Pre-marital sex--

[The Dark Lord]

No joke. I have seen this 70 year old man that waited to get married until that age and he saved himself until marriage still.

 

 

 

Freakin' idiot.

 

 

 

Screw religion. I refuse to wait until then to get A) married B) sex.

[Flametrooper]

 

Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family.

 

 

 

And you = over-generalizing. Those conditions don't always happen, not everyone who has premarital sex has an unwanted baby (cough, cough, use condoms). Not everyone who has premarital sex gets an STD either. (cough, condoms, cough. Again. But I guess your church prohibits that.)

 

 

 

I don't think its important...but then again I'm not a shallow person so that is reflected in my answer.

She's realistic, not shallow. Big Difference! You're being a bit romantic and slightly naive. I know when I get old enough to get married, I'll be making sure my partner's a good match, sexually and otherwise, before I say those vows, because I'm not sure I want marital stress over an issue like that.

[forsaken]

 

Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family.

 

 

 

That's a fairly strong over-generalisation. I think I can safely say that although idealistically we'd like to think that love is a purely mental concept, and one where we 'appreciate the person for their personality'. However, in the real world, the physical component is very readily a key factor of any relationship. How familiar and 'at ease' you are with your partner in terms of character compatibility plays a huge role in how well the relationship runs. Physical intimacy, however, does too. There's a direct correlation between how familiar and at ease two partners are physically and the healthiness of their relationship. If you're not physically at ease with a partner, then that would - obviously - translate into emotional/mental distress of some sort. This could then lead to further complications, ie., quiet unhappiness, unspoken insecurities, the whole bag of relationshipal issues. To me, the basic foundation of relationships then have two core areas: the physical intimacy and the emotional intimacy.

 

 

 

Someone mentioned it earlier, but pre-marital sex helps weed out one problem of many - BEFORE persons have committed to marriage [which is both a social and legal institution]. In an ideal world, this wouldn't be an issue - but then in an ideal world, we wouldn't need marriages, because everything would be perfect and nothing would need to be set down in stone. Here, pre-marital sex acts as, to put it crudely, a testing ground. I am sure you can all agree that bad sex for the rest of your life is an infinitely daunting prospect. One that would negatively impact and undermine a relationship.

 

 

 

Once again, I want to address this:

 

 

 

"Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family."

 

 

 

In the contemporary world, marriage is less of a religious institution in so much as it is a legalised social institution. The legal definition [in Australia at least] is the ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâthe union of a man and woman to the exclusion of all others voltunarily entered into for lifeÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ [Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)] Evidently, this is based on the former religious conceptions, but its evolved and broadened beyond those narrow fields.

 

 

 

For most, marriage is only entered because of the benefits offered to a pair that has the intent - during the time - to remain with eachother indefinitely.

 

 

 

So from this perspective - of marriage as a social and legal institution rather than religious - I'd have to say that pre-marital is okay, I'd even go as far as to say that its a fairly important 'criteria' of sorts prior to marriage. The single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution [i have no idea where that comes from], rape [?] and STD's [?]. In light of my perspective, these are irrelevant. For me, marriage only occurs once both parties have sufficiently 'tried' eachother to the point that they know that that person is the one they want to live with. To me, pre-marital sex is one such determinant.

 

 

 

If everyone were to marry before sex, then the issues of single parents, orphans, abortion and etc would be amplified. You would have financial and legal issues stacked on top, owing to the complex nature of divorcing a partner. The above issues only occur because most people have the foresight to 'test' each other out.

[Mountdoom77]

Holy [cabbage]!

 

 

 

On topic:

 

I think it's ok if they love eachother lol.

[The Dark Lord]

So what if someone doesn't measure up to your standards sexually? (Yes you scream out in pleasure as they're screwing you, yet it's not "good enough.") Oh my God! His penis is 2 CM shorter than what you wanted! Get over it.

 

 

 

Are you going to just keep on trying and getting disappointed or are you going to just suck it up and realize that life's a [bleep] and you don't always get things how you perfectly want them?

 

 

 

Oh and is being romantic immoral?

[Nadril]

So what if someone doesn't measure up to your standards sexually? (Yes you scream out in pleasure as they're screwing you, yet it's not "good enough.") Oh my God! His penis is 2 CM shorter than what you wanted! Get over it.

 

 

 

Are you going to just keep on trying and getting disappointed or are you going to just suck it up and realize that life's a [bleep] and you don't always get things how you perfectly want them?

 

 

 

Oh and is being romantic immoral?

