NationStates Jolt Archive

Which?
The first option you will good, casual sex, anytime you like. The second option, you are guranteed a happy marriage.

I'd rather have a happy marriage, but that's because I've had enough fun, and I'm ready to settle down now. Casual sex just ain't much fun. College girls get snooty.

Okay--your question asks about guaranteed casual sex with a person--are we talking about a fuck-buddy, friends with benefits sort of thing or are we talking about a long-term relationship that just doesn't involve marriage?

and are you supposing that a happy marriage wouldnt include lots of good sex?

If someone is having sex outside of marriage, they are setting the future child (assuming there is one), in a really bad position. If you still raise the child, why not get married? It would be silly not to. They techinically wouldn't have a legal mom and dad i think. In any case, it's just not right. If you have sex, u ALWAYS have a risk of a child, no matter what screwy precautions u use, so just don't do it unless ur married, or else you are giving a child a significantly worse life than he would normally have. And why not wait till marraige? It would make it all the more amazing when it happens. You wouldn't have it spoiled for you. It's like you having a birthday soon, or at Chirstmas time. If people tell you what's in the presents, it's not as fun. It's like any fun, good experience. If you don't spoil it for yourself, it's much better.

Don't ever give into the temptations of sex before marraige. its just like being tempted to sneak a peak at the Christmas presents b4 Christmas, or anything else like that, only it matters a LOT MORE, and has more risk for BAD consiquences.

Plain and simply, wait till marraige.

and are you supposing that a happy marriage wouldnt include lots of good sex?

Any happy marriage should include lots of that. Why would you not? The more the merrier I say! (referring to kids)

I am happily married and we have been married for 6 years. And the sex is hot, passionate and is never lacking in frequency, or quality!! Casual sex does not always mean GOOD sex! And married sex does not always mean bad sex!! :)

I picked a happy marriage. Guaranteed casual sex is a lot easier to get.

I am happily married and we have been married for 6 years. And the sex is hot, passionate and is never lacking in frequency, or quality!! Casual sex does not always mean GOOD sex! And married sex does not always mean bad sex!! :)

Well said. Well said.

If someone is having sex outside of marriage, they are setting the future child (assuming there is one), in a really bad position. If you still raise the child, why not get married? It would be silly not to. They techinically wouldn't have a legal mom and dad i think. In any case, it's just not right. If you have sex, u ALWAYS have a risk of a child, no matter what screwy precautions u use, so just don't do it unless ur married, or else you are giving a child a significantly worse life than he would normally have. And why not wait till marraige? It would make it all the more amazing when it happens. You wouldn't have it spoiled for you. It's like you having a birthday soon, or at Chirstmas time. If people tell you what's in the presents, it's not as fun. It's like any fun, good experience. If you don't spoil it for yourself, it's much better.

Don't ever give into the temptations of sex before marraige. its just like being tempted to sneak a peak at the Christmas presents b4 Christmas, or anything else like that, only it matters a LOT MORE, and has more risk for BAD consiquences.

Plain and simply, wait till marraige.How old are you?

Marriage. The sex may well follow, but the happiness sex brings is only temporary compared to what a long-lasting, stable relationship brings.

if a healthy happy marriage includes lots of good sex then why would anyone prefer casual sex? to have good sex with many different partners but none of the actual benefits of a loving relationship seems pretty worthless.

I picked a happy marriage. Guaranteed casual sex is a lot easier to get.

but could be far more costly.....

if a healthy happy marriage includes lots of good sex then why would anyone prefer casual sex? to have good sex with many different partners but none of the actual benefits of a loving relationship seems pretty worthless.

That was beautiful!!! WELL SAID!

How old are you?

I'm almost 16. Y did u ask?

I'm pretty sure everyone would choose a happy marriage, and if I am wrong then the state of the world is sad indeed.

I am happily married and we have been married for 6 years. And the sex is hot, passionate and is never lacking in frequency, or quality!! Casual sex does not always mean GOOD sex! And married sex does not always mean bad sex!! :)



Sheesh, you didn't leave much to the imagination :D

married people answer this question quite often. most people are faced with the possibility of casual sex that, if found out, would destroy the loving marriage they have now.

most married people turn it down most of the time. the benefits of even a rocky marriage are worth protecting for most people. most cheaters try their best to not be found out so as to avoid losing what they have at home.

I'm almost 16. Y did u ask?
Because it was pretty apparent from the tone of your post that you were 1) young and 2) inexperienced. In short, you don't know what you're talking about yet, and it shows. Please don't think I'm coming down on you here--I've got no real issue with your beliefs--but it's clear that you haven't had a lot of experience in this subject yet.

Because it was pretty apparent from the tone of your post that you were 1) young and 2) inexperienced. In short, you don't know what you're talking about yet, and it shows. Please don't think I'm coming down on you here--I've got no real issue with your beliefs--but it's clear that you haven't had a lot of experience in this subject yet.

Why? What I have said is true is it not?

Why? What I have said is true is it not?

ur not answering r u....

I'd go for the guarenteed happy marriage...I mean, why wouldn't I want one? In a happy, healthy marriage, it would probably follow that you would have good sex with your parnter. If the marriage is filled with strife and misery, then people tend to stray to get thier fulfillment.

Why? What I have said is true is it not?
Well, I wouldn't call it correct, that's for certain. Here's some examples from your original post.
If someone is having sex outside of marriage, they are setting the future child (assuming there is one), in a really bad position. If you still raise the child, why not get married? It would be silly not to. They techinically wouldn't have a legal mom and dad i think.
Actually, they would. Courts don't care about legitimacy much anymore--they care about parentage for purposes of child support and financial obligations. You also don't take into account that two people who might be having sex, and who might care for each other, might not be ready to marry each other. That wouldn't stop them from living together as a family if they so chose.

In any case, it's just not right.
Says who? Not everyone subscribes to the same moral code you do, and it's more than a bit presumptuous to assume they do, and that your moral code is the superior one.

If you have sex, u ALWAYS have a risk of a child, no matter what screwy precautions u use, so just don't do it unless ur married, or else you are giving a child a significantly worse life than he would normally have.
Actually, you can reduce the risk significantly, but that's not my point. Here's what I mean when I say you're inexperienced. You work under the assumption that marriage makes life better for kids that come out of a relationship. That's not always the case--the divorce rate in the US ought to be proof that people get married too often as it is, so just because you're married when you get pregnant is no guarantee of future happiness for your family.

And why not wait till marraige? It would make it all the more amazing when it happens. You wouldn't have it spoiled for you. It's like you having a birthday soon, or at Chirstmas time. If people tell you what's in the presents, it's not as fun. It's like any fun, good experience. If you don't spoil it for yourself, it's much better. Here's where your experience really shows through. It's obvious that you're still a virgin, and have no idea about the range of sexual experiences out there, from the mind-blowingly good to the horribly terrible, and for a female, the first experience is usually closer to the latter than the former.

Don't ever give into the temptations of sex before marraige. its just like being tempted to sneak a peak at the Christmas presents b4 Christmas, or anything else like that, only it matters a LOT MORE, and has more risk for BAD consiquences.

Plain and simply, wait till marraige.Again--you're overstating your case and offering no backup--your argument is based on conjecture and not experience.

I hope you realize that I'm not attacking you personally here--I'm just pointing out how I knew that you were young and inexperienced based on that post.

I'd have to ask the same question that's been asked before. Are we refering to casual sex in the sense that it would be random women (or men, depending on your preference), or are we talking about casual sex with the same person for many years?

Having been married once myself, I can attest to believe that marriage is not so much more than a ceremony and is not necessary for a long, happy life. I highly doubt I will ever marry again, simply as marriage to me means simply a piece of legal documentation and even a happy marriage is not any different (except legally) than a happy long-lasting relationship.

I'd have to ask the same question that's been asked before. Are we refering to casual sex in the sense that it would be random women (or men, depending on your preference), or are we talking about casual sex with the same person for many years?

Having been married once myself, I can attest to believe that marriage is not so much more than a ceremony and is not necessary for a long, happy life. I highly doubt I will ever marry again, simply as marriage to me means simply a piece of legal documentation and even a happy marriage is not any different (except legally) than a happy long-lasting relationship.Exactly--I've been married before, I've been a single booty-hound, and I've been in a long term committed relationship without marriage, so I've experienced the whole range. I prefer the last one, by the way. But I want to know what Neo Kervoskia meant in his question.

Well, I wouldn't call it correct, that's for certain. Here's some examples from your original post.

Actually, they would. Courts don't care about legitimacy much anymore--they care about parentage for purposes of child support and financial obligations. You also don't take into account that two people who might be having sex, and who might care for each other, might not be ready to marry each other. That wouldn't stop them from living together as a family if they so chose.


Says who? Not everyone subscribes to the same moral code you do, and it's more than a bit presumptuous to assume they do, and that your moral code is the superior one.


Actually, you can reduce the risk significantly, but that's not my point. Here's what I mean when I say you're inexperienced. You work under the assumption that marriage makes life better for kids that come out of a relationship. That's not always the case--the divorce rate in the US ought to be proof that people get married too often as it is, so just because you're married when you get pregnant is no guarantee of future happiness for your family.

