Premarital sex (1 Viewer)

[Stace]

I was curious as to what the rest of you think of premarital sex. I know many folks have religious beliefs regarding waiting for marriage, but do/did all of you abide by those beliefs? And what about those that have no religious teachings regarding this?

In today's society, abstaining from sex before marriage just isn't as feasible as it once was. Men and women are putting off marriage, for the most part, until they're in their late 20's/early 30's. Can we reasonably expect them to abstain from sex until then? As a society, we frown upon teenage sex, yet we also find it quite odd when we find someone in their 20's/30's that is still a virgin (Does The 40 Year Old Virgin ring any bells there?). Why the double standard?

Also, what about people that choose not to get married? That's quite common these days. What about homosexuals, who CAN'T get married? Can we reasonably expect these groups to abstain from sex?

Personally, I think that the whole no premarital sex mentality, while noble in its intent, is an antiquated notion that just doesn't have any place in today's world. We can reasonably expect people to abstain until, say, the age of 18, but we can't hold them to a standard of waiting for marriage when so many are choosing to wait longer and longer before following that path, decide to avoid it altogether, or can't follow that path. Not to mention the fact that so many of us in today's generation didn't wait until marriage; there's no way we can really expect tomorrow's generations to wait when we couldn't even practice what we're trying to preach, can we?

 

[talloulou]

No premarital sex!:shock: I slept around and then married the one that was best in bed. :rofl I couldn't imagine doing it any other way. :mrgreen:

 

[JustineCredible]

I was curious as to what the rest of you think of premarital sex. I know many folks have religious beliefs regarding waiting for marriage, but do/did all of you abide by those beliefs? And what about those that have no religious teachings regarding this?

I think it all depends on what an indivual's concept of "pre-marrital" and "marriage" are.
There many underlying factors in that question that may be too numerous to nail down easily.

In today's society, abstaining from sex before marriage just isn't as feasible as it once was. Men and women are putting off marriage, for the most part, until they're in their late 20's/early 30's. Can we reasonably expect them to abstain from sex until then? As a society, we frown upon teenage sex, yet we also find it quite odd when we find someone in their 20's/30's that is still a virgin (Does The 40 Year Old Virgin ring any bells there?). Why the double standard?

Well for one thing, the movie you site was fiction.
But, yes there is a bit of a double, even triple standard in society. Let's remember the days of Shakespear when it was quite common for couples to be married as early as thirteen years of age.
But what has happened is education.
Society on the whole is better educated and generally decides what is best through trial and error as well as changes in focus.

Also, what about people that choose not to get married? That's quite common these days. What about homosexuals, who CAN'T get married? Can we reasonably expect these groups to abstain from sex?

Interestingly enough, the Catholic Church actually DOES expect homosexuals to abstain from sex althogether BECAUSE two homosexuals cannot be wed in the Church.
According to many Catholic clergy, it's ok to be gay, just as long as you're not a PRACTICING homosexual. If that makes any sence at all.

Personally, I think that the whole no premarital sex mentality, while noble in its intent, is an antiquated notion that just doesn't have any place in today's world. We can reasonably expect people to abstain until, say, the age of 18, but we can't hold them to a standard of waiting for marriage when so many are choosing to wait longer and longer before following that path, decide to avoid it altogether, or can't follow that path. Not to mention the fact that so many of us in today's generation didn't wait until marriage; there's no way we can really expect tomorrow's generations to wait when we couldn't even practice what we're trying to preach, can we?

Well practicing what we preach has NEVER had much of a stronghold on society. If it did, we would never grow, never learn, never evolve.
That's just a sad concept.

 

[tecoyah]

Sex is a very personal matter, and dependant on the personality of the individual, in my opinion. That said, telling anyone when they should begin the exploration of this aspect of human nature just seems.....wrong. If someone wants to wait it has no effect on my sex life, unless they are the object of my desire. If they still wish to wait after my...uh...persuasive personality has been considered, I am fine with that.
There is nothing wrong with abstinence, as long as I am not expected to adhere to the Philosophy, as it is...indeed a mere philosophy.

 

[jfuh]

Premarital sex is human nature.
Sure I respect those whom religiously believe not to engage in such acts. However do not then turn around and lecture the rest of us that it's wrong.

This whole "born again virgin" nonsense is really just a desperate attempt to make a big deal out of virginity. That's not what should be taught. People should be taught the proper attitude about human sexuality.

 

[Axismaster]

I think that premarital sex is an abomination. Anyone who does it better not do it lightly and ask for forgiveness from God after doing it. God tells us several times in the Bible (my pastor once said how many times, but I forget) that premarital sex is wrong, and we as a society had best listen to that.

 

[Stace]

I think that premarital sex is an abomination. Anyone who does it better not do it lightly and ask for forgiveness from God after doing it. God tells us several times in the Bible (my pastor once said how many times, but I forget) that premarital sex is wrong, and we as a society had best listen to that.