 

 

 

What are you even talking about? No one said anything, at all, about penis size. The point is if you aren't attracted to someone and can't feel that attraction during sex I don't see how it could work out in a marriage.

 

 

 

Believe it or not but a good portion of love is based off of attraction. And when I say attraction I mean anything from being attracted to others who are smart or funny or look a certain way.

[forsaken]

So what if someone doesn't measure up to your standards sexually? (Yes you scream out in pleasure as they're screwing you, yet it's not "good enough.") Oh my God! His penis is 2 CM shorter than what you wanted! Get over it.

 

 

 

Are you going to just keep on trying and getting disappointed or are you going to just suck it up and realize that life's a [bleep] and you don't always get things how you perfectly want them?

 

 

 

Oh and is being romantic immoral?

 

 

 

How does being romantic relate? I'm assuming you're replying to my post.

 

 

 

You're taking a very narrow-minded response if so to my post. It's not about someone measuring up to my - or anyone elses - sexual standards. To do so would be the greatest sort of superficial folly.

 

 

 

The comment I am making is that physical - and thus sexual - intimacy plays a role in a relationship, regardless of what spin or view of relationships you have. It is an integral component in that it has the capability to affect the emotional and mental bond between two persons. As such, it should be one that is tested PRIOR to marriage - an institution that requires two persons to have the intent to, as mentioned, bond together indefinitely.

 

 

 

Does it not make sense for this intent to be as well-nurtured and better fulfilled and understood by both parties before entering marriage?

 

 

 

What is wiser: Ironing out doubts before or after a marriage, when doing so after limits your avenues of action, or at least the ease at which you can attain them.

[The Dark Lord]

Okay, I'll admit that I was being an [wagon].

 

 

 

Sexual appeal has part of a relationship. I wouldn't want someone that would repulse me or make me feel uncomfortable. Although I am not shallow and am a little leany on that subject. I wouldn't really care to catch an STD (especially a dangerous one) or turns out my wife would not be able to have children. (Although the latter doesn't necessarily mean that I would end the relationship. Things could still work out.) I can think of at least one way to get someone pregnant without catching an STD from them (no sexual contact with them at all).

 

 

 

I wouldn't want someone that is fat/has very unhealthy habits such as smoking (more than just the moderation, I'm talking about smoking to the point where it can cause cancer and the such) or has a habit of getting drunk, etc. If they cannot take care of themselves or are not responsible enough, how can I expect them to help take care of my children? Would it be a good environment for my children if they're neglected by one parent or that one parent influences me and my children in a negative manner?

 

 

 

Sexual pleasure still isn't that important at all to me. For the record, if orgasms mean so much to you, there are special devices that INCREASE it. If you want it to be really intense, just go get that special neurosurgery. Again, that can be worked out as well.

[How2PK]

Korskin, what does pre-maritial sex has got to do with rape and prostitution?

 

 

 

And since when is marriage a guarrantee for a happy and loving family? This isn't the 50s, you know.

[____]

It's not. He's just delusional.

[Sumpta]

The comment I am making is that physical - and thus sexual - intimacy plays a role in a relationship, regardless of what spin or view of relationships you have. It is an integral component in that it has the capability to affect the emotional and mental bond between two persons. As such, it should be one that is tested PRIOR to marriage - an institution that requires two persons to have the intent to, as mentioned, bond together indefinitely.

 

 

 

Very well put. Sex is an act of intimacy between two people (at least if it's done within the borders of a relationship). It's one of the ways of bonding and it can be a very emotional thing, both before and in marriage. If things don't work out between the sheets, you can be pretty sure things won't work out in the relationship. It works the other way around as well, if things go badly in the relationship, chances are that things aren't working well in bed either. There are exceptions, obviously, but it's very naive to think that sex is unimportant.

 

 

 

And as for me being shallow, that's really funny. I have very high demands for my relationships, I take them very seriously, even though I have no intention of getting married soon (if ever). Just because someone engages in premarital or non-marital sex, does not make them a [bleep], shallow or bad.

 

 

 

As for the statement that the world would be a better place if people didn't have premarital sex? I believe the world would be filled with a lot more frustrated people. We are physical beings, we do have physical needs. Sex is as much part of us as eating and drinking.

[Striker6]

I do think sexual compatability is something very important. Love is first, but if you both have very different sexual appetites, that will only lead to bad scenarios. Let me paint this scenario for you, you sound like the kind of person, that sits by the fire place, wearing your slippers and you're cardigan, and goes to bed at 7pm.