Here's where your experience really shows through. It's obvious that you're still a virgin, and have no idea about the range of sexual experiences out there, from the mind-blowingly good to the horribly terrible, and for a female, the first experience is usually closer to the latter than the former.

Again--you're overstating your case and offering no backup--your argument is based on conjecture and not experience.

I hope you realize that I'm not attacking you personally here--I'm just pointing out how I knew that you were young and inexperienced based on that post.


I disagree with everything you have said in this post, except that I have no backup and that it isn't based on experience (I rather like using metaphors instread, its a thing with me, i hate using examples), and I dont understand this statement:

"and for a female, the first experience is usually closer to the latter than the former."

Look, I don't need to have had sex or had girlfriends to know what I am talking about. It's simple logic really. People just seem to never understand. "Not everyone subscribes to the same moral code you do" Well you know what? Maybe if they did, they would be happier! If I say it's immoral, that's no reason to argue! I think most people believe this. Just because not everyone believes what I do, doesn't mean I cannot state what I believe as facts. Because ultimately, there is one answer, and that is not a belief, that is simple logic. If it were not so, there would be no truth. Nobody seems to understand that!

One last thing, "You also don't take into account that two people who might be having sex, and who might care for each other, might not be ready to marry each other. That wouldn't stop them from living together as a family if they so chose." I don't really disagree with that, but the 2 either wouldn't understand the possible consiquences of their actions, are stupid, or don't care for eachother enough, or else they just don't have a very strong will.

In a happy marriage, and loving it.

I honestly can't imagine why anyone would choose otherwise, given the criteria. A marriage partner is your best friend and lover rolled all into one. Why would you rather have casual entanglements and go home alone, than share your life with your best friend?

I'm not religious, but I believe marriage is more than a piece of paper. It's the final commitment to someone. My husband and I both agree that our relationship was greatly improved after marriage. We're both so much happier and content, and he loves wearing his ring and considering himself a married man.

By the way, Arathen, you might want to at least use proper spelling/grammar/punctuation if you want to be taken seriously. I'm just picturing a child when I read your posts.

If you say something's immoral, so what? I could say that wearing shoes is immoral. That doesn't mean I'm right or that I should dictate to other people.

By the way, there's a difference between truth and fact. If I say, "Arathen weighs 600000 lbs", that's a fact. Hopefully it's not a truth, though.

I disagree with everything you have said in this post, except that I have no backup and that it isn't based on experience (I rather like using metaphors instread, its a thing with me, i hate using examples), and I dont understand this statement:

"and for a female, the first experience is usually closer to the latter than the former."

Look, I don't need to have had sex or had girlfriends to know what I am talking about. It's simple logic really. People just seem to never understand. "Not everyone subscribes to the same moral code you do" Well you know what? Maybe if they did, they would be happier! If I say it's immoral, that's no reason to argue! I think most people believe this. Just because not everyone believes what I do, doesn't mean I cannot state what I believe as facts. Because ultimately, there is no answer, and that is not a belief, that is simple logic. If it were not so, there would be no truth. Nobody seems to understand that!

One last thing, "You also don't take into account that two people who might be having sex, and who might care for each other, might not be ready to marry each other. That wouldn't stop them from living together as a family if they so chose." I don't really disagree with that, but the 2 either wouldn't understand the possible consiquences of their actions, are stupid, or don't care for eachother enough, or else they just don't have a very strong will.

What's the point in getting married?

I mean, it's just a certificate and a ring. You don't need that piece of paper and twisted metal and stone to show how you really feel for one another. Love is beyond that.

Well, what I want to ask is, what are the consequences of not getting married, and just living with the man I love?

It might be considered an oxymoron, but I'd choose a happy marriage over limitless casual sex any day, without a doubt.

Eventually I'll be too old to enjoy on-demand casual sex, but a happy marriage could last a lifetime.

I disagree with everything you have said in this post, except that I have no backup and that it isn't based on experience (I rather like using metaphors instread, its a thing with me, i hate using examples), and I dont understand this statement:

"and for a female, the first experience is usually closer to the latter than the former."

Look, I don't need to have had sex or had girlfriends to know what I am talking about. It's simple logic really. People just seem to never understand. "Not everyone subscribes to the same moral code you do" Well you know what? Maybe if they did, they would be happier! If I say it's immoral, that's no reason to argue! I think most people believe this. Just because not everyone believes what I do, doesn't mean I cannot state what I believe as facts. Because ultimately, there is no answer, and that is not a belief, that is simple logic. If it were not so, there would be no truth. Nobody seems to understand that!
As to your first misunderstanding, what I was saying is that a woman's first penetrative sexual experience tends to be closer to bad than good on the pleasure scale--it's usually painful and a little bloody depending on her partner.

And this is me speaking from personal experience--I used to be like you. I had almost identical ideas about sex when I was your age and even when I was older. I held them through my wedding day and held onto some vestiges of them when I decided to get divorced. In short, I learned from my experience.

And by the way--just because you believe something doesn't make it fact. It's opinion, which makes it useless unless there's something to back it up. You admitted in your first sentence that you didn't have any evidence--ergo, you have no fact. You have opinion.

What's the point in getting married?

I mean, it's just a certificate and a ring. You don't need that piece of paper and twisted metal and stone to show how you really feel for one another. Love is beyond that.

Well, what I want to ask is, what are the consequences of not getting married, and just living with the man I love?

Look, there are eternal consiquences of that, but not everyone believes that. But still, why not get married? It would be simple to do! It doesn't have to be spectacular! And look, it can be fun! So, why not I ask?

Arathen, don't listen to the bitter old man who broke his own moral code by his own confession and now tries to act like he's wiser and has learned his lesson, when in fact he's just more world-weary and cynical, perhaps even bitter.

Stick to your guns and go through with your intentions, your goals are admirable. Wait for someone who is of the same type as yourself. Find one that will be like you to make and promise yourself to, for your spouse. Then love her, commit yourself wholly to your wife, and to the marriage, the anticipated children, and the power of two that comes from long term companionship between best friends.

I remember my grandparents 72 anniversary, then my grandmother passed away and her husband, my grandfather, followed her shortly thereafter. They married straight out of high-school and they loved each other and enjoyed the company of their great grandchildren to the end of their days…

No one has ever come up with a better long term version of living life, and certainly not disparaging bachelors, good luck and God bless.

I'd rather be happy with somebody for the rest of my life, then happy for a some odd hours with somebody I don't love.

seems to me that you don't have a happy, healthy marraige unless you're having some fairly awesome sex. but then again, i am a newlywed, so my opinion is obviously biased.

As to your first misunderstanding, what I was saying is that a woman's first penetrative sexual experience tends to be closer to bad than good on the pleasure scale--it's usually painful and a little bloody depending on her partner.

And this is me speaking from personal experience--I used to be like you. I had almost identical ideas about sex when I was your age and even when I was older. I held them through my wedding day and held onto some vestiges of them when I decided to get divorced. In short, I learned from my experience.

And by the way--just because you believe something doesn't make it fact. It's opinion, which makes it useless unless there's something to back it up. You admitted in your first sentence that you didn't have any evidence--ergo, you have no fact. You have opinion.

I never said it was a fact! I said it was fine if i stated it as one! But why don't people understand that something you believe can be true! If it can be true, than truth is not defined as what "evidence" you have to back it up! You can have absolutely no evidence of soemthign that is true! Say for example, an archeologist finds some ancient ruins. People did not know about the ruins before, but that doesn't mean they did not exist. It is a simple fact. Somebody could have believed that there was a ruin there b4, having little or no evidence, and then find out that it IS true. Why can't people understand this?

"And this is me speaking from personal experience--I used to be like you. I had almost identical ideas about sex when I was your age and even when I was older. I held them through my wedding day and held onto some vestiges of them when I decided to get divorced. In short, I learned from my experience."

Learned what? Hold on to your faith! Hold on to what you believe! Please! Because that is what keeps us civilized. If we don't have morals, we are just like animals, searching for lusts to fulifill.

Arathen, don't listen to the bitter old man who broke his own moral code by his own confession and now tries to act like he's wiser and has learned his lesson, when in fact he's just more world-weary and cynical, perhaps even bitter.

Stick to your guns and go through with your intentions, your goals are admirable. Wait for someone who is of the same type as yourself. Find one that will be like you to make and promise yourself to, for your spouse. Then love her, commit yourself wholly to your wife, and to the marriage, the anticipated children, and the power of two that comes from long term companionship between best friends.

I remember my grandparents 72 anniversary, then my grandmother passed away and her husband, my grandfather, followed her shortly thereafter. They married straight out of high-school and they loved each other and enjoyed the company of their great grandchildren to the end of their days…

No one has ever come up with a better long term version of living life, and certainly not disparaging bachelors, good luck and God bless.
Bitter? Me? I'm far happier now than I ever was when I was married and enslaved to a moral code that was based on a different time and place and was likely unrealistic even when it was formulated.