And what about those of us that don't believe in God? Obviously, what God supposedly said, and whatever is in the Bible, doesn't apply to us.

talloulou]No premarital sex! I slept around and then married the one that was best in bed. I couldn't imagine doing it any other way.

That's another consideration. Sex is a HUGE part of a healthy marriage. How can you marry someone without knowing what they're like in bed? If you're not compatible as sexual partners, you're going to have some issues to work out!

 

[Stace]

I think it all depends on what an indivual's concept of "pre-marrital" and "marriage" are.
There many underlying factors in that question that may be too numerous to nail down easily.

There aren't too many ways to interpret premarital and marriage. Premarital is before marriage; marriage is defined as a legal union between two adults. Was there something else you had in mind?

Well for one thing, the movie you site was fiction.

I'm well aware of that. And it was done intentionally, as it is something more people will recognize. Not everyone knows the guy that works in the next cubicle, or your neighbor down the street. Most people know at least the premise behind that movie.

But, yes there is a bit of a double, even triple standard in society. Let's remember the days of Shakespear when it was quite common for couples to be married as early as thirteen years of age.

And a big reason for that was because people had shorter life spans back then. There was a need for them to marry at an early age, in order for them to be able to reproduce.

But what has happened is education.
Society on the whole is better educated and generally decides what is best through trial and error as well as changes in focus.

Perhaps, but how can society as a whole decide what is best for any particular individual, especially concerning something like sex, which is certainly not a one size fits all situation?

Interestingly enough, the Catholic Church actually DOES expect homosexuals to abstain from sex althogether BECAUSE two homosexuals cannot be wed in the Church.
According to many Catholic clergy, it's ok to be gay, just as long as you're not a PRACTICING homosexual. If that makes any sence at all.

I understand what you're saying, as the military is the same way. But I'm not talking about religions specifically; I'm more interested in your opinion as an individual, and what you think is considered acceptable.

Well practicing what we preach has NEVER had much of a stronghold on society. If it did, we would never grow, never learn, never evolve.
That's just a sad concept.

I think that's a little backwards. If you are preaching something to someone, YOU need to be practicing it; how can you expect someone to do something you're telling them to do, if you're not willing to do it yourself? However, we learn and grow and evolve when we refuse to practice what is being preached TO us.

 

[JustineCredible]

I think that premarital sex is an abomination. Anyone who does it better not do it lightly and ask for forgiveness from God after doing it. God tells us several times in the Bible (my pastor once said how many times, but I forget) that premarital sex is wrong, and we as a society had best listen to that.

And what about those of us that don't believe in God? Obviously, what God supposedly said, and whatever is in the Bible, doesn't apply to us.

Even more appropriately, what of those who don't believe in Axis' God?
Or who simply aren't "Christian?"
Are we all now supposed to follow one idea of God, one translation of the "Christian" Bible?

Societies survive because they are flexable and can change with the times, not because of rigid adhearance to one dogma or concept. That's how societies fall.

That's another consideration. Sex is a HUGE part of a healthy marriage. How can you marry someone without knowing what they're like in bed? If you're not compatible as sexual partners, you're going to have some issues to work out!

Stace, you answered your own question here. Sex is only part of a healthy marriage, it's a cornerstone, not the entire foundation.
Yes, issues will need to be worked out, but marriage is a partnership with the understanding that issues will need to be worked out. There are issues all over the place in healthy marriages. It's the working them out and learning from each other that makes for a strong marriage.

 

[Sir_Alec]

I think that premarital sex is an abomination. Anyone who does it better not do it lightly and ask for forgiveness from God after doing it. God tells us several times in the Bible (my pastor once said how many times, but I forget) that premarital sex is wrong, and we as a society had best listen to that.

God's law is not the world or America's law, and it is definitely not my law

 

[JustineCredible]

There aren't too many ways to interpret premarital and marriage. Premarital is before marriage; marriage is defined as a legal union between two adults. Was there something else you had in mind?

Yes, actually there is.
Marriage is defined by those who are involved in them. Marriage is defined by religious groups, individuals, non-religious groups, couples..etc.

Pre-marrital is only a concept of concern dependent upon your personal definition of marriage itself.
If you are "married" spiritually with a life partner, but not "legally" is sex before "legal" marriage then defined as "pre-marital?"

What if marriage is defined as ownership? If a father is the legal guardian of his daughter, is he then "married" to her and can he justify sex with her?

I'm not saying I agree with this, but it is a concept worth concidering.

This is why it's not as black and white as you narrowly define it.

I'm well aware of that. And it was done intentionally, as it is something more people will recognize. Not everyone knows the guy that works in the next cubicle, or your neighbor down the street. Most people know at least the premise behind that movie.

