Discussion Page: Sexbots

I had been writing a post on an experience I had with some people on Facebook when Breitbart posted a story on the upcoming sexbot revolution. Many Christians were of the mind that using these machines would be sinful for two reasons:

  1. Sex outside of the marriage bed is not permitted. It is sin.
  2. Many turned in the bible to the story of Onan, who failed to impregnate his brothers wife after he had died, as the law dictated. However, he didn’t just tell everyone he didn’t want to do the deed, he went in and had sex with his dead brothers wife, but pulled out so as not to impregnate her. This angered God and he killed Onan for it.

The post got exceedingly large and may have needed an NSFW indicator, so I scrapped it. However, it would be interesting to see what some of you think about this upcoming event – and trust me, it IS going to happen, and when it does there is going to be a battle not only in the courts of law, but in the hearts and minds of believers. Lets talk in the comments section!

What’s your take on the issue?


Author: SnapperTrx

Just a guy on the internet.

6 thoughts on “Discussion Page: Sexbots”

  1. I think this is a wisdom issue rather than a sin issue.

    1. For it to be sin we’d have to define sex in terms different than the scriptures. Unless someone can point to an example that a person is not required. These sex bots are still objects like any other sex toy.
    2. Onan…I still fail to see what sin Yah judged him for other than failing to follow the law of the levirate. Deuteronomy 25:5-10

    I cannot call sex bots sinful based on either of these points, but I understand why people would want to. I think the better questions that may lead to more useful discussion is, “Is it wise to use a sex bot? How will these affect our culture and what can we do about it?” I propose these questions not because I have great answers, but because I see their answers being of great importance. Since I haven’t thought much on this issue myself all I can say is it seems unwise to use these sex bots since they are capable of replacing women to a degree much greater than we’ve ever seen. Personally, I think one would ruin my marriage. I’m sure many others can agree.

    I too am curious what legal implications these may have. I can definitely see the battle in our hearts and minds being critical to fight together as the family of Yah.

    1. Your points mirror what I had written up in my original post before it was scrapped:

      1. Despite going through the motions, “sex” with a robot is not actually sex. Sex requires two people and one of those to be a male. Going through the motions with a robot is not more sex than smashing one repeatedly with a hammer is “murder”. You may go through them motions but the result is not the same.
      2. Onan’s sin was, indeed, ignoring the law. Not only that, but I think God was angered that he went in under the guise of adhering to the law (ie: he went ahead and had sex with his dead brothers wife, as he was supposed to), but didn’t complete the task because in his heart he didn’t want to give her a child that would not be of his name. Maybe she was super hot and he just wanted to sex her up, but decided in the end that was all he wanted to do. Maybe God would not have slain him if he had just been up front and said he didn’t want to do the whole business anyway.

      Indeed all things are lawful for us but not all things are beneficial! God gave mankind a sex drive and it will figure itself out one way or another. I see it in this way (and this may be a little too gross for some readers, but, bear with me):

      Our bodies have a biological need to dispose of waste. If one knows they have to go relieve themselves they can either be pre-emptive, find a toilet and do what needs to be done, or they can wait until their body can no longer hold it and soil themselves. In the same manner God gave us a natural sex drive. If one knows they are feeling that it is becoming overwhelming they can do one of two things: They can be pre-emptive and take care of it themselves or, if they are married, by going to their spouse, or they can leave it until their body can no longer hold it in and causes it to be relieved on its own (ie: sex dreams, typically). For those who are married the choice seems obvious, but for those who are not it is NOT so obvious. The drive is still there, and there is no specific law against it in the scriptures, so I don’t see how it can be sinful for one to take care of it themselves (in the proper setting, of course). No one complains about people using the toilet, the toilet is a tool to get a specific job done. In the same manner sex robots are a tool to get a specific job done. Both make the handling of the job a bit more simple and comfortable.

      That being said, as with nearly anything overdoing it can become sin, and I think this is where Christians need to be careful. Given our sinful nature and humanities track record of overindulgence I think we may be headed down a slippery slope. Man has turned toward robots because women have become too difficult to deal with, in my opinion, and even if woman were to straighten themselves out, how far down the road will men be by the time it happens? Will they want to turn back?

