[nickelcitymario]

> [...] christianity, which kind of has anti-sexual overtone.

As a Christian, I wouldn't agree with this statement. Most denominations that I've experienced are very pro-sex. We see sex as a gift from God, intended to bond two (or, depending on the denomination, maybe more) people together. God is Love, we're taught, and sex is understood to be an expression of love.

Now, you might be right if you said Christianity was against certain types of sex. I'm not, and I think the sexual morality police are an overly loud portion of Christians. Most Christians I know are very open and accepting of people's sexuality. But there is certainly an abundance of Christians who feel it's our responsibility to tell people about the right and wrong applications of sex.

But "anti-sex" overall? Any such denomination would go extinct pretty quickly if their followers actually followed that.

[mejutoco]

I realize you didn’t talk explicitely of catholicism but at least in catholicism there is a strong control of sex: priests make vows of celibacy, sex is seen only as a means for reproduction, and there is literature on using exercise (if not worse) to put off sex. Lots of practices of christianity have masoquism undertones (original sin, some rituals). Of course this does not mean everyday christians share this interpretation, but historically I believe it correct to say the Catholic church is not pro-sex.

[mensetmanusman]

It’s important to realize that Catholicism as practiced by a given culture is influenced by prevailing beliefs.

The puritan(ical) genesis of the United States has resulted in a mostly Protestant practice of Catholicism in the U.S. (polls of US Catholics show that over half diverge with Catholic teachings).

Catholicism in my experience is very pro-sex, and many teachings are dedicated to it: https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/docume...

[mejutoco]

Thanks for the source. I guess it is possible to understand the text as "pro-sex" if one limits it to the context of marriage only and not allowing any anticonceptive mechanism. Independently of my personal beliefs I would not qualify anything with those limitations as "pro-sex", since they limit substantially what sex is allowed.

[DicIfTEx]

> But "anti-sex" overall? Any such denomination would go extinct pretty quickly if their followers actually followed that.

Case in point: the Shakers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers)