Yeah, I get why they'd assume no barriers for, say, traditional intercourse -- for many people that's one of the major perks of a committed relationship, if you are using a different form of/no birth control, you get to ditch the barriers, which are not oodles of fun. But they do have their place. While they seem to assume their married Christian couples haven't got STI transmission to worry about (an understandable assumption, but probably not true across the board -- ideally they would not have slept around before their marriage, but maybe they have, or maybe there was a nonconsensual encounter which stuck them with an STI) barriers can still be good for stuff like anal contact, where you want to avoid bacteria (esp. if you have cuts on your hands.)
I kind of want to e-mail them corrections. >.> Except I'm not sure they'd appreciate the input of a kinky queer heathen. It's just so neat to see a clear attempt at a sex-positive resource for conservative Christians, it'd be really nice if their actual sex-ed type information showed the same level of care as their biblical analysis.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-05-26 05:10 pm (UTC)I kind of want to e-mail them corrections. >.> Except I'm not sure they'd appreciate the input of a kinky queer heathen. It's just so neat to see a clear attempt at a sex-positive resource for conservative Christians, it'd be really nice if their actual sex-ed type information showed the same level of care as their biblical analysis.