Huh. I firmly believe that the G-d of Abraham is the one true G-d and that casual sex is not immoral.
If the people involved are consenting adults who are honest and open with each other, are not in exclusive relationships with other people, and take the proper precautions, I don’t have a problem with it. I’ve arrived at this answer largely by asking G-d
As noted, “moral” is somewhqat subjective, or at least subjectively percieved.
I will note that on the one hand we have several millenia of combined human experience, across vastly different times, places and cultures, supporting the idea that sexual activity is a powerful, important and indeed sacred thing with enormous social, psychological, religious and political consequences that should not be taken lightly; on the other hand, the “me and you ain’t nothing but mammals” school of consequence-free shagging has been popular for something less than half a century.
YMMV
I would say if you are risking pregnancy in such a relationship it is unquestionably immoral. Now that doesn’t mean that people always do moral things.
Also this excludes anal and oral sex as well as homosexual sex, and I guess other acts like pedipholia and beastiality, which may or may not be immoral, but it’s immorality is not based on bringng a new soul into the world emotionally unsupported (or killing it)
Casual sex is no more or less “immoral” than any other physical act. kanicbird, you are once again confusing “immoral” with “irresponsible.”
Outside of adultery (which involves indirect harm to another person), I would say nothing between two or more consenting adults is immoral, regardless of the “ick” factor other people may assign it.
I’m prepared to do a lot more studying of the issue before drawing a conclusion.
Get back to me in forty years.
SWM older but still cute and cuddly. Seeks friendly adventurous woman for friendship, intelligent conversation, and shareing showers, 
My opinion is that it is my body. I enjoy sex, and while married now, speaking for when I was single and not in a deliberate and stated monogamous relationship…
My coochie is not a holy temple, it has 2 purposes [well 3 if you want to count the monthly torture it seems to enjoy putting me through] procreation [which is nipped in the bud by a tubal ligation lo! these many years ago] and sexual pleasure. Since I don’t ascribe any particular holiness about my coochie, I see/saw no problem in using it to have pleasure. Safe sex is a good thing=) and trusted fuck buddies are wonderful=)
This sentence made me stop and scratch my head and try to figure out what you actually mean. Do you simply not believe in morality? If so, well, that’s your point of view, but then a question like “Is casual sex immoral” wouldn’t be meaningful to you, and you wouldn’t have anything to contribute beyond saying that you don’t believe in labelling anything “immoral.”
Or do you believe some acts are immoral (or more immoral than others), just not “physical” acts? What other kinds of acts are there? If I strangle someone to death with my bare hands, is that a physical act? And is it any more or less immoral than other physical acts I could perform? You’ll have to explain what constitutes this set of “physical” acts that you claim are morally neutral, what distinguishes them from other things that might be immoral, and why casual sex falls into the first category.
aruvqan, if there’s nothing “holy” about your coochie, why are you monogamous now that you’re married (or are you)?
You, sir, are completely and entirely wrong! I have no idea how you came to this grotesque conclusion, but it is absolutely unsupportable. I must ask you to retract your statement.
Chocolate can not be abused!
Morality or immorality depends on your frame of reference, as others have indicated.
I think that casual sex (despite the best of intentions on both sides) has the potential to be emotionally / psychologically devastating to one of the two people involved at some point. I say this because many people are not capable of remaining emotionally unattached over the longer term with someone they are having sex with. (Psychological Russian roulette, anyone?) If you and your CSBF partner are both not looking for an emotional connection, are not breaking a commitment to someone else by indulging in casual sex, and are prepared to behave responsibily towards one another in the event of an unplanned pregnancy or transmission of a sexually transmitted disease or developing feelings for the other, then I don’t think it could be considered unethical.
Because it is an agreement between mrAru and self. I have nothing against monogamy at all, just the religiously induced patrilineal body-control of females for inheritance sake that has no meaning to me. I would be perfectly happy with 2 husbands, or another wife if I approved of the woman in question. I do understand that there are a couple societies out there that allow polyandry, I seem to remember asking on list about them.
Look, in the past, the ONLY thing you can be assured of with a child is who the MOTHER is because you can tell which woman of a tribe the person pops out of after 9 months of being a bun in the oven. Paternity can in general only be determined if you can control access to the mother sexually. This means things like monogamous marriage forms with the control being punishment if discovered having sex outside of the recognized control bond. Control being a combination of societal punishment [recourse to law - stoning the woman, or whatever the determined punishment is for adultery] and religious based punishment [various things, like the burying alive of vestal virgins/nuns, various penances from various forms of religion. Some ‘tribal units’ have a strong religious presence in the societal government and combine criminal and religious punishments.]
I am sterile through surgery, and previously tried to do so chemically [twice it failed though properly medicated and one of those times even using a rubber that was apparently faulty] and see absolutely no reason why I should curtail my sexual fun for some reason that doubly doesnt pertain to me [agnostic and sterile] though I will by MY CHOICE curtail sexual contact per arranged contract [in this case, partaking in a common form of social contract called marriage in america, which requires monogamy. I did not however promise to obey hubby…just honor and love him. We are equals in this marriage=)]
Then you misread what I wrote, While I don’t want to go into the ‘nothing between two or more consenting audlts is immoral’ debate, my point is if the activity involves a potential creation of a non-consenting, non-adult at the time of the act that casual sex is immoral.
Of course it’s meaningless. That’s why it’s casual sex. And, of course I believe in morality. However. As was mentioned earlier, people tend to elevate beliefs to the level of ethics and personal ethics to the level of social morals. There is a distinction.
I do believe some acts are immoral, or less moral than others. Casual sex between two (or more) consenting adults falls into the first category because it’s consensual and hurts no one. Physically or emotionally hurting someone else for your own gain is immoral, which is why I included adultery in that category.
I didn’t misread what you wrote at all. What you are stating is opinion. Why is creating a non consenting non adult immoral? If it results in a child who is loved and wanted, despite the fact that it was not planned, what is immoral about it?
I was just about to ask exactly the same thing.
We all began as “non consenting non adults,” and how many of us really know what our parents’ circumstances and intentions were at the moment of our conception? And how is that relevent to anything? Just because a pregnancy is “unplanned,” doesn’t imply that the sexual act is “immoral.”
I learned a long time ago that there are only two kinds of sex: responsible and irresponsible. Sex is responsible when the people involved know what the possible consequences are, and accept responsibility for them.
Responsible sex (including unplanned pregnancies) can occur outside of a long-term relationship, just as irresponsible sex can occur within a totally monogamous marriage.
Define: “casual”?
Define: “sex”?
Define: “define”?
(sorry, just thought I’d get that out of the way)
Seriously, to answer the OP, between a husband and wife? No. anyone else? yes.
Based on my belief in the Abrabhamic God and his revealed word.
Question for you, BMalion. Do you believe that a person can be an atheist or agnostic and still be a moral person?
Well, as Aruvqan says, “trusted fuck-buddies” are a wonderful thing. That said, though, I would like to say that I draw a distinction between “casual sex” and “making love.” One is a purely physical act (and in my case, preferred with someone I know/trust, like a friend with “benefits”), the other involves deep emotional contact and a certain amount of romance. Fortunately for me, my wife sees things the same way, so I am at liberty to enjoy “friends with benefits” on occasion. I’m always careful, though, to keep the “lovemaking” something between my wife and I, since I think it deserves a special distinction. Yes, I have had, and will have in the future, “casual” sex with my wife, but it’s highly unlikely I will ever “make love” to a “fuck-buddy.”
Heathens. Abusing a poor, defensless, delicious, piece of dark, rich, chocolate…<drool, slobber>