Sex as Metatheory

I agree with Michael S. that sex is a fundamental component of the human person, and thus a fundamental component of Catholic legal theory.  But I'm not sure I would go so far as to say that "[r]eflecting on the design of our bodies, our radical incompleteness, our intense desire (especially in males) to “use” another’s body to satisfy our own needs, and a whole host of related topics can offer insight into the origin and nature of community, the need for rules (and hence the need for promulgators of rules) to govern behaviour, the origins and nature of government and other governing structures (the corporation, etc.)."

Here's the tension, in my view:  Our need for law derives in significant part from our fallen condition.  We are selfish and we need rules to rein in our selfishness.  But the ideal for sexuality (the lifelong coupling of a man and woman) is not in response to our selfishness, but to our incompleteness.  Adam and Eve did not need the criminal law in the Garden of Eden, but they still needed each other.  Corporate management does not need to face punishment for self-dealing because they are incomplete, but because they are selfish.  An authentic view of sexuality allows us to transcend our selfishness; law accounts for our selfishness.  I totally agree that our understanding of the human person must include an articulation of human sexuality.  But I'm still not sure how far the articulation of human sexuality gets us toward a comprehensive theory of law.