sexual relationships between consenting adults is the norm, although that legal range varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The debate thus often includes a sub-argument of what is legal vs. what is moral.

In previous centuries and in many non-western cultures of the 20th and 21st centuries, there has been less room for debate. This does not mean, however, that views on sexual morality have ever been homogenous.

For example, in Hellenic society, homosexuality was often encouraged and accepted as part of the socialization and upbringing of young men, especially those in the military. These relationships were in addition to heterosexual relationships entered into for the establishment of families and the production of progeny so that property would be inherited and kept within a larger kinship group. The importance of the kin-group and the maintanence of its property was such that, under certain circumstances, Athenian law allowed an uncle to marry his neice in order to keep family property together. It could be therefore argued that the needs of the family constituted a higher morality that helped to define the sexual mores of the society as a whole.

Another example is the contrast between traditional European and traditional Asian or African views of permitted familial relationships. British law and custom, for example, frequently forbade intermarriage between those related by marriage. However, in rural regions of India, Nepal, and surrounding nations, fraternal polyandry, in which two (or more) brothers marry the same woman, is culturally accepted. Likewise, European mores generally advocate monogamy strongly. However, polygamy is a much more common social pattern worldwide, with some 80 percent of world cultures considering it acceptable. Polygyny is widely practiced by many societies throughout Asia and Africa, and polyandry is the accepted norm in a few Indian and African societies.

Needs more on other cultures and times

In the United States, what many conservatives call "traditional morality" is held to prohibit all extramarital sex, because of the moral belief that sexual relations should occur only between husband and wife. This view of morality thus disapproves of some or all of the following--premarital, extramarital, and homosexual relations--whether consensual or not.

There are people who disagree with this traditional view. Generally they believe that sex is a natural behavior which should be only minimally restricted by legislation or other imposed moralities. Even among the most liberal views of sexual morality in the US, there is generally agreement that involving non-consenting partners (or those unable to give consent legally) in sexual relationships should be restricted and punishable under the law.

Judaism's view on human sexuality

In "A Guide to Jewish Religious Practice", Rabbi Isaac Klein writes a summation of Jewish views towards sex

Modern man is heir to two conflicting traditions neither of which is Jewish: On the one hand, [we have] the rebirth of the old paganism which found its extreme expression in the sacred prostitutes of Canaan...and on the other hand, the Christian reaction to the excesses of paganism...sex became identified with original sin, and celibacy was regarded as the ideal form of life. Modern man, while opting for pagan libertinism, also suffers a guilty conscience because of his Christian heritage....Judaism is free of both extremes. It rejects the espousal of uncontrolled sexual expression that paganism preaches, and also Christianity's claim that all sexual activity is inherently evil. Jewish marriage is based on a healthy sexual viewpoint that rejects the two extremist principals, and so are the regulations governing the conjugal relations between husband and wife, taharat hamishpacha, the purity of family life.

The Rabbinical Assembly (Conservative Judaism)has published a pastoral letter on all aspects of human sexuality, "This Is My Beloved, This Is My Friend: A Rabbinic Letter on Intimate Relations". Topics include sex within marriage; having children; infertility; divorce; adultery; incest; single parenthood; non-marital sex; contraception; homosexuality; and the laws of family purity (taharat hamishpacha).

Perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of Jewish law are the laws related to toharat ha'mishpach (Hebrew: literally "family purity"). These rules inform us that a women enters the state of "tameh" when she is "niddah" (menstruating). During this time the couple must refrain from all physical contact, especially sexual relations. After the cessation of her menstrual flow, the women counts seven days before immersing herself in a mikva, at which time sexual relations between man and wife can then continue.

The words "tahor" and "tameh" are often, but erroneously, translated as physically clean and unclean. However, these terms actually describe a state of ritual applicability in regards to fulfilling certain biblical commandments, such as those associated with the Temple in Jerusalem, the cultic function of Kohanim (priests), or sexual relations within in a Jewish marriage. Modern Jewish authors often translate tahor and tameh as "ritually pure" and "ritually impure".

For more details, see and Michael Gold's "Does God Belong in the Bedroom" and Shmuel Boteach's "Kosher Sex".

    The extra period of seven days is controversial within the Conservative community. It was initially presented as a custom of the pious, and seems to have stemmed from the confusion of a few halakhists over the normal length of time of women's menstrual cycles. Some have proposed that contradictory statements in the Talmud and the works of Nachmanides and Maimonides led to a situation whereby the extra 7 days of waiting became mandatory. This longer waiting period is in direct contradiction to other Mishnaic and Talmudic statements. While the movement has not yet issued an official ruling on this, some American Conservative Jews have ruled that the extra days are no longer mandatory. These include Rabbis Joel Roth, Michael Gold, Susan Grossman and JTS Talmud Professor David C. Kraemer.

See: Homosexuality and morality