NationStates Jolt Archive

Do you beleive in sex before marriage? :fluffle:

Do you beleive in sex before marriage? :fluffle:
With all my p.....heart :fluffle:

Do you beleive in sex before marriage? :fluffle:
Sure. Why should you have to deprive yourself of one of the most pleasant things in life until you find that one person that you can live with for eternity without contemplating suicide or murder?

I had plenty of sex before marriage...then I married her :)

Yes.

i believe in sex without marriage. stupid outdated cultural institutions...

I better believe in sex before marriage, otherwise I'll be going against my own personal moral structure! :p

There should be a poll...

No, I don't, because it's a sin. However, I also don't believe in imposing morality on others. If others want to sin, that's their own business.

Do you beleive in sex before marriage?
Yes; it happens often.

No, I don't, because it's a sin. However, I also don't believe in imposing morality on others. If others want to sin, that's their own business.

What if they want to steal and murder?

Hehe... I didn't when I was younger... but as one gf of mine pointed out, it'd be like buying a car without taking a test drive. You may find out that you don't like what you signed up for. :P
That being said, I would never have sex with someone I didn't care about. Sex for the sake of having sex just isn't my style.

I think it causes more problems than it solves, that and it is a sin. So no, I don't think it's right. I think it is also a highly personal thing, so I doubt you will see me standing on the street corner shouting out to all the people walking by pointing out thier fornication any time soon. :p

Yes; it happens often.

i was going to say that, but i figured somebody else would before i got done typing it.

i was also thinking about making a thread titled "PIXIES before lunch?"

Sure, why not...

Absolutely, I believe it is right. We are sexual beings.

And if you are in my position that is the only thing you can do.. because same-sex marriage is not allowed. :rolleyes:

Absolutely, I believe it is right. We are sexual beings.

And if you are in my position that is the only thing you can do.. because same-sex marriage is not allowed. :rolleyes:
you could be abstinent (although I agree it isn't as much fun)

you could be abstinent (although I agree it isn't as much fun)
No he ment the only type of sex you could have in most of the USA

Abstainment is not a form of sex

Absolutely, I believe it is right. We are sexual beings.

And if you are in my position that is the only thing you can do.. because same-sex marriage is not allowed. :rolleyes:

Unless you live in Canada, Spain or the Netherlands.

If it's consensual and the 2 (or more) people are of age, then they should be able to screw all they like.

you could be abstinent (although I agree it isn't as much fun)
Why would I be abstinent? For whose advantage? Fundamentalists?

Unless you live in Canada, Spain or the Netherlands.

Well I'm originally from Spain.. run off with my boyfriend there.. I wish.. :D

Unless you live in Canada, Spain or the Netherlands.

New Zealand offers same-sex civil unions, which is essentually the same thing as far as having your relationship recognised by the state. NZ offers hetro civil unions too, mind.

OMG .... get as much sex as u can before u get married coz believe me ... when marriage & kids come along etc .... sex becomes a grab it while u can sort of thing .... :fluffle:

The Minister last week was talking about Marriage, and devoting yourself to your spouse and how to find a good spouse and then how to be a good spouse yourself etc.,

When he said:

And for those young men that talk about 'trying' sex with their girlfriends before marriage because they want to ensure a compatible sex life after marriage, I have one word for them:


Baloney. :p

YOu have to believe in it, because it happens. It is concrete fact, therefore you must believe in it...

Now if you AGREE with it or not is a different matter.

i believe in sex without marriage. stupid outdated cultural institutions...


Oh yeah!

Sex is something that brings male and female pleasure, at least one of a higher feeling. You can't emulate these feelings, sex and drugs, and even if religon wasn't established, you would have to have sex with someone before they were to be wed with you. It's whatever you make of it; It's fun, or it's glorious, and it can be both. If you really love her...

The Minister last week was talking about Marriage, and devoting yourself to your spouse and how to find a good spouse and then how to be a good spouse yourself etc.,

When he said:

And for those young men that talk about 'trying' sex with their girlfriends before marriage because they want to ensure a compatible sex life after marriage, I have one word for them:


Baloney. :p

If you don't have anything in common sexually with your spouse, you're not going to be 100% happy, unfortunately. I'm sorry to say, regardless of how much love and have in common. It'll always be there in the background and grow into a grudge or cheating. So, perhaps these "young men" are right, lunch meats aside. . .

New Zealand offers same-sex civil unions, which is essentually the same thing as far as having your relationship recognised by the state. NZ offers hetro civil unions too, mind.

That's so silly. If you're going to offer civil unions just offer marriage. Civil unions annoy both sides of the argument. It's kinda a wimpy way to solve the problem. Make a stand one way or another and at least you'll have full support of someone.

Why would I be abstinent? For whose advantage? Fundamentalists?

The comment was made simply to show that you DID have another option.
Clearly you like to bring up the issues with it as often as possible :P
As for sex before marriage, it would be too radical a change to implement now, there'd be an uproar!
i dont agree with the removal of rights, this would be just that so no, it would be morally wrong to bring into effect.

Do you beleive in sex before marriage? :fluffle:

Naturally, since I would rather have the experiance of sex before marriage than entering into a marriage unaware of any remotely sexual concepts.

It's everyone's personal choice: no point starting a thread on this

Always test drive before you buy. ;)

If you don't have anything in common sexually with your spouse, you're not going to be 100% happy, unfortunately. I'm sorry to say, regardless of how much love and have in common. It'll always be there in the background and grow into a grudge or cheating. So, perhaps these "young men" are right, lunch meats aside. . .

The open sexuality movement started in the sixties, if the theory of finding the right 'sexual' partner was right (about making it possible to find better marriage partners) then the divorce rate should be going down since then... Who wants to go check and see if that's happening? :p LOL

The young couple has to 'learn' how to be good spouses for each other, why would the couples sex life be any different? It's not.