Look--I've been in a monogamous relationship for nearly five years now, with no signs of ending and no plans for marriage. Why? Because we've both been married before and realize that it can give you a false sense of security in your relationship. Every day I wake up next to my girlfriend and I'm glad that I'm there, and I'm there because I want to be there, not because I feel locked in by a document that says I have to be there unless I want to go through some legal rigamarole to become unattached.

My marriage was never like that, let me tell you. My ex and I get along far better now than we ever did while married, and our daughter is a shining example of the fact that divorced people can still raise an un-fucked-up kid. Our divorce helped that happen. So you can take your one-size-fits-all standards and jam them, because the world doesn't work that easily.

Arathen, don't listen to the bitter old man who broke his own moral code by his own confession and now tries to act like he's wiser and has learned his lesson, when in fact he's just more world-weary and cynical, perhaps even bitter.

Stick to your guns and go through with your intentions, your goals are admirable. Wait for someone who is of the same type as yourself. Find one that will be like you to make and promise yourself to, for your spouse. Then love her, commit yourself wholly to your wife, and to the marriage, the anticipated children, and the power of two that comes from long term companionship between best friends.

I remember my grandparents 72 anniversary, then my grandmother passed away and her husband, my grandfather, followed her shortly thereafter. They married straight out of high-school and they loved each other and enjoyed the company of their great grandchildren to the end of their days…

No one has ever come up with a better long term version of living life, and certainly not disparaging bachelors, good luck and God bless.

Thankyou. I will do what you have said. I am glad there are people like you in this world.

People can have morals without having faith, and they can certainly have different morals you don't agree with, and that doesn't make them animals.

I still can't believe you actually said that.

I don't agree with your beliefs, but I feel no need to disparage you or what you believe. I simply choose to follow my own moral code, which has nothing against sex before marriage.

I never said it was a fact! I said it was fine if i stated it as one! But why don't people understand that something you believe can be true! If it can be true, than truth is not defined as what "evidence" you have to back it up! You can have absolutely no evidence of soemthign that is true! Say for example, an archeologist finds some ancient ruins. People did not know about the ruins before, but that doesn't mean they did not exist. It is a simple fact. Somebody could have believed that there was a ruin there b4, having little or no evidence, and then find out that it IS true. Why can't people understand this?

"And this is me speaking from personal experience--I used to be like you. I had almost identical ideas about sex when I was your age and even when I was older. I held them through my wedding day and held onto some vestiges of them when I decided to get divorced. In short, I learned from my experience."

Learned what? Hold on to your faith! Hold on to what you believe! Please! Because that is what keeps us civilized. If we don't have morals, we are just like animals, searching for lusts to fulifill.

Wow, you're still going after The Nazz ruined all of your arguments? I guess I'll have to pitch in. You shouldn't state your opinions as fact, because they're mostly unprovable. Maybe The Nazz learned that life isn't a fairytale, marriage is a very old concept, and he now has a better life? And would you please quit about morals? It's one thing when someone like Neo Rogolia argues with her personal morals, because, although I disagree intensely with her almost all of the time, she provides better arguments. Just because we don't share your morals doesn't make us animals. The Nazz was right, you should hold off all these value judgements until you've lived a little. You've got a lot to learn, kid.

Both, a happy marriage where my wife(s) put out heaps.

Bitter? Me? I'm far happier now than I ever was when I was married and enslaved to a moral code that was based on a different time and place and was likely unrealistic even when it was formulated.

Look--I've been in a monogamous relationship for nearly five years now, with no signs of ending and no plans for marriage. Why? Because we've both been married before and realize that it can give you a false sense of security in your relationship. Every day I wake up next to my girlfriend and I'm glad that I'm there, and I'm there because I want to be there, not because I feel locked in by a document that says I have to be there unless I want to go through some legal rigamarole to become unattached.

My marriage was never like that, let me tell you. My ex and I get along far better now than we ever did while married, and our daughter is a shining example of the fact that divorced people can still raise an un-fucked-up kid. Our divorce helped that happen. So you can take your one-size-fits-all standards and jam them, because the world doesn't work that easily.


MORAL CODES DO NOT ENSLAVE! That's exactly why you have to be carefull who you marry! Don't let your concience be seared by this evil theory that morality is wrong. It's sickining to behold that someone believes this. Look, you should marry your girlfriend, it can be a simple marraige. Please, hold onto the faith that morality is right, or you will forever regret your actions. I believe you will remember this day. The day that you read this. You will remember it when you stand before your Savior, Jesus Christ, at your Judgement, whether you have repented or failed to do so. Please, change now. Do your best. This is wrong. I wish so badly I could help you change, but I doubt I will be of any affect. Please, change.

MORAL CODES DO NOT ENSLAVE! That's exactly why you have to be carefull who you marry! Don't let your concience be seared by this evil theory that morality is wrong. It's sickining to behold that someone believes this. Look, you should marry your girlfriend, it can be a simple marraige. Please, hold onto the faith that morality is right, or you will forever regret your actions. I believe you will remember this day. The day that you read this. You will remember it when you stand before your Savior, Jesus Christ, at your Judgement, whether you have repented or failed to do so. Please, change now. Do your best. This is wrong. I wish so badly I could help you change, but I doubt I will be of any affect. Please, change.

Neo Rogolia...take this one and train him well.

You know what I can't believe, Arathen? That you called people who don't subscribe to your moral code animals. Did you ever consider that people might take offense to your pushing your faith on them? If you didn't like smoking, would you like me to blow smoke in your face? If not, then stop parading your beliefs around as facts and let other people live their own damn lives.

Bitter? Me? I'm far happier now than I ever was when I was married and enslaved to a moral code that was based on a different time and place and was likely unrealistic even when it was formulated.

Look--I've been in a monogamous relationship for nearly five years now, with no signs of ending and no plans for marriage. Why? Because we've both been married before and realize that it can give you a false sense of security in your relationship. Every day I wake up next to my girlfriend and I'm glad that I'm there, and I'm there because I want to be there, not because I feel locked in by a document that says I have to be there unless I want to go through some legal rigamarole to become unattached.

My marriage was never like that, let me tell you. My ex and I get along far better now than we ever did while married, and our daughter is a shining example of the fact that divorced people can still raise an un-fucked-up kid. Our divorce helped that happen. So you can take your one-size-fits-all standards and jam them, because the world doesn't work that easily.

Exactly my point. This isnt cynicism talking, this is experience. My ex and I get along better now and she is far more open with me now than she was while we were married.

A long lasting relationship need not always end in marriage for it to be a good relationship. Simply because we choose not to adhere to someone else's moral code does not make us unmoralistic. And, believe me, I know all about uber-religious moral codes having grown up a missionaries kid. You dont want to get me started on my view of religion.

Wow, you're still going after The Nazz ruined all of your arguments? I guess I'll have to pitch in. You shouldn't state your opinions as fact, because they're mostly unprovable. Maybe The Nazz learned that life isn't a fairytale, marriage is a very old concept, and he now has a better life? And would you please quit about morals? It's one thing when someone like Neo Rogolia argues with her personal morals, because, although I disagree intensely with her almost all of the time, she provides better arguments. Just because we don't share your morals doesn't make us animals. The Nazz was right, you should hold off all these value judgements until you've lived a little. You've got a lot to learn, kid.

Your wourds are like a knife to my heart. It shocks and saddens me that someone would believe what you have said. Don't you understand? Things you believe COULD be true. How can someone not understand this? And life is NOT a fairytale! What does that mean? So, now you think everything in life is fake huh? Well, that's about as low as you can get. Please, believe that life is real at least. Marraige is an old concept. It is one that should be kept. It is a wonderful concept. And lastly, it looks like YOU have a lot to learn. A lot to learn about life.

Out of the mouths of babes... :rolleyes:

Neo Rogolia...take this one and train him well.

You know what I can't believe, Arathen? That you called people who don't subscribe to your moral code animals. Did you ever consider that people might take offense to your pushing your faith on them? If you didn't like smoking, would you like me to blow smoke in your face? If not, then stop parading your beliefs around as facts and let other people live their own damn lives.

How did I say that they were animals? That's obviously a misunderstanding. I mean anyone who doesn't have any morals is being animalistic. It's really true if you think about it. It's logic for goodness sake! if you don't have a concience, you just give into your lusts.

By the way, smoke hurts you, my beliefs don't.

Your wourds are like a knife to my heart. It shocks and saddens me that someone would believe what you have said. Don't you understand? Things you believe COULD be true. How can someone not understand this? And life is NOT a fairytale! What does that mean? So, now you think everything in life is fake huh? Well, that's about as low as you can get. Please, believe that life is real at least. Marraige is an old concept. It is one that should be kept. It is a wonderful concept. And lastly, it looks like YOU have a lot to learn. A lot to learn about life.

Arathen, simmer down.

The posts made and advice given comes from years of experience you have yet to gain. It is wise for young men and women to listen to their elders - trust me, they're right. I still have much to learn, but that doesnt stop me from attempting to pass on what little wisdom I've gained to young whippersnappers such as yourself.

