Interesting, possibly this website is not permitted to go into such discussion; but that is just the rules of the game here. Admin. may have to set limits; I am prepared to abide by them.
My general impression is that humans are less bad and more innocent than is often realised. And the real explanations of many contentious issues may prove to be pervaded by unexpected innocence.
Some behaviours are obviously biologically illogical, this is backed scientifically by Bhatmanghedjli (I mispelt his name I think) in his book "The body's many cries for water. You are not sick you are thirsty."
What 'humans' really are, and what is "natural" reproductive activity I do not claim to fully know here. Since I was educated on the subject at age 12 I have assumed the hypothesis that the purpose of reproductive activity is reproduction. Logical but doesn't seem to be that popular a view.
There does seem to be a real logic to the idea that a lot, or even most, activity of this nature as currently practised is but a misplaced substitute to make up for a lack of aliveness due to errors in child-rearing practices and loss of pleasant sensation of aliveness from infancy.
It is said that chimpanzees are perfect mothers; they are with the infant constantly through the year after birth. Humans seem to be muddled, over things the animals get right. Some cultures though have happier babies (I've heard Korean babies smile rather than cry). More skin-contact in infancy may lead to less seeking of such contact in a socially-prescribed-reproductive context in later life. These are theories.
The jury is out on what humans are. I think they are naturally far more amazing than is realised.
Jesus Christ portrays similar characteristics to the instincts of newborn babies: love of life, of creation. I think deep down everybody has a divine-like nature as amazing as the most mystical super-alien from a distant galaxy that you can imagine.
I think it is tragic that the non-bias of infants to cuddle any others as fellow children of the living God; would be missappropriated during adulthood into strange contexts by society.
I see no biological logic in e.g. certain same gender behaviours; but at the same time see only innocence in the embrace of U.S. and Russian presidents.
Quote: "I agree with you it is more important to do the right thing than to have some particular moment of pleasure" O.K.
Disputes over the rights and wrongs of human behaviours might partly be resolved by more information. I particularly think that information on the past, specially before age 5yrs, is relevant to understanding what humans really are.
Lacking for now a full-recall track record to determine facts beyond even those science has provided, I think the jury must side with the unborn as having a right to life. Reproductive behaviour comes with a responsibility to the new life.
One may ask: is the blank in recall asociated with societal bullying of children? I discovered that fear has everything to do with it. Orwell's "1984" describes an ultimate dictatorship that is not dissimilar in some ways to the predicament faced by infants born to a lost and confused race.