That's so silly. If you're going to offer civil unions just offer marriage. Civil unions annoy both sides of the argument. It's kinda a wimpy way to solve the problem. Make a stand one way or another and at least you'll have full support of someone.

Better than nothing. It got through parlament 62-58 on the final vote, and it's unlikely that it would have if it was straight up marriage (there were massive confrontations outside between pro/anti people). Once everyone gets their shit together and realise that people are people regardless, maybe we can change it again.

I think it causes more problems than it solves
Assuming that protection is used, what problems does it cause?

And for those young men that talk about 'trying' sex with their girlfriends before marriage because they want to ensure a compatible sex life after marriage, I have one word for them:

Baloney. :p
That's no argument.

And for those young men that talk about 'trying' sex with their girlfriends before marriage because they want to ensure a compatible sex life after marriage, I have one word for them:

Baloney.

kinky!

The open sexuality movement started in the sixties, if the theory of finding the right 'sexual' partner was right (about making it possible to find better marriage partners) then the divorce rate should be going down since then... Who wants to go check and see if that's happening? :p LOL

The young couple has to 'learn' how to be good spouses for each other, why would the couples sex life be any different? It's not.
There are too many un controlled variables in this scenario to find out the causal factor and pin it on a single one your type one and two errors would be MASSIVE

Frankly if you want to get it on, and the other person wants to get it on, then ...well..get it on..

the problem here is taht no matter how much you say it is everyone's personal choice ETC just by commenting you are stating your own opinion and therefore trying to influence someone your way, IE when you say "its a sin"...maybe to you...cuz your god doesn't like you to have fun, heh, i'm just kidding i'm a christian, a bad one but still that one dude is pretty forgiving, anywhoo i think someone said it, but i agree, that sex for the sake of sex, i am against, tahts how i feel, not morally, i just think its pointless, i think you should have sex with someone you care about, let it be meaningful

Why is sex before marriage a sin?

I suspect the Catholic church declared pre-marital sex a sin, in order to keep family groups closer together and prevent bastard children from appearing left, Right and centre.

That is no longer a consideration in todays world, furthermore, there is reliable contraception nowadays!

U got 2 test drive d car before u buy it!

Is there such a thing as sex after marriage?

Actually, I think what's forbidden is adultery not sex. It also says "thou shall not covet thy neighbour's ass..." so you should go looking a few more houses down the street.

That this question would even come up seems ridiculous... I know it's not but it should be. The moral stigma attached to sex is one of the biggest causes for intolerance, cheating, lying, rape, blackmailing, and the destruction of family whether in the form of a parent not disowning a child for their sexual choices or a marriage broken up because of physical intimacy problems. How's that for a list of REAL sins?

Giving someone an orgasm is hardly a criminal act, and that any religion or group would consider lust a sin proves organizations like that are more about controlling people than creating a beneficial human atmosphere.

Creating more love, at whatever level you choose to, is NEVER a bad thing. Because we are selfish we cling desparately to this idea that if your partner has been with someone else (or wants to be) that they somehow don't love you as much, or are somehow unclean spiritually.

Yes, promiscuity does have risks, but responsible people can minimize those risks to a point where it should not be a problem. Making love, intimate BDSM scening, plain sex, raw carnal lust - these are all different experiences and are all things that every human should at least encounter once in their life, and really should be relatively varied and common experiences for true sexual health. Chances are that if you don't experience them before marriage you never will considering our strictly monogamous viewpoints on mating.

The sin is causing an environment where sexual freedom is a crime but sexuality surrounds us in our media, entertainment, fashion, and cuture.

The young couple has to 'learn' how to be good spouses for each other, why would the couples sex life be any different? It's not.

Would you marry someone you had nothing in common with or knew nothing about ?

Marriage is a statement that you wish to spend your life together. I personally think it makes sense to at least get to know eachother before committing. Do things together to see if you want to keep doing them for many years to come. And yes, sex is one of those things.

Hell yeah. :fluffle:

Is there such a thing as sex after marriage?
touché

Yes, sex existed for ages before people invented marriage.

Gay marriage is also legal in Belgium.

Why would I be abstinent? For whose advantage? Fundamentalists?
I am sorry. I didn't mean to offend I forgot my smiley ;) so that you would know I wasn't all that serious. I was getting frustrated the other day with someone who isnt' you and kinda made a sarcastic comment towards you for no good reason sorry :)

The young couple has to 'learn' how to be good spouses for each other, why would the couples sex life be any different? It's not.

There's a big difference between compromising on small issues and not being true to yourself to keep the relationship from being rocky. If one person is into whips and chains and the other is into rose peddles and massage, it's not fair to either person to have to give up that part of themselves to please their partner. You have to discover if there are extreme differences like that. This applies to all aspects of the relationship. For example, if one person hates children and the other one can't wait to start a family, that's also an issue. But, you wouldn't avoid going near children because you want to save the discovery of how your spouse reacts to children until after marriage, would you?

Gay marriage is also legal in Belgium.

Right! I knew there was one more. Belgium. Thanks.

Gay marriage is also legal in Belgium.

yeah, but who cares about belgium?

Well, for me it's about the only option, as I hope never to get married. That's not to say that I don't want a stable partner, but getting married just doesn't appeal to me for the simple reason as it could lead to two people feeling obliged to stay together even if they have lost their love for each other, and saves on divorce proceedings and, before that, buying a ridiculously expensive dress that I'll only wear one day and never wear again. Why marry when there's no law saying that you can't live with and love someone without marrying them? So, I either have sex outside of marriage, or go for life-long celibacy. I could do either, am currently doing the latter. But I don't hold with casual sex with just anyone. There are health risks in that, and it doesn't seem right. What's more, it's nice to know who you're sleeping with, as opposed to sex with a complete stranger.