 

 

 

On you're wedding night, the first night with your Mrs, whom you thought was just as conservative as you, you're waiting for her in your bed (lights off of course, as only a conservative person would) "Hunny are you coming to bed, I have some tea ready first".

 

 

 

"Hold on honey, won't be a moment".

 

 

 

Only to discover your conservative librarian wife, is into this;

 

 

 

I was actually talking about women more than men, because a man actually thinks about sex all the time, they cant help it. However if its a woman they shouldnt be thinking like that as they weren't designed to think about sex all the time. So I think that the comment was inappropriate as it illuminated that if lust comes first from the woman's perspective there is something genetically wrong.

 

 

 

Plus if you're getting married you've obviously had enough of alot of sex because you are tieing yourself to one person. So it shouldn't actually be a major factor in a marriage.

[IGoddessI]

Wait a second... Women aren't supposed to think about sex as much as men... Oh ...

 

 

 

Thank you sex expert Striker...

[Korskin]

First off sorry for not replying but my router broke down.

 

 

 

If this freaks you out, Kors.

 

 

 

Three girls called me at 4AM and offered me food sex.

 

 

 

-------

 

 

 

Okay, do you think masturbation is wrong outside a marriage? It's another form of sex. Also every guy I know does it, possibly including you.

 

Masturbation is really a different topic. The Bible doesn't say much about it, but my stand is that it leads to other sins such as lust, porn etc and therefore should be avoided. Whether it's immoral aka a sin is debatable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The bible leads to a lot of bad things.

 

 

 

Damn I love not giving any supporting reasonings or arguments!

 

 

 

 

 

Heres a tip, Kors. The bible isn't always right.

 

We can take the Bible out of the equation. I'll make it very simple and very black and white:

 

Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family.

 

 

 

I wasn't aware that people could get divorced, kids could get put up for adoption, parents could not get abortion, neither could hire a prostitute behind ones back, neither could rape the other one (when they weren't willing) and neither could get an STD just because they were married.

 

 

 

Man marriage sure does give people a lot of super powers doesn't it?

 

It's not marital sex if you hire a prostitute since your not married to the prostitute. You could rape the one you married but then you have broken your wedding vows. I'm assuming that you will try not to brake them. You could get an abortion but I don't see any reason for it unless the mother's life is endangered. I don't think STD's are a huge problem among married couples.

 

 

 

 

Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family.

 

 

 

And you = over-generalizing. Those conditions don't always happen, not everyone who has premarital sex has an unwanted baby (cough, cough, use condoms). Not everyone who has premarital sex gets an STD either. (cough, condoms, cough. Again. But I guess your church prohibits that.)

 

 

Yes, I'm over-generalizing. But I'm thinking that premarital sex is most often the cause of it.

 

 

 

 

Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family.

 

 

 

That's a fairly strong over-generalisation. I think I can safely say that although idealistically we'd like to think that love is a purely mental concept, and one where we 'appreciate the person for their personality'. However, in the real world, the physical component is very readily a key factor of any relationship. How familiar and 'at ease' you are with your partner in terms of character compatibility plays a huge role in how well the relationship runs. Physical intimacy, however, does too. There's a direct correlation between how familiar and at ease two partners are physically and the healthiness of their relationship. If you're not physically at ease with a partner, then that would - obviously - translate into emotional/mental distress of some sort. This could then lead to further complications, ie., quiet unhappiness, unspoken insecurities, the whole bag of relationshipal issues. To me, the basic foundation of relationships then have two core areas: the physical intimacy and the emotional intimacy.

 

 

 

Someone mentioned it earlier, but pre-marital sex helps weed out one problem of many - BEFORE persons have committed to marriage [which is both a social and legal institution]. In an ideal world, this wouldn't be an issue - but then in an ideal world, we wouldn't need marriages, because everything would be perfect and nothing would need to be set down in stone. Here, pre-marital sex acts as, to put it crudely, a testing ground. I am sure you can all agree that bad sex for the rest of your life is an infinitely daunting prospect. One that would negatively impact and undermine a relationship.

 

 

 

Once again, I want to address this:

 

 

 

"Premarital sex = single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution, rape, STD's.

 

Martial sex = babies in a loving family."

 

 

 

In the contemporary world, marriage is less of a religious institution in so much as it is a legalised social institution. The legal definition [in Australia at least] is the ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâthe union of a man and woman to the exclusion of all others voltunarily entered into for lifeÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ [Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)] Evidently, this is based on the former religious conceptions, but its evolved and broadened beyond those narrow fields.

