Huseng wrote:I don't think all but a small minority of Buddhist teachers would suggest fire and brimstone in matters related to sexuality.
Really what it comes down to is that the Buddha taught that desire is cause for suffering and must be eliminated. On a subtle level it hinders meditation. Entry into the first dhyāna includes "abandoning desire". By not overcoming kāma one is bound to the kāma-dhātu.
This might not be relevant to most people who neither meditate nor actively seek liberation from saṃsāra. I don't think it wise to take a yogic principle and turn it into an ethical rule for people who do not engage in meditation. This is why the lay precept just concerns harmful sexual acts (for example incest and adultery).
I don't think I disagree with what you're trying to say.
Do hope you're not meaning to imply that lay householders don't meditate or work to achieve any attainments...
Not really sure how to reply to that without posting intimate details of my life but I will point out that there are parallels in sport fighting - that you never have sex in training camp.
The main point of my post was about how you eliminate those desires: stamping them out versus letting them fade away.
I find the second approach more successful for me, feels a lot more natural. Strict self-denial often seems to have the opposite effect in my experience.
If I was a true renunciate, I definitely wouldn't waste my time thinking about that stuff.
When I take that leap I'm going to have strong motivations & convictions driving me, those kinds of fantasies just wouldn't have any place in what I'll be trying to accomplish.
At the same time, if you live in a candy store eventually you're going to get bored of candy, but if you're not allowed to have it you'll probably crave it.