When you've supported yourself and another person working full-time, hell, even graduated college, then you will have earned the right to attempt to pass wisdom on to others. What you are attempting to force upon those of us posting here are merely your opinions based entirely upon what your parents have breed you to believe - not a single argument have you made wherein you can claim to have experience and the wisdom that comes with.

Out of the mouths of babes... :rolleyes:

...comes idiotic, unexperienced attempts to conform the rest of the world to his moralistic beliefs?

Now we know where religious-extremist come from...


lol

Your wourds are like a knife to my heart. It shocks and saddens me that someone would believe what you have said. Don't you understand? Things you believe COULD be true. How can someone not understand this? And life is NOT a fairytale! What does that mean? So, now you think everything in life is fake huh? Well, that's about as low as you can get. Please, believe that life is real at least. Marraige is an old concept. It is one that should be kept. It is a wonderful concept. And lastly, it looks like YOU have a lot to learn. A lot to learn about life.

Could you at least make an effort to make sense? I said that The Nazz learned "life is not a fairytale," so I have no idea where this concept that I believe everything is fake comes from. Finally, your comment about me having a lot to learn...taking what I said, then saying it right back at me, isn't much of a retort, I'm afraid.

How did I say that they were animals? That's obviously a misunderstanding. I mean anyone who doesn't have any morals is being animalistic. It's really true if you think about it. It's logic for goodness sake! if you don't have a concience, you just give into your lusts.

Well, let's see here...

If we don't have morals, we are just like animals, searching for lusts to fulifill.

I think it's spelled out pretty clearly there. What do you define as morals? I bet The Nazz believes he has morals, just not yours. Do his not count?

...comes idiotic, unexperienced attempts to conform the rest of the world to his moralistic beliefs?

Now we know where religious-extremist come from...


lol

Hey, we're not all like him. I'm only about 18 or so.

*watches as his opinion is disregarded completely in the future*

Hey, we're not all like him. I'm only about 18 or so.

*watches as his opinion is disregarded completely in the future*

Age has nothing to do with this discussion. I was referring more to his lack of life-experiences than to his actual age. Believe me, I understand how you feel. I'm not so old in age, but I've had more experiences than many people 5-10 years older than I.

Arathen, simmer down.

The posts made and advice given comes from years of experience you have yet to gain. It is wise for young men and women to listen to their elders - trust me, they're right. I still have much to learn, but that doesnt stop me from attempting to pass on what little wisdom I've gained to young whippersnappers such as yourself.

When you've supported yourself and another person working full-time, hell, even graduated college, then you will have earned the right to attempt to pass wisdom on to others. What you are attempting to force upon those of us posting here are merely your opinions based entirely upon what your parents have breed you to believe - not a single argument have you made wherein you can claim to have experience and the wisdom that comes with.

I am not attempting to force my beliefs on you, and what i believe is not based entirely on "what my parents have bread into me". And there are plenty of "elders" and older people who believe what I do. By the way, you should listen to the opinions of younger people. They can teach you things to. Maybe you wouldn't believe or accept my backup of my arguments would you? Well here it is. All or most of the truths I have stated have either come from what I have learned by testimant of the holy spirit.

I am not attempting to force my beliefs on you, and what i believe is not based entirely on "what my parents have bread into me". And there are plenty of "elders" and older people who believe what I do. By the way, you should listen to the opinions of younger people. They can teach you things to. Maybe you wouldn't believe or accept my backup of my arguments would you? Well here it is. All or most of the truths I have stated have either come from what I have learned by testimant of the holy spirit.


I ask only that you reread my post - paying significant attention to the line or two in which I explained some of my background with the church.

And calling people animals and crying out that they're essentially sinners because they dont believe the same as you is an attempt, albeit a poor one, at converting others to your beliefs. (Remember, I'm a MK)

...comes idiotic, unexperienced attempts to conform the rest of the world to his moralistic beliefs?

Now we know where religious-extremist come from...


lol

Cynical
Function: adjective
1 : CAPTIOUS, PEEVISH
2 : having or showing the attitude or temper of a cynic : as a : contemptuously distrustful of human nature and motives <those cynical men who say that democracy cannot be honest and efficient -- F. D. Roosevelt> b : based on or reflecting a belief that human conduct is motivated primarily by self-interest <a cynical ploy to cheat customers>
- cyn·i·cal·ly /-k(&-)lE/ adverb

synonyms CYNICAL, MISANTHROPIC, PESSIMISTIC mean deeply distrustful. CYNICAL implies having a sneering disbelief in sincerity or integrity <cynical about politicians' motives>. MISANTHROPIC suggests a rooted distrust and dislike of human beings and their society <a solitary and misanthropic artist>. PESSIMISTIC implies having a gloomy, distrustful view of life <pessimistic about the future>.

Could you at least make an effort to make sense? I said that The Nazz learned "life is not a fairytale," so I have no idea where this concept that I believe everything is fake comes from. Finally, your comment about me having a lot to learn...taking what I said, then saying it right back at me, isn't much of a retort, I'm afraid.



Well, let's see here...



I think it's spelled out pretty clearly there. What do you define as morals? I bet The Nazz believes he has morals, just not yours. Do his not count?

Have people truely sunk that low? Well, this argument is no longer valid it seems. You don't even know what morals are. I refer to good morals, if that helps. Since I can only assume based on your previous responses that it doesn't, this argument is finsished. I know what I have said is true. I do not lie. Believe what you may, but the truth will remain. Your words have left me sickened with frustration and anger, and I cannot take it any more. Goodbye!

Wow, you're still going after The Nazz ruined all of your arguments? I guess I'll have to pitch in. You shouldn't state your opinions as fact, because they're mostly unprovable. Maybe The Nazz learned that life isn't a fairytale, marriage is a very old concept, and he now has a better life? And would you please quit about morals? It's one thing when someone like Neo Rogolia argues with her personal morals, because, although I disagree intensely with her almost all of the time, she provides better arguments. Just because we don't share your morals doesn't make us animals. The Nazz was right, you should hold off all these value judgements until you've lived a little. You've got a lot to learn, kid.



Finally, I get some recognition :D


Thankies~ :fluffle:

Cynical
Function: adjective
1 : CAPTIOUS, PEEVISH
2 : having or showing the attitude or temper of a cynic : as a : contemptuously distrustful of human nature and motives <those cynical men who say that democracy cannot be honest and efficient -- F. D. Roosevelt> b : based on or reflecting a belief that human conduct is motivated primarily by self-interest <a cynical ploy to cheat customers>
- cyn·i·cal·ly /-k(&-)lE/ adverb

synonyms CYNICAL, MISANTHROPIC, PESSIMISTIC mean deeply distrustful. CYNICAL implies having a sneering disbelief in sincerity or integrity <cynical about politicians' motives>. MISANTHROPIC suggests a rooted distrust and dislike of human beings and their society <a solitary and misanthropic artist>. PESSIMISTIC implies having a gloomy, distrustful view of life <pessimistic about the future>.

Indeed, I am quite cynical. But not because of a failed marriage. In fact, I believe in long-lasting relationships. I simply dont believe that I need to conform my life to how the church and the more deeply religious believe I should live my life. That's not cynicism. That's the true expression of free will - the ability to decide for myself what I think is moralistic and what is not.

Have people truely sunk that low? Well, this argument is no longer valid it seems. You don't even know what morals are. I refer to good morals, if that helps. Since I can only assume based on your previous responses that it doesn't, this argument is finsished. I know what I have said is true. I do not lie. Believe what you may, but the truth will remain. Your words have left me sickened with frustration and anger, and I cannot take it any more. Goodbye!

So, unless someone has the same morals as you, that person has bad morals? That's a little self-righteous of you, dont you think?


(Yet more evidence of this young one's progression towards the religious extremism we see all over the US today)

Your words have left me sickened with frustration and anger, and I cannot take it any more. Goodbye!

You know, I could go on a rant about how good Christians shouldn't anger so easily, or again explain that "good" morals aren't necessarily the ones you believe in, but I'll just say this in response to that last sentence and word.

My work here is done.

So, unless someone has the same morals as you, that person has bad morals? That's a little self-righteous of you, dont you think?

No more self-righteous than you are acting...don't you think?


(Yet more evidence of this young one's progression towards the religious extremism we see all over the US today)

There is a light, and it's getting brighter.

Sometimes people really, really scare me.

I mean, what happened to live and let live anyway? Why do so many people think they have the right to push their beliefs on other people, or judge them if they don't follow the supposed "moral" path? I mean, even the Bible says something about not judging people.

You know, I could go on a rant about how good Christians shouldn't anger so easily, or again explain that "good" morals aren't necessarily the ones you believe in, but I'll just say this in response to that last sentence and word.

My work here is done.

How nicely modest and loving and unassuming of you, without judgment from you towards him whatsoever, your parents would be proud I'm sure.

Sometimes people really, really scare me.

I mean, what happened to live and let live anyway? Why do so many people think they have the right to push their beliefs on other people, or judge them if they don't follow the supposed "moral" path? I mean, even the Bible says something about not judging people.

Aren't you expressing a contrary opinion at this very moment? Telling others what they should and should not be doing?