 

 

 

For most, marriage is only entered because of the benefits offered to a pair that has the intent - during the time - to remain with eachother indefinitely.

 

 

 

So from this perspective - of marriage as a social and legal institution rather than religious - I'd have to say that pre-marital is okay, I'd even go as far as to say that its a fairly important 'criteria' of sorts prior to marriage. The single parents, orphans, abortion, prostitution [i have no idea where that comes from], rape [?] and STD's [?]. In light of my perspective, these are irrelevant. For me, marriage only occurs once both parties have sufficiently 'tried' eachother to the point that they know that that person is the one they want to live with. To me, pre-marital sex is one such determinant.

 

 

 

If everyone were to marry before sex, then the issues of single parents, orphans, abortion and etc would be amplified. You would have financial and legal issues stacked on top, owing to the complex nature of divorcing a partner. The above issues only occur because most people have the foresight to 'test' each other out.

 

I think testing each other sexually is not necessary. If you love each other in every other way and want to marry, I'm sure you will work out the sexual part of the relationship once you're married. I'm not saying that sex is an insignificant part of the relationship but I just don't believe in sexual incompatibility.

 

 

 

Korskin, what does pre-maritial sex has got to do with rape and prostitution?

 

 

 

And since when is marriage a guarrantee for a happy and loving family? This isn't the 50s, you know.

 

Rape and prostitution is more likely premarital than marital sex. You probably don't rape the one your married to, neither do you a marry a prostitute and keep paying him/her money for sex. There is no guarantee of a happy and loving family but at least you have made a commitment and a promise to try.

[Sumpta]

I think testing each other sexually is not necessary. If you love each other in every other way and want to marry, I'm sure you will work out the sexual part of the relationship once you're married. I'm not saying that sex is an insignificant part of the relationship but I just don't believe in sexual incompatibility.

 

 

 

Rape and prostitution is more likely premarital than marital sex.

 

 

 

These two thoughts combined are highly dangerous:

 

 

 

1) marital sex will work out just fine

 

2) only non-married people rape

 

 

 

Because 1 = a fairy tale. Yes, sex can be a most wonderful thing between two people, and we humans crave for both the physical and emotional aspect of it. But sexual incompatibility definitely does exist. I'm sure you can work at it in some cases, but it doesn't always work out fine, especially not if you've never discussed this before with your partner, nor experimented before marriage. These sexual problems will lead to a lot of sexual frustration, misunderstanding and unhappiness. This might culminate in sexual agression over time. Oh dear, and that brings us straight to 2, does it not. Rape is not a privilige of unmarried men!

 

 

 

Oh and Striker, the more posts I read by you, the more I love how you just don't get women. At all.

[Matok]

 

.....However if its a woman they shouldnt be thinking like that as they weren't designed to think about sex all the time. So I think that the comment was inappropriate as it illuminated that if lust comes first from the woman's perspective there is something genetically wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

Wait a second... Women aren't supposed to think about sex as much as men... Oh ...

 

Thank you sex expert Striker...

 

 

 

new thread anyone? :wink:

 

Though i think this issue was already over-chewed in TV series such as "Sex and the Big City" and others...

 

BTW, men & woman are designed (and implemented) differently,not only in the sexual aspect. thats how nature made us..

[Tigra00]

Striker, please learn to read.

 

 

 

Sexual compatibility, whilst not being the key element to a marriage, is still an important one and should not be overlooked.

 

 

 

I don't think its important...but then again I'm not a shallow person so that is reflected in my answer.

 

 

 

Wait wait wait...

 

 

 

You don't think sex is important in a relationship...Period?

 

 

 

Wow, that's quite delusional. I feel compelled to apologize for you to your future partners. :shock:

 

 

 

You ain't gotta' do it before you're married, but after you are, it's pretty important.

[forsaken]

I think testing each other sexually is not necessary. If you love each other in every other way and want to marry, I'm sure you will work out the sexual part of the relationship once you're married. I'm not saying that sex is an insignificant part of the relationship but I just don't believe in sexual incompatibility.

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

Rape and prostitution is more likely premarital than marital sex. You probably don't rape the one your married to, neither do you a marry a prostitute and keep paying him/her money for sex. There is no guarantee of a happy and loving family but at least you have made a commitment and a promise to try.

 

 

 

To the first bit, I hold a similar if not the same view as Sumpta.

 

 

 

To the latter, I have a few problems with what is said. Firstly, I don't believe prostitution is 'wrong', but I can anticipate that you find it immoral. Here there is obviously a clash, but I think it's one that I hope we can both agree to disagree on.