Assuming that protection is used, what problems does it cause?
There is an emotional and spiritual aspect to sex.

But I don't hold with casual sex with just anyone. There are health risks in that, and it doesn't seem right.

True, it's not wise to just go with anyone. It's always a good idea to become friends first. But, if you stick to oral sex, and get tested every 6 months there's really not much of a chance of getting anything too dangerous.

i'm all for it. you gotta try before you buy

I highly recommend it.

Well, for me it's about the only option, as I hope never to get married. That's not to say that I don't want a stable partner, but getting married just doesn't appeal to me for the simple reason as it could lead to two people feeling obliged to stay together even if they have lost their love for each other, and saves on divorce proceedings and, before that, buying a ridiculously expensive dress that I'll only wear one day and never wear again. Why marry when there's no law saying that you can't live with and love someone without marrying them? So, I either have sex outside of marriage, or go for life-long celibacy. I could do either, am currently doing the latter. But I don't hold with casual sex with just anyone. There are health risks in that, and it doesn't seem right.
why so down on marriage? It can work. I don't think I can ever "lose my love" for my husband because love isn't an emotion but a choice.
It is difficult for me to have this conversation on here because so many do not believe like I do. If I were to make my true thoughts on the subject known, I know for a fact I would risk getting flamed, or worse reported for flaming even though that wouldn't be my intention.
Kudos on the no casual sex though, it is a step in the right direction (in my opinion) :D

There is an emotional and spiritual aspect to sex.

An opinion I agree with. However, isn't that all the more reason to allow it before marriage ?

In all honesty I consider the idea that one must just "risk it" and get married as a virgin an insult to the institute. I would like to see more stable marriages, resulting from people actually putting thought and contemplation as well as effort into it, instead of the "forced" mockery the churches have made it to be.

Nope

There is an emotional and spiritual aspect to sex.
Which would also be the reason two people would get marrie? :confused:

i'm all for it. you gotta try before you buy
This is the kind of thinking I'm talking about! People are nowadays treated like objects in a corrupt marketplace of hedonism!

Nope
Ah, that's the kind of in depth discussion I crave. :rolleyes:

This is the kind of thinking I'm talking about! People are nowadays treated like objects in a corrupt marketplace of hedonism!
It's an analogy :fluffle:


I said anal

Which would also be the reason two people would get marrie? :confused:

Well, unfortunately having a emotional and even a spiritual connection during sex is not a good enough reason to get married. You have to have that connection in the vast majority of the aspects of your life, or it's never going to last.

An opinion I agree with. However, isn't that all the more reason to allow it before marriage ?

In all honesty I consider the idea that one must just "risk it" and get married as a virgin an insult to the institute. I would like to see more stable marriages, resulting from people actually putting thought and contemplation as well as effort into it, instead of the "forced" mockery the churches have made it to be.
what are you talking about when you say "risk it" ? I am so confused. please explain what you are talking about so I can respond

Well, unfortunately having a emotional and even a spiritual connection during sex is not a good enough reason to get married. You have to have that connection in the vast majority of the aspects of your life, or it's never going to last.
well it has to start sometime.

Which would also be the reason two people would get marrie? :confused:
not really. marriage shouldn't have anything to do with emotion. It has to do with a choice made to commit to another person for the rest of your life. Getting married based on emotion is dangerous as emotions change often.

not really. marriage shouldn't have anything to do with emotion. It has to do with a choice made to commit to another person for the rest of your life. Getting married based on emotion is dangerous as emotions change often.
What?! Love is no emotion? What are you, a robot? :rolleyes:

what are you talking about when you say "risk it" ? I am so confused. please explain what you are talking about so I can respond

With "risking it" I mean deciding to get married without first exploring if you can actually life happily together - including sex.

well it has to start sometime.

Yes, and keep dating to see if you have that connection in other aspects of your life as well. But don't go out and get married based solely on your sexual connection.

What?! Love is no emotion? What are you, a robot? :rolleyes:
infatuation is an emotion
love is not.
I love my kids, sometimes they frustrate me, I still love them.
I love my husband, sometimes I want to kick him in the head (I don't do it) but I still love him.

if love were an emotion, it would be subject to my other emotions, gee I am having a lot of trouble explaining this.....

Love is not subjective, it should be absolute and unchanging.

Kudos on the no casual sex though, it is a step in the right direction (in my opinion) :D

The problem is that if you don't have sex with a variety of people before settling down you might be curious about what you've missed. Felt that you missed out on a aspect of life you can't get any more. It's best to get your experience while you can so you can be satisfied in a relationship knowing that this is what you want and you're not missing out on anything better.

No, I don't, because it's a sin. However, I also don't believe in imposing morality on others. If others want to sin, that's their own business.
It might be a sin for you... but those of us that know better don't think about if something is a "sin" or not.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good peope doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for a good people to do evil things, that takes religion." ~~Quote by Steven Weinberg.

"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of blindfolded Fear." ~~ Quote by Thomas Jefferson.

not really. marriage shouldn't have anything to do with emotion. It has to do with a choice made to commit to another person for the rest of your life. Getting married based on emotion is dangerous as emotions change often.


Isn't that the truth. But then... nothing endures but change, and that in itself is why the debate has even come up.

Love is not subjective, it should be absolute and unchanging.

