[Debate] Living a life without..?

[GommeInc]

The discussion some of you are having is quite interesting - is sexual intercourse a human need/want? It's mounted on the same horse as human rights in some respects, we need food and drink in order to survive, but what about sex? On an individual basis we do not need sex to survive, but then you get the wider perspective of the survival of humanity, where sex is needed.

Should we impose our views on those who choose a life of celibacy, when it's perfectly fine and harms no-one? No, as it is their choice to do so. It gets a bit difficult if it is imposed on someone from a young age, similar to children being brought up in a strictly religious family or being circumcised (Germany is a good case for this).

As for the questions at hand.

What do you think of this way of living?
It's not for me personally. I don't see it as a problem either. It only really makes sense in a religious setting to aid concentration in the long-term, and in the short-term it has its uses in football (or was that a myth)?

Would you be able to live a life in celibacy?
It wouldn't be hard (excuse the pun) to live like this. It's like asking someone if they could live without their legs or be able to drive - it just won't be enjoyable.

If you was given the option to choose to recieve a massive amount of money, however, you had to live a life in celibacy, would you accept it? This means that you never have to work, you will be the richest person on earth, the only exception is, no means of sexual enjoyment...
These questions are always odd as they suggest you can't change after you've had the money or your forced to live in a particular way, which to me seems like a breach of fundamental rights But for the sake of the question: No, I wouldn't take the money because if I did there would be less freedoms - no work or sex - while choosing no means no immediate sum of money, yet you can still make money through working.