First, that's not what I said. I said the notion that Christians are taught to abhor sex is a deliberate straw man argument. I made no claims about anxiety or l

First, that's not what I said. I said the notion that Christians are taught to abhor sex is a deliberate straw man argument. I made no claims about anxiety or lack of it. I made no reframing of the breadth of human sexuality, because that was not what was being discussed. I did make assertions regarding the Christian teaching of what was moral in regard to human sexuality. You then state a number of assumptions (prefaced with "I think") which are largely irrelevant. The story of Onan, who spilled his seed during intercourse rather than give his brother's widow a child as the Mosaic law required, was punished because of disobedience to the law. That had nothing to do with fantasy or pornography. Christian teachings regarding sexual fantasy or pornography are all aimed at the training of one's conscience to avoid behavior that typically leads one to the societal norm of extra-marital sexual experience. This expands to a wider belief regarding self-control. If you routinely do something wrong, you come to accept it as normal, and are likely to continue where that path winds. A straw man argument is a logical fallacy [1]. It is the deliberate misrepresentation of someone's position in order to make it easier to attack. My opinion is that understanding logical fallacies (formal and informal) is important for conducting honest and rational discussions, so we disagree on that. I tend to agree with your point about wasted effort regarding enforcement of morality with law. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man