Unfortunately, even if you do truly love someone I believe that if that person were to leave you, that love would eventually die. You might still have tender feelings for them but love has the shocking ability to eventually fade away even if it was your whole life at one point. That's what time does.

infatuation is an emotion
love is not.
I love my kids, sometimes they frustrate me, I still love them.
I love my husband, sometimes I want to kick him in the head (I don't do it) but I still love him.

if love were an emotion, it would be subject to my other emotions, gee I am having a lot of trouble explaining this.....

Love is not subjective, it should be absolute and unchanging.
Should be, but it's not... :rolleyes:

With "risking it" I mean deciding to get married without first exploring if you can actually life happily together - including sex.
happiness is a state of mind. You can choose to be happy or unhappy based on your expectations.

Marriage isn't about being happy, you don't get married for instant happiness. Marriage is work, it is the hardest relationship you will ever have. Your partner isn't responsible for making you happy and you are not responsible for thier happiness either.

Pre marriage couseling helps people get through most of the big issues before they are married (if you get a good counselor) living together for a few years, and having a lot of sex doesn't really prepare you for anything in my opinion.

Should be, but it's not... :rolleyes:
It is for me. It all depends on how you look at things.

No, I don't, because it's a sin. However, I also don't believe in imposing morality on others. If others want to sin, that's their own business.

Can somebody please explain how sex before/without marriage is somehow immoral? I don't understand.

Wouldn't it be immoral to say someone shouldn't do something, simply because your own religious views (that they don't necessarily share) dictate that way?

Right, I'm off to enjoy another 'immoral' treat - gambling! ;)

Marriage is merely a contractual agreement. It neither creates nor proves love, and that is all that should matter when having sex. Believing marriage will either make someone want to have sex with you, or worse, make them love you, is extremely harmful.

It is for me. It all depends on how you look at things.
lol. Then why do you say "should be"?

The problem is that if you don't have sex with a variety of people before settling down you might be curious about what you've missed. Felt that you missed out on a aspect of life you can't get any more. It's best to get your experience while you can so you can be satisfied in a relationship knowing that this is what you want and you're not missing out on anything better.
I am not in the least curious about what I might have missed. In fact most of the married couples I know who waited are not curious.
I have run into couples that I was couseling that one partner waited and the other did not, where the one that waited always felt inadequet because they were worried that they wouldn't measure up to what the other in the marriage expected sexually

lol. Then why do you say "should be"?
because sadly for many people it isn't

Can somebody please explain how sex before/without marriage is somehow immoral? I don't understand.

Wouldn't it be immoral to say someone shouldn't do something, simply because your own religious views (that they don't necessarily share) dictate that way?

Right, I'm off to enjoy another 'immoral' treat - gambling! ;)
I guess that would depend on what your morals are based in.

For me it is immoral because I am a Christian. I have no moral code stating that I have to be careful not offend someone with other beliefs when stating mine.

It might be a sin for you... but those of us that know better don't think about if something is a "sin" or not.

While I agree with your point, let me give a friendly piece of advice: it's not normally a good idea to state that you know better in this kind of debate - it gives you far less chance to get your point accross. Also, on a point of pedants, it is in fact not possible to "know better" than anyone in this particular debate - opinions by definition can never be right nor wrong - only justified.

Giving someone an orgasm is hardly a criminal act, and that any religion or group would consider lust a sin proves organizations like that are more about controlling people than creating a beneficial human atmosphere.
You know... as an agnostic i fully believe in the "7 deadly sins". However... only when taken to extremes. Most people don't quite realize that most things are actually good for you in small doses. Take Alcohol for example. In small doses it will help your blood flow. In large doses it causes liver failure.

Just a little thought for you.

OMG .... get as much sex as u can before u get married coz believe me ... when marriage & kids come along etc .... sex becomes a grab it while u can sort of thing .... :fluffle:

i hear you :mad:

I am not in the least curious about what I might have missed. In fact most of the married couples I know who waited are not curious.
I have run into couples that I was couseling that one partner waited and the other did not, where the one that waited always felt inadequet because they were worried that they wouldn't measure up to what the other in the marriage expected sexually

That is always a possibility. I have talked to couples (though not in counseling, though many people believe that is why I exist) where the past of one person is upsetting to the past of the other. That can happen regardless of premarital sex or not.

We all have a fear of sexual inadequacy (well, not me, but everyone else(just kidding) ;) ) at some point in time or another.

And Smunkee knows she says these things because I am "leading her into temptation" (damn I think I'm funny today)!

For me it is immoral because I am a Christian. I have no moral code stating that I have to be careful not offend someone with other beliefs when stating mine.

On a larger scale, isn't that the kind of attitude that causes wars?

I have run into couples that I was couseling that one partner waited and the other did not, where the one that waited always felt inadequet because they were worried that they wouldn't measure up to what the other in the marriage expected sexually

Well I'm sure they were inadequate compared to a person with sexual experience. The only reason your others who both waited don't think that is because they don't know how bad it is because they have no way to compare. It will be bad the first time, that's for sure. Like everything else it takes practice. No one is a born lover. Do you really want your honeymoon to be so awful and awkward?

There's a big difference between compromising on small issues and not being true to yourself to keep the relationship from being rocky. If one person is into whips and chains and the other is into rose peddles and massage, it's not fair to either person to have to give up that part of themselves to please their partner. You have to discover if there are extreme differences like that. This applies to all aspects of the relationship. For example, if one person hates children and the other one can't wait to start a family, that's also an issue. But, you wouldn't avoid going near children because you want to save the discovery of how your spouse reacts to children until after marriage, would you?

And just how would going near children show you whether or not your spouse would like to have their own children?

Just because someone loves other peoples children, can you suppose that they want to have their own?

For example, I love other peoples children, but have not had any of my own (have a step-daughter however---turned out fine, however unlikely that might seem).

And how does sleeping with someone tell you all their preferences? And how does failing to enact all your fantasies make you a worse person?