That's a really silly way of looking at it. My post is all about individual freedoms and not forcing things on people, and you call that contrary. I mean, give me a break.

I'm sick and tired of people judging people and telling them what is "right" to do with their lives. I'm a very strong believer in live and let live.

How about casual sex with lots of different people? ;)
Seriously, I would take marriage, except that the only guy I would ever have married doesn't want me.
Casual sex it is.

No more self-righteous than you are acting...don't you think?



There is a light, and it's getting brighter.

Amusing how this thread devolved, isn't it? I guess we won though, he left. Everyone knows that when you leave you're giving up.

And I wouldn't call growing religious extremism a light that's getting brighter, but that's just me. I probably wouldn't call any growing extremism a brightening light.

Sometimes people really, really scare me.

I mean, what happened to live and let live anyway? Why do so many people think they have the right to push their beliefs on other people, or judge them if they don't follow the supposed "moral" path? I mean, even the Bible says something about not judging people.



Psalm 141:5-6

5 Let a righteous man [a] strike me—it is a kindness;
let him rebuke me—it is oil on my head.
My head will not refuse it.
Yet my prayer is ever against the deeds of evildoers;

6 their rulers will be thrown down from the cliffs,
and the wicked will learn that my words were well spoken.




But this is for a completely different thread ;)

That's a really silly way of looking at it. My post is all about individual freedoms and not forcing things on people, and you call that contrary. I mean, give me a break.

I'm sick and tired of people judging people and telling them what is "right" to do with their lives. I'm a very strong believer in live and let live.

And if they dare NOT abide and agree with your personal outlook on how they should live and let live, then you'll damn well let them know how wrong they are for it too won't you?!?! Well good for you.

How nicely modest and loving and unassuming of you, without judgment from you towards him whatsoever, your parents would be proud I'm sure.

Hey, I'm not the one that claimed to follow Jesus' teachings, am I?

Psalm 141:5-6

5 Let a righteous man [a] strike me—it is a kindness;
let him rebuke me—it is oil on my head.
My head will not refuse it.
Yet my prayer is ever against the deeds of evildoers;

6 their rulers will be thrown down from the cliffs,
and the wicked will learn that my words were well spoken.




But this is for a completely different thread ;)

Whoa whoa whoa. Do we actually get to throw people off cliffs? Because if so, I'm all over that. I definitely call cliff duty.

Whoa whoa whoa. Do we actually get to throw people off cliffs? Because if so, I'm all over that. I definitely call cliff duty.


I think it was meant in a metaphorical sense, but sure, why not? :D

Amusing how this thread devolved, isn't it? I guess we won though, he left. Everyone knows that when you leave you're giving up.

And I wouldn't call growing religious extremism a light that's getting brighter, but that's just me. I probably wouldn't call any growing extremism a brightening light.

I must say though, the growing darkness of hopelessness that you’ve been defending isn't very appealing itself... I’ll take sanguinity over cynicism any day of the week, all other factors staying the same.

Hey, I'm not the one that claimed to follow Jesus' teachings, am I?


No you weren't, but you surely weren't at a lack of words for telling him what he should be doing.... Where then did they originate from?

I must say though, the growing darkness of hopelessness that you’ve been defending isn't very appealing itself... I’ll take sanguinity over cynicism any day of the week, all other factors staying the same.

If by cynicism you mean doubt, then call me a cynic. Doubt is one of the greatest tools with which to combat tyranny, apathy, and blind conviction. I'll stick with it for now.

No you weren't, but you surely weren't at a lack of words for telling him what he should be doing.... Where then did they originate from?

Well, to be fair, he was the one to start telling people what they should be doing. I don't start things like this, I merely counter when people claim that everybody should live by their beliefs.

And before you say that I shouldn't tell people not to push their beliefs on others, don't. It doesn't make much sense.

And before you say that I shouldn't tell people not to push their beliefs on others, don't. It doesn't make much sense.

Double-standards never do.

Double-standards never do.

Yes, the thing is - I'm not pushing beliefs, per se, I'm fighting beliefs. I'm saying "Ok, believe what you want, but let's all just please keep it to ourselves and not bother anyone else." I have never said "You are a Christian, you are wrong, become an atheist!" So I think it's only fair that I should expect others (of any religion or belief) to act the same.

I could see your point if I was actively denigrating people's beliefs and telling them to convert, but I am not. I am merely pointing out the dangers of expecting others to agree with your system of morals.

Which?
The first option you will good, casual sex, anytime you like. The second option, you are guranteed a happy marriage.

we are insignifacant..poor spelling..but i dont care..proves my point..we all are just nobodies..so i will take the sex thank you.

Why can't I have both? That is a happy marriage as well as guaranteed casual sex when the missus is out of town? A bit of juggling needed but theoretically possible. The French manage to do it ok. Which is probably yet another reason why the puritanical bible-belters in the US hate them so much.

This has turned out to be quite the interesting conversation. On one hand we have older people, who have experienced most of the options, and on the other we have a 16 year old Religious boy who has experienced none of it.

Arathen, I commend your beliefs, however, this is not the place to force them onto people. I was raised a Roman Catholic, and hold strong to most of the beliefs including waiting, however, I have experienced the other side. I say this, because from age 10-15 I had the same girlfriend, and she died in a car accident leaving my birthday party so for a year I cracked. Age 15-16 was spent doing absolutely stupid things that went against my beliefs because I was angry at God, but because I did sleep around and what not doesn't make me a bad person or "animalistic".

I'm not sure of what religion you follow, however, if it is a Christian faith; remember most importantly God gave people the right to choose. Like I said, I commend you for waiting, and for holding strong to your religion, but we as human beings have the right to choose our own decisions in life. If these people choose to stay in long meaningful relationships without marriage, or to love somebody of the same sex, or to sleep around with random people, it is not in your or my place to judge.

And people find faith on their own terms; you damning them for not following your moralistic beliefs will do nothing but turn people away. The decisions we make, are only the business of the people we affect, and ourselves. And them choosing to live their life does not affect you.

Seriously, I would take marriage, except that the only guy I would ever have married doesn't want me.
*Bakes Oxwana a cake.
Don't worry, old girl. Men come and go, cake is always there.

--

In the poll I vote option C.
I'm sure lots of casual sex would be nice in the short term, but it would upset my girlfriend, which is undesirable.

How do you guarantee a happy marriage? Chop off both parties' heads after "I Do"?
I'm rather fond of my girlfriend, and have no plans whatsoever to leave her, but I have no intention of marrying her either. Why would I want to? I've watched plenty of people make that mistake, I have no gods to appease, and I'd rather we stayed together because we wanted to than because we'd signed papers that made it expensive or inconvenient to separate.

I'm another person in the "long-term loving sexual relationship without necessarily marrying" category. The only reason I would ever marry my partner is for the legal benefits (taxes, power of attourney, etc.), and in such a case it would only be civil, outside of church.

I must say though, the growing darkness of hopelessness that you’ve been defending isn't very appealing itself... I’ll take sanguinity over cynicism any day of the week, all other factors staying the same.
But it's the cynics that get all the coolest t-shirts

There is a light, and it's getting brighter.
...Because that light at the end of a tunnel? Is a train.

(Oh, I just noticed both quotes are from you Ph33rdom... this isn't any sort of personal attack on you, or selecting of your posts for malicious reasons. I'm just bored, and the topic has deviated so much, I thought I'd reply to the two easiest things to reply to. No offense meant, I just like one-liners).

---
Anyway, on topic, I'd take meaningful sex over either of the options given. Casual sex is boring and marriage isn't my thing (at 18 years old, anyway). Some meaningful sex, well now, that I could go for. Right now in fact. Stupid lack of a partner.

This has turned out to be quite the interesting conversation. On one hand we have older people, who have experienced most of the options, and on the other we have a 16 year old Religious boy who has experienced none of it.

Arathen, I commend your beliefs, however, this is not the place to force them onto people. I was raised a Roman Catholic, and hold strong to most of the beliefs including waiting, however, I have experienced the other side. I say this, because from age 10-15 I had the same girlfriend, and she died in a car accident leaving my birthday party so for a year I cracked. Age 15-16 was spent doing absolutely stupid things that went against my beliefs because I was angry at God, but because I did sleep around and what not doesn't make me a bad person or "animalistic".

I'm not sure of what religion you follow, however, if it is a Christian faith; remember most importantly God gave people the right to choose. Like I said, I commend you for waiting, and for holding strong to your religion, but we as human beings have the right to choose our own decisions in life. If these people choose to stay in long meaningful relationships without marriage, or to love somebody of the same sex, or to sleep around with random people, it is not in your or my place to judge.

And people find faith on their own terms; you damning them for not following your moralistic beliefs will do nothing but turn people away. The decisions we make, are only the business of the people we affect, and ourselves. And them choosing to live their life does not affect you.

Valori, you once again prove yourself to be a gentleman, and I thank you.


Arathen and Ph33rdom, I have lived both sides. If you want to argue religious dogma, we can do so - but not in this thread. I know far more about the christian religion than most people that know me would ever believe me to know. And most of my good friends also know not to get me started because I'll shoot holes in any dogma presented to me.