I won't debate a purely fictional person dealing with a purely comical situation. Sorry, bating me with "The Fourty Year Old Virgin" is simply rediculous, especially when you first have such a narrow definition of marriage and sex.

And a big reason for that was because people had shorter life spans back then. There was a need for them to marry at an early age, in order for them to be able to reproduce.

Yes, you're starting to understand my point.
Let's not forget though that most if not all of those marriages were pre-arranged and if a girl (girl in today's definition) did have pre-marrital sex, it most likely wasn't with the person whom her parents arraged for her to marry. Which then puts a kibosh on your original therory of sexually getting along with their life partner.

Perhaps, but how can society as a whole decide what is best for any particular individual, especially concerning something like sex, which is certainly not a one size fits all situation?

Society as a whole cannot. The knowledge of this by society as a whole is the only way a society can survive.
What we as a society can hope to know is where limits should be placed for the good of the whole.
Children should not be engaging in sex because they are not emotionally ready for it's concequences. Forcing sex upon a child should be a crime because adults are expected to look out for the safety of children and by forcing sex upon children are irreparably damaging these children and their idea of what healthy sex is.

I understand what you're saying, as the military is the same way. But I'm not talking about religions specifically; I'm more interested in your opinion as an individual, and what you think is considered acceptable.

What I concider acceptable for myself is not what someone else should be forced to concider as acceptable for them, or what society in general should concider acceptable for society as a whole.
I'm an adult, I do not have sex in public, I don't put my sex on display. It is something I find to be best left in private and would be much appreciative if society didn't find it something to debate in public.

Sex is only a part of what I do, not who I am. I do not ever, want to be defined by my sex, sexual encounters, sexuality or sexual orientation...nor do I think anyone else should either.

I think that's a little backwards. If you are preaching something to someone, YOU need to be practicing it; how can you expect someone to do something you're telling them to do, if you're not willing to do it yourself? However, we learn and grow and evolve when we refuse to practice what is being preached TO us.

Well, you've answered your own question again. I'll leave you to it.

 

[JustineCredible]

God's law is not the world or America's law, and it is definitely not my law

My point, exactly!
You go!

 

[Naughty Nurse]

I think that premarital sex is an abomination.

It is if it's bad sex.

Anyone who does it better not do it lightly and ask for forgiveness from God after doing it. God tells us several times in the Bible (my pastor once said how many times, but I forget) that premarital sex is wrong, and we as a society had best listen to that.

Axis, if you have a religion that gives you something positive in your life, then good for you. I am happy about that. However, we don't all share your religion. Personally I wouldn't dream of asking what I consider to be a fictitious deity for forgiveness - that would make me, IMHO, a bit psychotic.

And your pastor must be a bit anally retentive if (s)he actually counted how many times it's mentioned in the Bible.

 

[JustineCredible]

It is if it's bad sex.




Axis, if you have a religion that gives you something positive in your life, then good for you. I am happy about that. However, we don't all share your religion. Personally I wouldn't dream of asking what I consider to be a fictitious deity for forgiveness - that would make me, IMHO, a bit psychotic.

And your pastor must be a bit anally retentive if (s)he actually counted how many times it's mentioned in the Bible.

Somehow I doubt Axis' pastor actually did the counting, there are tons of religious extremist websites which have done the counting already. Such as how many times the concept of homosexuality being an abomination or "against God"...blah, blah, blah...

 

[FallingPianos]

if they are adults, I see no inherent problem with it. being expected to wait until your're 25 or 27 is unreasonable in my opinion.

 

[Stace]

if they are adults, I see no inherent problem with it. being expected to wait until your're 25 or 27 is unreasonable in my opinion.

Thanks for that link, star. Even with the minor fluctuations that are present, there's a definite trend there. I was actually kind of surprised at the data for 1890, for some reason I assumed folks were getting married somewhere around 18-19 years old back then.

Now, would you consider "adult" to be 18 or 21? I know that legally it's 18, but not everyone recognizes it that way. But you're absolutely right, it's ridiculous to expect folks to wait so long.

 

[jfuh]

I think that premarital sex is an abomination. Anyone who does it better not do it lightly and ask for forgiveness from God after doing it. God tells us several times in the Bible (my pastor once said how many times, but I forget) that premarital sex is wrong, and we as a society had best listen to that.

Aside from the simple statement that it's wrong, why is it wrong? How is going against human nature wrong?
All other animals have sex without marriage.

 

[FallingPianos]

Thanks for that link, star. Even with the minor fluctuations that are present, there's a definite trend there. I was actually kind of surprised at the data for 1890, for some reason I assumed folks were getting married somewhere around 18-19 years old back then.

the variation is mostly in men. it goes from 26 in 1890, to 22 in 1950, and then gradually increases to the present 27. with women, there's hardly any change at all until around 1975 when it starts increasing rapidly.