Repression is a concept designed to cause people to want to break out of traditional relationships and ideals, and to get them to "do their own thing" while removing guilt for committing sin. That is all it is for. Not valid at all.

For example, if I do not overeat when I really want to, would anyone say that there is something wrong with "repressing that urge?" Or would you applaud me for taking control of my overeating problem?

Sleeping with my wife before we got married did not give me a full picture of how she would act once we were married, and we both wish we had not had sex with anyone before we got married. We love each other, and wish we had only been with each other. Plus, there are things my wife does now that we are married that she did not consider doing before we were married. :D

As someone else said, you have to learn to be a spouse to someone. Not just little issues, but big things too. The whole thing is a major adjustment. My wife is still adjusting after 13 years of marriage. So living together, sex before, does not help.

Just my anecdotal experience. ;)

What is all this about "compatibility"? I mean, it's pretty easy to find out if someone is a BDSM freak before marriage… you just ask them, yes? This is something I have never understood (the compatibility thing, not BDSM. Unfortunately I do understand what BDSM is!)/

That is always a possibility. I have talked to couples (though not in counseling, though many people believe that is why I exist) where the past of one person is upsetting to the past of the other. That can happen regardless of premarital sex or not.

We all have a fear of sexual inadequacy (well, not me, but everyone else(just kidding) ;) ) at some point in time or another.

And Smunkee knows she says these things because I am "leading her into temptation" (damn I think I'm funny today)!
true, but why add one more thing on the pile of things that can cause strife in a marriage.

leading me into temptation huh? :eek: now what am I going to do??

Well I'm sure they were inadequate compared to a person with sexual experience. The only reason your others who both waited don't think that is because they don't know how bad it is because they have no way to compare. It will be bad the first time, that's for sure. Like everything else it takes practice. No one is a born lover. Do you really want your honeymoon to be so awful and awkward?
I assure you my honeymoon was anything but awkward (TMI?)
Half of the fun of sex is getting better at it. Besides, I doubt that my sexlife is not as "good" as anyone elses, it may even be better because my husband and I are fully commited to eachother, I mean with casual sex aren't you just basically having to start over with someone every time? why not just stay the course?

happiness is a state of mind. You can choose to be happy or unhappy based on your expectations.

Marriage isn't about being happy, you don't get married for instant happiness. Marriage is work, it is the hardest relationship you will ever have. Your partner isn't responsible for making you happy and you are not responsible for thier happiness either.

Pre marriage couseling helps people get through most of the big issues before they are married (if you get a good counselor) living together for a few years, and having a lot of sex doesn't really prepare you for anything in my opinion.

Marriage isn't about being happy? Then exactly what purpose does it serve? You must take some responsibility for your partners happiness, or what love do you have for them? I would want for nothing more than to make my partner happy if i ever married them. And if you need counselling to get through marriage, then maybe you got the wrong person....

true, but why add one more thing on the pile of things that can cause strife in a marriage.

leading me into temptation huh? :eek: now what am I going to do??

While that's true, it is generally a pointer to what is really wrong. Often feelings of infidelity can be completely unfounded but based on things before the relationship.

For example...Mr and Mrs Jones got married as virgins. Mrs. Jones used to date Bob Smith, and although they cam close they never "went all the way". Mr. Jones wonders though, he had always heard Bob (a friend of his when they were in school) say he did. Now Mrs. Jones gets a job at a bank where the manager is Bob. Nothing happens but suspicion causes Mr. Jones to have issues and become enraged without reason.

Just a hypothetical (really it is, but I could make a movie about it), but these things and things like this happen all the time.

And in regard to the last thing...c'mon Smunkee...you know I'm a fine piece of...okay I'll stop...

And just how would going near children show you whether or not your spouse would like to have their own children?

Just because someone loves other peoples children, can you suppose that they want to have their own? It was just an example. It's not really feasible to avoid children. Perhaps it wasn't a very good example. I'll just try and explain and not use out there examples.

I think I see what you're saying: You're saying that you can't always tell what someone will like just by trying it with them first? Then perhaps they're not being open and honest with you about the experience. You also likely didn't do it enough and talk about it afterwards. It will be different but it's the big issues, that will become readily obvious after time. If there aren't any major glaring issues then it won't be such a big occasion. Then that's a good light to go ahead, but at least you know that ahead of time.

You two wish that you hadn't done it before? Well, that's only because now you know that you're both enjoying it now. If one of you had become totally offset by sex when you had it before, trust me, you'd be glad you'd done it and not entered a marriage not knowing that. You just got lucky that you both had sex in common. Either that or you're still not being honest with each other about your sexual needs but don't want to rock the boat by bringing it up because other things are going well. That's the other possibility.

And just how would going near children show you whether or not your spouse would like to have their own children?

Just because someone loves other peoples children, can you suppose that they want to have their own?

For example, I love other peoples children, but have not had any of my own (have a step-daughter however---turned out fine, however unlikely that might seem).

And how does sleeping with someone tell you all their preferences? And how does failing to enact all your fantasies make you a worse person?

Repression is a concept designed to cause people to want to break out of traditional relationships and ideals, and to get them to "do their own thing" while removing guilt for committing sin. That is all it is for. Not valid at all.

For example, if I do not overeat when I really want to, would anyone say that there is something wrong with "repressing that urge?" Or would you applaud me for taking control of my overeating problem?

Sleeping with my wife before we got married did not give me a full picture of how she would act once we were married, and we both wish we had not had sex with anyone before we got married. We love each other, and wish we had only been with each other. Plus, there are things my wife does now that we are married that she did not consider doing before we were married. :D

As someone else said, you have to learn to be a spouse to someone. Not just little issues, but big things too. The whole thing is a major adjustment. My wife is still adjusting after 13 years of marriage. So living together, sex before, does not help.