If you wish to discuss waiting until marriage for sex and monogamy, I'll remind you that Solomon had hundreds of concubines - and this was accepted. I could also shoot a few holes into the pre-marital sex argument, but I just got home from work and I choose not to waste anymore of my morning doing research to prove to you just how ignorant you show yourselves to be.

Does the bible itself (even though full of fallacies through mis-translation by man) not say "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself?" Who do you two think you are to tell me that my morals are wrong? Does that act in and of itself not smack of hypocrisy on your parts for your self-righteous idignation?

Ph33rdom, I never acted self-righteous. Rather, I simply stated that it was overly self-righteous of Arathen to claim that because my morals were not the same as his I am a sinner and an anmial. I made no claims whatsoever concerning my morals in relation to his other than to state that I dont force mine on him, so he has no right to force his on me. <---- If these actions and beliefs are the "light" of which you speak, I want nothing to do with it for that is not the TRUE light that should be spread but the "light" propogated by the religious extremists who believe in the dogma they have been brain-washed with by the Church (and yes, I've seen evidence of brain-washing in many different denominations).

How DARE you act more righteous than anyone else here, simply because they choose to think for themselves and determine for themselves what is right and wrong.

I WISH I could marry!

Amestria']I WISH I could marry!
Why?
(This is a genuine question.)

* ~ = Snipped sections*

Arathen and Ph33rdom, I have lived both sides. If you want to argue religious dogma, we can do so ~

... not say "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself?" Who do you two think you are to tell me that my morals are wrong? Does that act in and of itself not smack of hypocrisy on your parts for your self-righteous idignation?

Ph33rdom, I never acted self-righteous. Rather, I simply stated that it was overly self-righteous of Arathen to claim that because my morals were not the same as his I am a sinner and an anmial. I made no claims whatsoever concerning my morals in relation to his other than to state that I dont force mine on him, so he has no right to force his on me. ~

How DARE you act more righteous than anyone else here, simply because they choose to think for themselves and determine for themselves what is right and wrong.


Now who's doing the judging and telling others that what they are doing is bad?

Hypocrisy, a two way highway.

Amusing how this thread devolved, isn't it? I guess we won though, he left. Everyone knows that when you leave you're giving up.

And I wouldn't call growing religious extremism a light that's getting brighter, but that's just me. I probably wouldn't call any growing extremism a brightening light.
No--most of the time they've just gone to bed. Getting enough sleep is far more important than taking part in some little internet debate--another bit of wisdom that comes with age.

If someone is having sex outside of marriage, they are setting the future child (assuming there is one), in a really bad position. If you still raise the child, why not get married? It would be silly not to. They techinically wouldn't have a legal mom and dad i think. In any case, it's just not right. If you have sex, u ALWAYS have a risk of a child, no matter what screwy precautions u use, so just don't do it unless ur married, or else you are giving a child a significantly worse life than he would normally have. And why not wait till marraige? It would make it all the more amazing when it happens. You wouldn't have it spoiled for you. It's like you having a birthday soon, or at Chirstmas time. If people tell you what's in the presents, it's not as fun. It's like any fun, good experience. If you don't spoil it for yourself, it's much better.

Don't ever give into the temptations of sex before marraige. its just like being tempted to sneak a peak at the Christmas presents b4 Christmas, or anything else like that, only it matters a LOT MORE, and has more risk for BAD consiquences.

Plain and simply, wait till marraige.

Especially "And why not wait till marraige?":Uhm....cuz there is nothing speciall about having sex mabey? :/ But mabey thats just me who thinks so.

No--most of the time they've just gone to bed. Getting enough sleep is far more important than taking part in some little internet debate--another bit of wisdom that comes with age.

I was being facetious, you see. And I believe he made it quite clear that we'd offended him beyond redemption, that's why he left. Oh well, without him around it's not much of a thread anymore.

The implication is of course that marriage = bad sex.

Not true.

Not even close.

Unless you fulfill that prophecy all on your own.

The implication is of course that marriage = bad sex.

Not true.

Not even close.

Unless you fulfill that prophecy all on your own.That's true. Of all the issues my ex-wife and I had, sex was never an issue, not even for a while after the divorce.

Of course, the sex has been better since I've been with my current long-term girlfriend, but that's another story. :D

Valori, you once again prove yourself to be a gentleman, and I thank you.


Arathen and Ph33rdom, I have lived both sides. If you want to argue religious dogma, we can do so - but not in this thread. I know far more about the christian religion than most people that know me would ever believe me to know. And most of my good friends also know not to get me started because I'll shoot holes in any dogma presented to me.

If you wish to discuss waiting until marriage for sex and monogamy, I'll remind you that Solomon had hundreds of concubines - and this was accepted. I could also shoot a few holes into the pre-marital sex argument, but I just got home from work and I choose not to waste anymore of my morning doing research to prove to you just how ignorant you show yourselves to be.

Does the bible itself (even though full of fallacies through mis-translation by man) not say "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself?" Who do you two think you are to tell me that my morals are wrong? Does that act in and of itself not smack of hypocrisy on your parts for your self-righteous idignation?

Ph33rdom, I never acted self-righteous. Rather, I simply stated that it was overly self-righteous of Arathen to claim that because my morals were not the same as his I am a sinner and an anmial. I made no claims whatsoever concerning my morals in relation to his other than to state that I dont force mine on him, so he has no right to force his on me. <---- If these actions and beliefs are the "light" of which you speak, I want nothing to do with it for that is not the TRUE light that should be spread but the "light" propogated by the religious extremists who believe in the dogma they have been brain-washed with by the Church (and yes, I've seen evidence of brain-washing in many different denominations).

How DARE you act more righteous than anyone else here, simply because they choose to think for themselves and determine for themselves what is right and wrong.



Fine then, I'm game for a dogma-war :D

1. The concubine was an acceptable thing back in OT times, yet it is not today, because you're talking about pre-Christ times.

2. There are no holes in the pre-marital sex argument to shoot, but if you feel that there are, please attempt to do so.

3. The Bible is not full of fallacies, as its translators were inspired by God and thus infallible at the time of translation.

4. People looooove to take Matthew 7:1 out of context, don't they? :rolleyes: It's stating that one should not judge a person based on certain standards if that person is not prepared to be judged on the same standards. It's a condemnation of hypocrisy, basically, not an outright prohibition on judging altogether. Even the apostles knew this. You know, the denizens of Sodom and Gomorrah said "who are you to judge us!?" to Lot, and we all know what happened to them ;)

there is no such thing as casual sex
think of it in reference to casual fridays:
a day when you can relax and feel more
comfortable...like yourself
casual sex is about pretense, pressure,
sometimes guilt, and lord knows you
don't act like yourself

I have casual sex with my wife on average every day-sometimes twice, if I'm still awake.

And there is nothing more casual than no fear as to contracting any STDs or having an unwanted pregnancy.

It dont get no more casual.

If those are the only choices, I would choose the marriage (i.e. something that lasts longer than 5 minutes).

Fine then, I'm game for a dogma-war :D

1. The concubine was an acceptable thing back in OT times, yet it is not today, because you're talking about pre-Christ times.

2. There are no holes in the pre-marital sex argument to shoot, but if you feel that there are, please attempt to do so.

3. The Bible is not full of fallacies, as its translators were inspired by God and thus infallible at the time of translation.

4. People looooove to take Matthew 7:1 out of context, don't they? :rolleyes: It's stating that one should not judge a person based on certain standards if that person is not prepared to be judged on the same standards. It's a condemnation of hypocrisy, basically, not an outright prohibition on judging altogether. Even the apostles knew this. You know, the denizens of Sodom and Gomorrah said "who are you to judge us!?" to Lot, and we all know what happened to them ;)

I already stated that this was not the thread for this discussion.

Now who's doing the judging and telling others that what they are doing is bad?

Hypocrisy, a two way highway.

ROFL...I find it highly ironic that you cant see the hypocrisy of your own statements...

Casual sex usually leds to marriage or parenthood, and there's no such thing as a happy marriage.

The answer is C: "Focus ALL of your attention on financial gain -See Family Guy Episode: Viewer Mail #1"

ROFL...I find it highly ironic that you cant see the hypocrisy of your own statements...

I never said anything about not judging behaviors nor did I say anything in opposition to the idea that people should feel welcome to make moral statements of shoulds and should nots in the public forum, even for the sake of spreading and proselytizing their own accepted moral codes...

But you did, you said it was wrong for them to do it. Even as you said this was wrong in others you were doing it yourself against them.

*snip*The is one of the most intelligent and well thought-out posts I have ever read from someone of a religious background. Not to say that religious people can't or don't make intelligent posts, of course, but the capability to see both sides of the story and be completely non-judgemental in doing so is nonetheless most impressive. My deepest sympathies regarding your girlfriend, Valori. That's a horrendous thing to have to deal with at any stage in one's life, but I'm sure it was especially awful considering that you and she were so young.