 

 

 

The main problem I have is in regards to the fact that rape is more likely in pre-marital sex than it is in marital. That is, from my experience, far from the case. For instance, let's look at the history of marriage and the concept of unito caro, which used to be a key component of marriage. Essentially what this concept entailed was that when married, two persons became 'one flesh' - however the church did not recognise females and so in effect women became the property of men. Here, marriage essentially propagated the right of males to consortium [sexual relations]; that is, allowed them the right to rape women. Women however had no avenue of redress; the law and the church both supported the male in this regard.

 

 

 

Nowadays, many people still hold out-of-date views that once married, they have said legal right to consortium. Once again, if you've never had sex with someone before, or engaged in such physical intimacy, you'd be unaware of what both were comfortable with, and thus what could amount to rape could occur in equal likelihood within a marriage as it would without.

 

 

 

This also brings me onto another key issue; women - or even men - who are subject to rape or assault of any nature in a marriage are less likely to report and complain about it. Most of the time, this is due to a fear of the consequences; be it that 'it wasn't worth pursuing in the broader view of things', or the need to provide a unified - if fake - front of 'happiness' for the children and so on.

 

 

 

Therefore, I strongly think that rape is not limited to pre-marital sex, nor do I think it is more likely to occur in pre-marital sex. More likely to be reported? Yes. To occur? Not so much.

[Zonorhc]

Rape and prostitution is more likely premarital than marital sex. You probably don't rape the one your married to, neither do you a marry a prostitute and keep paying him/her money for sex. There is no guarantee of a happy and loving family but at least you have made a commitment and a promise to try.

 

 

 

So... because rape and prostitution largely involve premarital sex, then premarital sex is the root cause of rape and prostitution?

 

 

 

Okay, well, going by your hilariously fallacious logic, since cancer largely involves pain and suffering, then clearly, pain and suffering are the root causes of cancer.

[Nadril]

Rape and prostitution is more likely premarital than marital sex. You probably don't rape the one your married to, neither do you a marry a prostitute and keep paying him/her money for sex. There is no guarantee of a happy and loving family but at least you have made a commitment and a promise to try.

 

 

 

So... because rape and prostitution largely involve premarital sex, then premarital sex is the root cause of rape and prostitution?

 

 

 

Okay, well, going by your hilariously fallacious logic, since cancer largely involves pain and suffering, then clearly, pain and suffering are the root causes of cancer.

 

 

 

Stole the thoughts right out of my head.

 

 

 

 

 

Also, you assume too much Korskin. One of those is you assume that everyone will uphold the wedding vows at all times.

 

 

 

 

 

And yes, prostitution is premarital. Like Zonorhc said, however, Premarital sex doesn't instantly equal to prostitution.

 

 

 

Ever come to think that a family wouldn't be ready for a kid, Korskin? What happens if they have an accident? Broken condom, do it without protection, any number of things. You are incredibly naive if you think that a married couple would never get an abortion.

 

 

 

Also people can lie Korskin. Someone can lie about not having an STD just because they are afraid that the person wouldn't love them anymore. There are also other ways of getting a STD other than sex that, in fact, wouldn't involve anything premarital at all.

[IGoddessI]

Sex isn't important? Well whoops looks like I'm a shallow b*tch I didn't get married to my ex because no matter what we tried he just couldn't last long enough in the bed room. I'm a woman with needs and like hell I'm going to spend the next 50 years of my sex life with a 2 minute wonder :P Especially when I'm not even in my sexual peaking prime years he he he... Hi.

[How2PK]

I'm with ya girl!

[dutchdreams]

Wasn't he the guy that complained about pre-maturity.......err maturity a few pages back ?

 

 

 

Anyways, to those who think prostitution is something done pre-marital: how come so many married men are among the clientele ? Disfunctional marital sex life would be one of the reasons.

[goldphishies]

Just so long as you "protect your investment", your good... and it would probably help if you're drunk, as well.

 

And I've been gone awhile, so maybe the rules changed... but I'm suprised this thread lasted this long without being locked.

[heartless619]

Well I'm probably going to save myself for marriage but thats just my personal choice. Especially if that's what my partner wants. Though I don't have a problem with either way, though I don't like the fact that there's so many loose chicks out there rooting any male with hormones. And that males think its cool getting with a loose chick for a night. Then they realise that they've contracted that disease they don't want.

 

 

 

But if there's a guy and a girl who love each other and have talked it through and use protection then I generally don't see a problem with it, though I still believe its generally better to wait.

 

 

 

what he said..took the words outa my mouth...