Just my anecdotal experience. ;)

well said. :D

I think I know where Smunkeeville is coming from on the love vs. infatuation.

I don't agree with her on everything on everything, but I do think I know what she's getting at with the love not being an emotion. I agree that infatuation is not love and that you can love people and still get frustrated with them occasionally.

The way I've come to understand it love is an action. It's a concious repitition of things you do in order to show that you care about the other person. You may start doing a few of them because of infatuation, but in order for them to continue connection and emotion do have to be there, but love is an action.

That said, I'm in the camp of premarrital sex is good, but personally it's got to be with someone I care about and who cares about me.

:mad: It isn't right. It may be accepted but a lot of things that aren't right are accepted today. Hey though can't change people their mortal and sadly eternal path is choosen by themselves.

What is all this about "compatibility"? I mean, it's pretty easy to find out if someone is a BDSM freak before marriage… you just ask them, yes? This is something I have never understood (the compatibility thing, not BDSM. Unfortunately I do understand what BDSM is!)/

Unforutnately you might not realize what you like until you've tried a few things. Not everyone just wakes up and says "I'm a BDSM freak" they just try some things. Like them, go further, etc. If they have a partner who doesn't want to go further and explore their potential likes, then that's where the problem comes up.

Why is sex before marriage a sin?

I suspect the Catholic church declared pre-marital sex a sin, in order to keep family groups closer together and prevent bastard children from appearing left, Right and centre.

That is no longer a consideration in todays world, furthermore, there is reliable contraception nowadays!

Contraception is frowned upon by the Catholic church though; you mustn't "spill the seed".

*snip*

That said, I'm in the camp of premarrital sex is good, but personally it's got to be with someone I care about and who cares about me.

I wholeheartedly agree. I did have sex once with someone I did not care greatly about and who couldn't give a flying poop about me (my only Rock Star one night stand). I hated myself and her afterwards.

But I still value the experience I had with other girls prior to my marriage. Even though they all cheated on me...bitches...not that I'm bitter.

Unforutnately you might not realize what you like until you've tried a few things. Not everyone just wakes up and says "I'm a BDSM freak" they just try some things. Like them, go further, etc. If they have a partner who doesn't want to go further and explore their potential likes, then that's where the problem comes up. I don't think that sort of thing would cause problems, given that people who are against premarital sex tend to be against anything "unnatural" as well… problem solved. :)

I assure you my honeymoon was anything but awkward (TMI?)
Half of the fun of sex is getting better at it. Besides, I doubt that my sexlife is not as "good" as anyone elses, it may even be better because my husband and I are fully commited to eachother, I mean with casual sex aren't you just basically having to start over with someone every time? why not just stay the course?

What if while "learning" you wanted to try something your husband didn't want to do. That's it. You're at an impasse. If you have casual sex you can just find someone else who will help you experience that aspect and then you can discover if it's something you need in your later permanent relationship or not.

Do you beleive in sex before marriage? :fluffle:
Sure. I don't see why not.

I guess that would depend on what your morals are based in.

For me it is immoral because I am a Christian. I have no moral code stating that I have to be careful not offend someone with other beliefs when stating mine.
Are you sure about that? if you read the bible a bit more you might find out that you should...don't take this too harshly though.

Here is what I think...and it is my oppinion:
I think the reason you don't wan't to sleep with another person beofore mariage is because it causes problems. And when I am talking about problems I am not talking about unprotected and so on. I mean spiritualy and emotionaly. You might not realize it at first. You might never realize it. But the problem is there. When you finally actually marry someone you will find that it might start some problems. You might always go around the subject on tiptoes, and things might be somewhat strained when talking about the subject. For one let's take an example.
One person has not waited. <let's say it's the guy.
Another has waited.<let's say it's the girl.
When the two meet in mariage it's going to be awkward. Maybe not...who knows....but the other might wonder how come this one has such experience...and wonder with whom...it might be a small wondering but nevertheless it's still there. And then that wondering turns to suspicion and slowly toward hatred. Maybe not...this is only my hipothesis.
Now the girl is the one that is jealous just so you know. Then there is the guy. He has slept with so many other partners...and guess what. He remembers them. You can't forget them. It's not possible. or maybe it is...but the body has become immune to something. Immune to breaking up...and sleeping with many people prooves that divorce might be real close in that persons life. Mind you...this is only my hipothesis. Every time a person sleeps with another and then breaks up they leave a part of themselves. And that's like ripping your heart into pieces and leaving it with the other person. But then guess what...this still happens in the world...(obviously)...and divorce is still around...actually divorce is around form the time of Mosses...even Abram I would guess...scuse me...Abraham. But that does not mean divorce is good. Not at all. But then there is another problem...this will not be a easy thing to debate with a person of different morrals and beliefs. So this might just prove useless blabing away to some of you. Don't be insulted by it though please...I like arguing with people...but I don't like making them enemies...then arguing is not fun anymore.:rolleyes:

Marriage, to me, is a life-long commitment to another person - a commitment to spend the rest of your life with that person, in a loving relationship.

I don't have sex (although I might fool around some - no intercourse) until I have decided that I can make that commitment. Thus, to me, sex and marriage are essentially the same thing. The piece of paper is for legal protection. The ceremony is for other people. The commitment makes the marriage.

Contraception is frowned upon by the Catholic church though; you mustn't "spill the seed".

"Every sperm is sacred" Anyone ever watch Monty Python? That's great social commentary.

why so down on marriage? It can work. I don't think I can ever "lose my love" for my husband because love isn't an emotion but a choice.
It is difficult for me to have this conversation on here because so many do not believe like I do. If I were to make my true thoughts on the subject known, I know for a fact I would risk getting flamed, or worse reported for flaming even though that wouldn't be my intention.