In relation to the original question, it would definitely be a happy marriage for me. I am currently in a happy, long-term relationship that will hopefully result in marriage in a few years - but neither of us feel any need to rush. It is a sexual relationship, and while I admire the opinions of people who want to wait until marriage before having sex, I do disagree with them. I see Arathen's point about it being so much more special after having waited, but it opens up a can of worms too. What if you're sexually incompatible, for instance?

To use my own experiences as an example of what I mean, I only slept with one other man before meeting my current boyfriend, and regretted it for a while - partly because of my own moral code, and partly because the sex was pathetic. Now, however, I'm kind of glad I did it; it gives an excellent point of contrast between sex then and now. It makes me appreciate how enjoyable and special sex with my boyfriend actually is, because I've experienced the flip side too.

I am not at all religious, but I do have a fairly strong moral code when it comes to things like this. Just because one is not married and not a virgin does not make one a whore, an animal or in any way a bad person :) Anyway, live and let live; my morals are about me, and not others. Everyone can stick rigidly to their own beliefs and principles without imposing them on others.

Edit: Just one extra note, Arathen - happy relationships don't have to result in children, whether they involve marriage or not! I know that we don't intend to have any, whether we get married or whether we don't. Even the Bible acknowledges that sex is not just about procreation. It is a risk you take when you have sex, whether you do that for physical or emotional reasons or both, but the risk can be seriously minimised.

I choose casual sex because screwing any girl you want at anytime is much better than getting stuck with an old bat who won't have sex with you because you slept with her sister :mad:

I choose casual sex because screwing any girl you want at anytime is much better than getting stuck with an old bat who won't have sex with you because you slept with her sister :mad:LOL, you're actually lucky if that's the only punishment you're getting! :D

LOL, you're actually lucky if that's the only punishment you're getting! :D

who says she knows for sure :cool: (gets clubbed with rolling pin)....oh :(

Guaranteed casual sex. I will never tie myself down with marriage, as I value my independence and freedom above all else. With marriage comes additional responsibilities, and to maintain a healthy relationship, you must devote a substantial amount of effort and work into it. Simply put, I'm happier alone.

I think it was meant in a metaphorical sense, but sure, why not?
I thought you were a literalist.

Everyone:

I have been reading these posts for awhile now...and I would just like to say a few things. The person that you are all giving a hard time is only 16....I applaud him for still having high ideals at his age....do I think that he has the right to pass judgement? No, no one does....but I also don't think that was his intention....I think that he was just trying to state how he feels about premarital sex and how Christianity feels about premarital sex. He is only 16 and he is still at an age where most people are trying to figure out how to get their point across without passing judgement on others. I ask you to please give the guy a break...I'm sure that all of you remember what it was like to be young. And I think that he is right....just because you may be older than him, doesn't mean that he has no wisdom to offer you. I am a grade 9 youth group leader and sometimes I feel that they teach me more than I could ever teach them. Maybe instead of jumping on what he has to say, you could guide him gently and look for the positives in what he has to say. Just a thought. And just for the record, I am almost 27...I have been happily married for 6 years....I do believe that sex is a wonderful and beautiful gift....I am Christian...and I also believe that premarital sex is not how God intended us to use the gift of sex....but don't think for one moment that I am asking you to believe the same things that I do.

*snip*I largely agree with what you said, and would like to point out that my long post was not intended as criticism of him. I disagree with him, but hope that I managed to make that clear in a polite and non-critical way.

I largely agree with what you said, and would like to point out that my long post was not intended as criticism of him. I disagree with him, but hope that I managed to make that clear in a polite and non-critical way.

I also attempted to post rational and calm responses, however, when he began attacking my posts...well...game on...

depends Idealy I would be in a relationship with several women who are friends first and anything else later

but casual sex is a very weird idea

I have to be friends at least

and I treat all my friends (I only have female friends) as potential partners except for my best friend (but thats because of her sexuality rather then anything else)

Neutered Sputniks:

This is just a thought...and feel free to disagree...but maybe as the older, wiser, more mature person, you should've just told him that you wish to agree to disagree...Lead him into maturity by example...and SHOW him what accepting another's views is all about. If you had approached his comments that way, then he may have been more open to what you had to say....and then if he decided to still remain closed on the issue, you would at least have the satisfaction of knowing that you tried to show him by being a good example.....but these are just my thoughts on the matter.

Neutered Sputniks:

This is just a thought...and feel free to disagree...but maybe as the older, wiser, more mature person, you should've just told him that you wish to agree to disagree...Lead him into maturity by example...and SHOW him what accepting another's views is all about. If you had approached his comments that way, then he may have been more open to what you had to say....and then if he decided to still remain closed on the issue, you would at least have the satisfaction of knowing that you tried to show him by being a good example.....but these are just my thoughts on the matter.

who wants to be responsible? whenever something is wrong the first thing they say is whose responsible

Jesus tap-dancing Christ, in only two pages this transformed into a debate about morality, megh I should have expected it.
Here are my views:
Fuck whomever you want as long as it's consesual.
Don't ask the state to regulate sex because you think it's immoral.
God told me to tell you that he doesn't love you anymore. :(
Love does not necessarily come with sex.
I don't want kids or to get married.
Babies start to cry when I approache them.
Borgle boggle iggle sport.

Fin

Marriage, bar none. I can't make love with someone I don't feel for romantically...my body just refuses to turn on.

-Asylum Nova

God told me to tell you that he doesn't love you anymore. :(

that's not nice :mad:

the question you should ask is what wouldn't I trade for sex with anyone at anytime

Who would I sleep with? Everyone (but Men because im not gay) especially Rachel Stevens, Paris Hilton, Uma Thurman (sp?) the list goes on and on (if anyone would like to hear them all just ask all mine are hand picked :D )

that's not nice :mad:

the question you should ask is what wouldn't I trade for sex with anyone at anytime

Who would I sleep with? Everyone (but Men because im not gay) especially Rachel Stevens, Paris Hilton, Uma Thurman (sp?) the list goes on and on (if anyone would like to hear them all just ask all mine are hand picked :D )

I'd like to punch Paris Hilton in the face.

Casual sex, for sure.
marriage is a waste of time for people that have nothing better to do
(by something 'better to do' I'm not reffering to the casual sex)
I think it is silly to abide by social standards that will get you no where in life.
I really just DON'T understand how people can be happy in a marriage, I would spend to much time feeling like a mediocre nobody to enjoy the 'happiness' marriage could offer.
That is unless I married someone important/rich/famous/notably intelligent on basis of improving eachothers social standards... not 'love' though. :rolleyes:

Neutered Sputniks:

This is just a thought...and feel free to disagree...but maybe as the older, wiser, more mature person, you should've just told him that you wish to agree to disagree...Lead him into maturity by example...and SHOW him what accepting another's views is all about. If you had approached his comments that way, then he may have been more open to what you had to say....and then if he decided to still remain closed on the issue, you would at least have the satisfaction of knowing that you tried to show him by being a good example.....but these are just my thoughts on the matter.

Hmm, I fear my posts have been made in vain. Perhaps it would behoove you to reread the entire thread, paying a bit more attention to the posts I've made. Or not, as you are free to think how you will of me.

Whilst I don't appreciate my advice being blown off, it was the more personal attacks made by the other party that aggrevated the situation, although, as I recall from last night, I wasnt too aggravated when I made the posts...

Marriage, bar none. I can't make love with someone I don't feel for romantically...my body just refuses to turn on.

-Asylum Nova

But you need not be married to feel romantically about your partner. I've found that even in the strongest relationship, there is sometimes casual sex. And even in a casual sex relationship there are nights that are more passionate than others.

But you need not be married to feel romantically about your partner. I've found that even in the strongest relationship, there is sometimes casual sex. And even in a casual sex relationship there are nights that are more passionate than others.
Here's what I don't get--what do these people think happens when you get married? Do they think a magic horny-aura suddenly encapsulates you and gives you incredibly better sex than you can ever have single or in a committed, but non-marital relationship? Give me a break.

Which?
The first option you will good, casual sex, anytime you like. The second option, you are guranteed a happy marriage.

God is there even a question here ? Of course a happy marriage ? If you into the other, save yourself the guesswork and go to the hospital and ask em to shoot you up with AIDs, infect ya with some herpies for flavor and call it a night.

Good grief.

God is there even a question here ? Of course a happy marriage ? If you into the other, save yourself the guesswork and go to the hospital and ask em to shoot you up with AIDs, infect ya with some herpies for flavor and call it a night.

Good grief.

Nothing says you cannot have a casual sexual monogamous relationship wherein such concerns are nullified. Please, dont be so close-minded as to believe that it's your way or the devil's way.

If someone is having sex outside of marriage, they are setting the future child (assuming there is one), in a really bad position.(...) They techinically wouldn't have a legal mom and dad i think.(...)

LOL @ Arathen. "Me fail law school? Thats unpossible!"