      Legally any attempt to regulate the item is simply a desperate attempt by feminists and white knights to save women’s sexual monopoly in the marketplace and should be seen as such. If there is no regulation against a sex doll without a microchip in it now there shouldn’t be a regulation against one WITH a microchip, but when the ship is sinking the last of the rats will do whatever they can to keep themselves afloat.

      Thanks for the input! It seems your new to my site and I appreciate the discussion!

      1. Thank you for giving more of your thoughts on this. I appreciate the parallel to murder you’ve made; I’ll be using that one in any other discussions I have about this. Everything else you’ve said is agreeable to me, yet challenging for our modern church to swallow. Sadly they will be joining the feminists on this fight.

        I’m happy to have stumbled upon your site. We need more sites like this. I’ve caught up on many interesting topics and like what I’ve read. So I figured I’d stick around and add to the discussion when time permits.

  2. I think when it comes to sex, it’s best to be cautious, and having sex with robots would be closer to “sin” than “holiness”. A possible third point to add might be that God condemns sex with animals as well. (I know it’s not the same thing as a robot, but maybe it’s sin because having sex with a non-human is wrong?)

    If you don’t believe that having sex with a robot is sin, I have some questions:
    -What about sexbots that are designed to look like children? Should that be legal?
    -What about sexbots that are designed to look like an actual human being? (For example, a celebrity) Would it be dishonoring to the person/lusting after them? (Jesus did say if you look at a woman with lust you’ve commited adultery in your heart.)
    -If a Christian bought a sexbot that was the same sex as them (for example, a man buying a male sexbot) and had sex with it, would that be sin?

    1. The main thing is: What does the bible say? The bible specifically forbids sex with animals, which is another living thing. A robot or “toy” is not a living thing. Though one may be going through sexual motions the actual activity could not be considered sex. You could say, “Oh he is having sex with that robot”, but technically one is not really having “sex” so much as one is simulating the motions. Again, if we were to take the same robot and stab it repeatedly with a sharp object you might say someone just “murdered” the robot, but its not murder.

      1. Though it would be, in my mind, perverted, a robot designed to look like a child would still not be a real, living person. If someone were to purchase one then they might be sinning, but I think it would be more a sin of conscience rather than the sin of a physical act.
      2. Something designed to look like an actual person would be no sin at all. Remember that lust and covet are synonymous with one another, and deal with a desire to possess unlawfully in the heart. If you haven’t read the info at Biblical Gender Roles I highly recommend it, as he puts it really well. We can lust over more than just people (the bible says not to lust after your neighbors wife, or servant or donkey), so if we put it into simpler terms it becomes easier to understand: If my neighbor owns a nice car and I admire it I am not lusting nor in sin. If I imagine myself driving that car I am not lusting nor in sin. If I determine to work hard and buy a car like his I am not lusting and have not sinned. If I determine that the next time he leaves the house I am going to break into his garage and steal the car for a joyride I have now lusted over one of his possessions by determining in my heart to take what is not mine, and I have sinned before even taking action.
      3.Again, “sex” is a specific action that requires two living humans (in the case we are speaking of) and at least one to be male (penetration must be made). Is it wrong for a man to go to the doctor and get his colon cancer checkup? Or for him to use something like a home enema to alleviate issues? This is no different. Though he would be taking sexual pleasure in the act it is not having sex with another man. That may not mean he is not going to suffer a sin of conscience if he thinks he is doing something illicit or wrong, but that is something the bible leaves up to us (to sin against our conscience). Would it be wrong for a husband and wife to use certain toys that would do the same thing? The bible gives very little in the way of restrictions in the marriage bed. No men with men, not between family members and not with animals. Beyond that there is nothing! In fact, the Song of Solomon is explicit in its imagery of oral sex and other activities.

      We must be careful that we do not add to the word, nor should we take away. That means we should take care to read and understand, and not just take the word of others.

    2. I also take issue with this idea of being “closer” to sin or holiness. It’s either sin, holy, or neutral. “Sex” with sex bots is either sin or not. It may vary based on a person’s heart, but you can point to scripture to judge that.

      Sin: “Sex” with animal.
      Holy: Obedience to Yah.
      Neutral: Wear blue shirts rather than red.

      Where do sex bots belong? It’s more complex than one might think.

      As for your questions, cutesushi, I don’t think I have anything to add to Snapper’s answers. Keep ’em comin’ though! Thinking through these issues is good for all of us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s