That's fair enough. But the thing is, I am a real sceptic of marriage. I've known many people who were married, but were divorced after all of 2 years, but are now living with, but are not married to, someone who they love and have been doing so for several times longer than the duration of their failed marriage. Marriage doesn't necessarly keep couples together, and when it does it can be because they feel obliged to stay together (although, as you have pointed out, this is not always the case). For me, marriage is like being 'told' to stay with someone, whereas when you aren't married that factor isn't there, and doesn't affect whether you decide to stay together or call it quits. Just because you aren't married doesn't mean you don't want to be with someone, and you can still work things out with your partner. if you want to marry, then go for it, and enjoy it. But I don't see why people who choose not to marry should be so frowned upon by society and seen as somehow 'wrong'.

Marriage isn't about being happy? Then exactly what purpose does it serve? You must take some responsibility for your partners happiness, or what love do you have for them? I would want for nothing more than to make my partner happy if i ever married them. And if you need counselling to get through marriage, then maybe you got the wrong person....
oh where to start where to start.
okay here goes (hopefully in order and clear enough to understand)
Marriage isn't about always being happy, nothing is. In my opinion the purpose of marriage is to have a partner in life, through the good and the bad, sickness and health, and everything inbetween.
I don't take any responsiblility for anyones happiness but my own. (and that goes for all the other emotions too, you can't make someone angry they choose to be angry.)
I do want my partner to be happy and he wants me to be happy, but there is nothing I can do to make him happy, he has to want to be happy. There are ways I can show my love to him, but if he is fundamentally unhappy then they won't make any difference.
The purpose of pre-marital counseling is not to "get you through marriage" hence the PRE part. It is for couples considering marriage to find out if they are really compatible. (some just aren't, no matter how sexually attracted to someone you are or how good of friends or how much you think "he is really nice and we have been dating for 2 years and should get married now',sometimes you just aren't compatible)
Marriage isn't a choice to be taken lightly, and it is not one big happy love fest. People are imperfect, you have to live with their imperfections, if you can't then you should seek counseling, if you are unwilling to seek counseling or put any work in the marriage, you shouldn't get married.

One person has not waited. <let's say it's the guy.
Another has waited.<let's say it's the girl.
When the two meet in mariage it's going to be awkward. Maybe not...who knows....but the other might wonder how come this one has such experience...and wonder with whom...it might be a small wondering but nevertheless it's still there. And then that wondering turns to suspicion and slowly toward hatred.

There shouldn't have to be any wondering at all. If two people have decided to make the commitment entailed in marriage, they should both know everything there is to know about the others' relationship and sexual history. If they haven't been honest with each other about that (and other things), chances are that the marriage will fail. This failure may not have anything to do with levels of experience - it is the deception and failure to disclose information that would do it.

"Every sperm is sacred" Anyone ever watch Monty Python? That's great social commentary.
Meaning of life ... lol

(sorry for the long quote0


| |
| The Miracle of Birth: Part 2: The Third World |
|___________________________________________________|

ANNOUNCER: The Miracle of Birth: Part Two: The Third World.

[sombre music]
[bark bark bark bark bark bark]
[quack quack]
[quack quack quack quack quack quack]
DAD: Oh, bloody hell.
[quack quack quack]

[fwump]
BABY: [crying]
MUM: Ohh, get that, would you, Deirdre?
DIERDRE: All right, Mum.
BABY: [crying]

[bark bark bark bark bark bark bark]

CHILDREN: [talking]
MUM: Now, whose teatime is it?
CHILDREN: Mine!
MUM: Come on, now. Out you go. Now, uh, Vincent, Tessa, Valerie, Janine,
Martha, Andrew, Thomas, Walter, Pat, Linda, Michael, Evadne, Alice,
Dominique, and Sasha, it's your bedtime.
CHILDREN: Aww, Mum!
MUM: Now, don't argue! Laura, Alfred, Nigel, Annie, Simon, Amanda,--
DAD: Wait! I've got something to tell the whole family.
MUM: Oh, quick. Go and get the others in, Gordon.
CHILDREN: What could it be? Shhh...
DAD: The mill's closed! There's no more work. We're destitute.
CHILDREN: [talking]
DAD: Come in, my little loves. I've got no option but to sell you all for
scientific experiments.
CHILDREN: [whining]
DAD: No, no. That's the way it is, my loves. Blame the Catholic church for
not letting me wear one of those little rubber things. Oh, they've done
some wonderful things in their time. They preserved the might and
majesty, the mystery of the Church of Rome, and the sanctity of the
sacraments, the indivisible oneness of the Trinity, but if they'd let me
wear one of those little rubber things on the end of my cock, we wouldn't
be in the mess we are now.
BOY: Couldn't Mummy have worn some sort of pessary?
DAD: Not if we're going to remain members of the fastest growing religion in
the world, my boy.
MUM: Ehhh, he's right.
DAD: You see, we believe--
[piano music]
Well, let me put it like this. [singing]
There are Jews in the world.
There are Buddhists.
There are Hindus and Mormons, and then
There are those that follow Mohammed, but
I've never been one of them.

[music]
I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is:
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on. You're
A Catholic the moment Dad came,

Because

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

CHILDREN: [singing]
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

GIRL: [singing]
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

CHILDREN: [singing]
Every sperm is wanted.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood.

MUM: [singing]
Hindu, Taoist, Mormon,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

MEN: [singing]
Every sperm is sacred.
[clunk]
Every sperm is great.
WOMEN: [singing]
If a sperm is wasted,...
CHILDREN: [singing]
...God gets quite irate.