(...)Hold on to your faith! Hold on to what you believe! Please! Because that is what keeps us civilized. If we don't have morals, we are just like animals, searching for lusts to fulifill.

ummm hate to burst you bubble. *wispers* we are just animals... and most of the time we are just fufilling our lusts (be it for money, sex, love, ect..) Thats the way we are designed... sry buddy =(

Thats you right about now-> :confused:

ummm hate to burst you bubble. *wispers* we are just animals... and most of the time we are just fufilling our lusts (be it for money, sex, love, ect..) Thats the way we are designed... sry buddy =(

Thats you right about now-> :confused:


ROFL...

*snip*
3. The Bible is not full of fallacies, as its translators were inspired by God and thus infallible at the time of translation.
*snip*

And at what time was that? When was it translated into modern english?

ROFL...

I cant tell if thats a good "ROFL" or a bad one...

And at what time was that? When was it translated into modern english?

And which of the over 100 translations to English are we referring to?

I cant tell if thats a good "ROFL" or a bad one...

A good one...

I largely agree with what you said, [dont beat up on Arathen, essentialy] and would like to point out that my long post was not intended as criticism of him. I disagree with [Arathen], but hope that I managed to make that clear in a polite and non-critical way.

I've made no such attempt. I dissagree with him, and damned if im NOT going to be critical. I'm not saying i'm intolerant or not willing to let him live his life how he wants. Im just not gonna stand by and not offer opposition to the "Well why NOT get married then" arguement. Like stated before you dont need a ring or a legal document or a ceremony before god, (yeah, thats right. I didnt capitalize it!) all you need is love. (And no, I didnt mean to take that from the song. I cant stand the beattles.) This kind of thinking is just what the church preaches (most of all the parents) and I simply find it disturbing, that is all. (Now dont you guys go and bitch that im being intolerant or opressive. Because I'm not. I dont respect your ideas, but I respect your right to have them. Grudgingly, might I add.)

Nothing says you cannot have a casual sexual monogamous relationship wherein such concerns are nullified. Please, dont be so close-minded as to believe that it's your way or the devil's way.

We have different versions of casual sex then.

Open non committed realtionships are for a reason. Even if you think it means
monogamous maybe your partner doesnt.

I didnt say anything about the devil. I gave my opinion. You wanna play , dont bawl when the chips fall against ya and Doc says : sorry John, your dead.

Same reason I dont know why guys like girls who are like the titantic so much. (in how many they went down on).

To each their own. But only ones I have sympathy for are those who got it from medical mistakes, and their partner they were committed to cheating on them.

Nothing says you cannot have a casual sexual monogamous relationship wherein such concerns are nullified. Please, dont be so close-minded as to believe that it's your way or the devil's way.

Oh and that doesnt include casual mono... sex partners. as far as my sympathy

We have different versions of casual sex then.

Open non committed realtionships are for a reason. Even if you think it means
monogamous maybe your partner doesnt.

I didnt say anything about the devil. I gave my opinion. You wanna play , dont bawl when the chips fall against ya and Doc says : sorry John, your dead.

Same reason I dont know why guys like girls who are like the titantic so much. (in how many they went down on).

To each their own. But only ones I have sympathy for are those who got it from medical mistakes, and their partner they were committed to cheating on them.

Open your mind...skip Church every now and again...and pay attention to what people are really saying.

Many of us believe that it is possible to have a long-lasting, exclusive relationship without marriage. Marriage is merely a piece of paper and a ring and is not necessary for a long and happy relationship. It is also entirely possible to have a casual exclusive sexual relationship (look up monogamous... www.dictionary.com ) whether you want to admit it's possible or not. (although, I suppose admitting that was possible would mean such a relationship could exist without being cursed with the ravages of STDs brought about by sex outside of marital bounds and then what would be God's punishment for such actions?...)


LOL...I just saw your second response, not sure but I think it somewhat renders my sarcasm in this post a bit irrelevant and for that I apologize. I get tired of being evangelicised to...)

Open your mind...
*snip*

OPEN WHO NOW?! :eek: That doesnt sound kosher...

Why?
(This is a genuine question.)

Tax benefits! :D

You know, in many nations in Africa, single sexualy promiscius women are less likly to become infected with AIDS then women who refrain from sex until marriage. Thats because the single women can force their partners to use condems while married women often have no right to argue that. Also its easier for single women to break off unfullfilling or unfaithful relationships.

(Just bring this up to disprove the notion that monogomus sex is automaticaly safer then casual sex)

all you need is love.

Love does not exist... that is, it is a word used to simplify the complex feelings often found in relationships... There is no force called love, its a myth.

Amestria']Love does not exist... that is, it is a word used to simplify the complex feelings often found in relationships... There is no force called love, its a myth.


My dog disagrees with you.

Neither. Casual sex has its dangers, though using condoms does protect against most of those problems.

Marriage is expensive and over-rated. I know a few couples who had long happy relationships, then married and split up within two years because of the pressure.

I've been in a stable de-facto relationship with my man for almost 10 years (the party is on nov 29th). We are both very happy with our situation and see no reason to ruin it with marriage.

ummm hate to burst you bubble. *wispers* we are just animals... and most of the time we are just fufilling our lusts (be it for money, sex, love, ect..) Thats the way we are designed... sry buddy =(

Thats you right about now-> :confused:
No, society functions as a product of humans controlling their lusts, not indulging them.
And indoctrination of our youth to believe we're right.

Amestria']Love does not exist... that is, it is a word used to simplify the complex feelings often found in relationships... There is no force called love, its a myth.

Why do you say it doesnt exis then define it... Simplify and Define are synonyms in this case. Pretty simple. Love = "the complex feelings often found in relationships". As defined by you.

No, society functions as a product of humans controlling their lusts, not indulging them.
And indoctrination of our youth to believe we're right.

I didnt say anything about how SOCIETY functions. There is a big difference between the social structure and the inner-personal structure. What I mean is we may conform to the norms of society and we may act rationally, but the main personal driving force is that of lust (as I said before, not just sexual lust [if there is such a thing as non-sexual lust =P{which I think there is}]). YES! TRIPPLE PARATHETECAL STATEMENTS. *Achem* Sorry, always wanted to do that.

...society functions...

barely...

Right now, casual sex. In the long term, happy marriage.

Neither. Casual sex has its dangers, though using condoms does protect against most of those problems.

Marriage is expensive and over-rated. I know a few couples who had long happy relationships, then married and split up within two years because of the pressure.


But the choice is a happy marriage so whether your idea of marriage is more realistic or not, it doesn't really apply here.

damn it, wrong button, i meant to choose the marriage one

there is no such thing as casual sex
think of it in reference to casual fridays:
a day when you can relax and feel more
comfortable...like yourself
casual sex is about pretense, pressure,
sometimes guilt, and lord knows you
don't act like yourselfMaybe that's how it is for you, but casual sex is not about pretense pressure or guilt, if you do it right. Casual sex is about having some fun and getting off. If you feel pressure, or you have to be someone you are not to have casual sex, then obviously it isn't for you. That does not make it a bad thing.

I thought you were a literalist.



Not everything in the Bible is literal. Certainly not Revelation, that's for sure >.>

Which?
The first option you will good, casual sex, anytime you like. The second option, you are guranteed a happy marriage.


Happy, healthy marriage anyday!

God is there even a question here ? Of course a happy marriage ? If you into the other, save yourself the guesswork and go to the hospital and ask em to shoot you up with AIDs, infect ya with some herpies for flavor and call it a night.

Good grief.*hands Tyma a condom*
I have casual sex. Lots and lots.
And I'm STI-free, as of less than two months ago :eek: . Casual sex does not give you AIDS. Unprotected sex with a person who has AIDS does.
Good grief indeed.

To be honest, I'm not sure! I'm not the sort of person that enjoys a 24x7 relationship, I find that very claustrophopic (sp!!) and I am sure I would find being married the same (but I guess that could all change, as time goes by!! I'm not that young btw - lateish 20's)

However I'm not sure that I would want regular guaranteed casual sex either! If you mean fuck buddies or whatever terms, that does not really work either because there is always some psycological attachment, especially I think (from experiance) in fem2fem senarious.

Personally, although regular sex is an attractive option, I would rather have lots of good close friends around me, and if I go out of a night and meet a gal or meet someone in everyday life thats all good -and to me 3/4 of the excitement! ;)

I've been married nearly thirty years. I have never met anyone with a happy and healthy marriage who would answer the question in the affirmative. I wouldn't exchange my marriage for casual sex.

Amestria']Love does not exist... that is, it is a word used to simplify the complex feelings often found in relationships... There is no force called love, its a myth.
Love exists... only as we define it.

Not everything in the Bible is literal. Certainly not Revelation, that's for sure >.>\

So I guess you just get to choose what to take literally eh? Seems like a good gig to me. :D

I dont need to get married to have a happy healthy relationship.

Maybe that's how it is for you, but casual sex is not about pretense pressure or guilt, if you do it right. Casual sex is about having some fun and getting off. If you feel pressure, or you have to be someone you are not to have casual sex, then obviously it isn't for you. That does not make it a bad thing.

and how many times have you participated in 'casual sex'?
and you have been married too?
seems you need to have some basis for this opinion.
if i had never done either, chances are i'd agree,
but life has a way of showing you the things you
never expected? ;)