Now, would you consider "adult" to be 18 or 21? I know that legally it's 18, but not everyone recognizes it that way. But you're absolutely right, it's ridiculous to expect folks to wait so long.

I wouldnt define it strictly by age. its more a matter of if they have the maturaty to handle sex. I think highschool is too young. all the people I know that had sex in highschool, only created bigger problems in their relationships by doing so. plus, teenagers are more likely to use birthcontrol incorrectly, or to neglect to use it at all.

I think the bottom line, is that if they are mature enough that sex wont overly complicate their relationship, and if they are responsible enough to use birth control, and to be able to handle the consequences (able to calmly decide to have an abortion, adoption, or decide to keep it) if birth control fails, then they are old enough to have sex.

I'm sure that varies a lot from individual to individual, but i'd guess late teens and early twenties.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

There's nothing wrong with premarital sex. Most people need the practice-- and I cannot fathom how some people are capable of marrying someone without having bedded them first. If you're going to commit yourself to one person for the rest of your life, you really need to make sure they can give you what you need.

This is less of an issue if you don't believe in monamory, but most people do-- including myself. The law doesn't let me declare next of kin save for marrying, and it only lets me marry one person, so I'm going to make sure that one person's also the one I'm gonna want for the rest of my life.

Marriage isn't about sex, and it isn't about love in the romantic sense. It's about family, children, and inheritance. We've lost sight of that and it's hurting us.

 

[FallingPianos]

There's nothing wrong with premarital sex. Most people need the practice-- and I cannot fathom how some people are capable of marrying someone without having bedded them first. If you're going to commit yourself to one person for the rest of your life, you really need to make sure they can give you what you need.

This is less of an issue if you don't believe in monamory, but most people do-- including myself. The law doesn't let me declare next of kin save for marrying, and it only lets me marry one person, so I'm going to make sure that one person's also the one I'm gonna want for the rest of my life.

Marriage isn't about sex, and it isn't about love in the romantic sense. It's about family, children, and inheritance. We've lost sight of that and it's hurting us.

while I definatly agree with your last statement, I believe the rest of your post contradicts it. a commitment such as marriage cannot be tested, and if you try to hard to test it, you set yourself up for divorce by entering the marriage with too many expectations. people that cohabitate before marriage are much more likly to divorce, and I think its because they were expecting marriage not to significant change things between them.

of course, you should know a certain amount about the person you are going to marry before marrying them, but its very easy to delude yourself that you know everything.

 

[Stace]

There's nothing wrong with premarital sex. Most people need the practice-- and I cannot fathom how some people are capable of marrying someone without having bedded them first. If you're going to commit yourself to one person for the rest of your life, you really need to make sure they can give you what you need.

This is less of an issue if you don't believe in monamory, but most people do-- including myself. The law doesn't let me declare next of kin save for marrying, and it only lets me marry one person, so I'm going to make sure that one person's also the one I'm gonna want for the rest of my life.

Marriage isn't about sex, and it isn't about love in the romantic sense. It's about family, children, and inheritance. We've lost sight of that and it's hurting us.

This may sound a bit crude, but the way I see it is: You wouldn't buy a car without test driving it, and I mean, honestly, how long do people even keep the same car? So why would you marry someone without knowing that you're compatible with them in all ways? If you're truly devoted to your marriage, you're going to be with this person until you die. Who wants to have an unsatisfying sex life for 50 + years?

 

[americanwoman]

This may sound a bit crude, but the way I see it is: You wouldn't buy a car without test driving it, and I mean, honestly, how long do people even keep the same car? So why would you marry someone without knowing that you're compatible with them in all ways? If you're truly devoted to your marriage, you're going to be with this person until you die. Who wants to have an unsatisfying sex life for 50 + years?

Thats along the lines of how I feel. I would say that sleeping around is bad but if you are in a commited relationship and you want to get married then you should try it out before you committ to it. Ever seen sex and the city when Charlotte gets married then finds out he can't get it up. How frustrating would that be! So yes,l I would say take that test drive before committing.

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

americanwoman,

Thats along the lines of how I feel. I would say that sleeping around is bad but if you are in a commited relationship and you want to get married then you should try it out before you committ to it. Ever seen sex and the city when Charlotte gets married then finds out he can't get it up. How frustrating would that be! So yes,l I would say take that test drive before committing.

I don't know... I'm really glad that I didn't have sex with my ex. I would have to say it depends relationship by relationship.

 

[americanwoman]

americanwoman,



I don't know... I'm really glad that I didn't have sex with my ex. I would have to say it depends relationship by relationship.

true,true every relationship is different. But if you were enganged or even wanting to get engaged then maybe it is appropriate to 'test drive' things.

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

Americanwoman,

true,true every relationship is different. But if you were enganged or even wanting to get engaged then maybe it is appropriate to 'test drive' things.

I can agree with that.