PRIEST: [singing]
Every sperm is sacred.
BRIDE and GROOM: [singing]
Every sperm is good.
NANNIES: [singing]
Every sperm is needed...
CARDINALS: [singing]
...In your neighbourhood!

CHILDREN: [singing]
Every sperm is useful.
Every sperm is fine.
FUNERAL CORTEGE: [singing]
God needs everybody's.
MOURNER #1: Mine!
MOURNER #2: And mine!
CORPSE: And mine!

NUN: [singing]
Let the Pagan spill theirs
O'er mountain, hill, and plain.
HOLY STATUES: [singing]
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

EVERYONE: [singing]
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood.

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite iraaaaate!

DAD: So, you see my problem, little ones: I can't keep you all here any
longer.
GIRL: Speak up!
DAD: I can't keep you all here any longer! God has blessed us so much, I
can't afford to feed you anymore.
NIGEL: Couldn't you have your balls cut off?
DAD: Hohh, it's not as simple as that, Nigel. God knows all! He'd see
through such a cheap trick. What we do to ourselves, we do to Him.
GIRL: You could have had them pulled off in an accident.
CHILDREN: [talking]
DAD: No. No, children. I know you're trying to help, but, believe me,...
CHILDREN: Ohh...
DAD: ...me mind's made up. I've given this long and careful thought, and it
has to be medical experiments for the lot of you.
CHILDREN: Ohh. Oh. Oh...

CHILDREN: [singing mournfully]
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,...
MR. HARRY BLACKITT: Look at them, bloody Catholics, filling the bloody world
up with bloody people they can't afford to bloody feed.
MRS. BLACKITT: What are we dear?
MR. BLACKITT: Protestant, and fiercely proud of it.
MRS. BLACKITT: Hmm. Well, why do they have so many children?
MR. BLACKITT: Because... every time they have sexual intercourse, they have
to have a baby.
MRS. BLACKITT: But it's the same with us, Harry.
MR. BLACKITT: What do you mean?
MRS. BLACKITT: Well, I mean, we've got two children, and we've had sexual
intercourse twice.
MR. BLACKITT: That's not the point. We could have it any time we wanted.
MRS. BLACKITT: Really?
MR. BLACKITT: Oh, yes, and, what's more, because we don't believe in all that
Papist claptrap, we can take precautions.
MRS. BLACKITT: What, you mean... lock the door?
MR. BLACKITT: No, no. I mean, because we are members of the Protestant
Reformed Church, which successfully challenged the autocratic power of the
Papacy in the mid-sixteenth century, we can wear little rubber devices to
prevent issue.
MRS. BLACKITT: What d'you mean?
MR. BLACKITT: I could, if I wanted, have sexual intercourse with you,...
MRS. BLACKITT: Oh, yes, Harry.
MR. BLACKITT: ...and, by wearing a rubber sheath over my old feller, I could
insure... that, when I came off, you would not be impregnated.
MRS. BLACKITT: Ooh!
MR. BLACKITT: That's what being a Protestant's all about. That's why it's
the church for me. That's why it's the church for anyone who respects
the individual and the individual's right to decide for him or herself.
When Martin Luther nailed his protest up to the church door in fifteen-
seventeen, he may not have realised the full significance of what he was
doing, but four hundred years later, thanks to him, my dear, I can wear
whatever I want on my John Thomas,... [sniff] ...and, Protestantism
doesn't stop at the simple condom! Oh, no! I can wear French Ticklers
if I want.
MRS. BLACKITT: You what?
MR. BLACKITT: French Ticklers. Black Mambos. Crocodile Ribs. Sheaths that
are designed not only to protect, but also to enhance the stimulation of
sexual congress.
MRS. BLACKITT: Have you got one?
MR. BLACKITT: Have I got one? Uh, well, no, but I can go down the road any
time I want and walk into Harry's and hold my head up high and say in a
loud, steady voice, 'Harry, I want you to sell me a condom. In fact,
today, I think I'll have a French Tickler, for I am a Protestant.'
MRS. BLACKITT: Well, why don't you?
MR. BLACKITT: But they-- Well, they cannot, 'cause their church never made
the great leap out of the Middle Ages and the domination of alien
episcopal supremacy.
NARRATOR #1: But, despite the attempts of Protestants to promote the idea of
sex for pleasure, children continued to multiply everywhere.

That's fair enough. But the thing is, I am a real sceptic of marriage. I've known many people who were married, but were divorced after all of 2 years, but are now living with, but are not married to, someone who they love and have been doing so for several times longer than the duration of their failed marriage. Marriage doesn't necessarly keep couples together, and when it does it can be because they feel obliged to stay together (although, as you have pointed out, this is not always the case). For me, marriage is like being 'told' to stay with someone, whereas when you aren't married that factor isn't there, and doesn't affect whether you decide to stay together or call it quits. Just because you aren't married doesn't mean you don't want to be with someone, and you can still work things out with your partner. if you want to marry, then go for it, and enjoy it. But I don't see why people who choose not to marry should be so frowned upon by society and seen as somehow 'wrong'.
it's not looked at in general society as 'wrong" as much as it used to be.

judging from what I have read so far though, I commend you in not rushing into a marriage, I think even though you are skeptical, that if you ever did get married that you would choose someone who you could really spend the rest of your life with :) most of the people who get divorced in the first 5 years of marriage, rush into marriage for all the wrong reasons.:( you don't seem like that type though.

On a larger scale, isn't that the kind of attitude that causes wars?
why? I should be able to state my beliefs shouldn't I ?

why? I should be able to state my beliefs shouldn't I ?
Absolutely just as he had the right to comment on your beliefs and their hazards (in his opinion)

I'll take sex before, during(even the ceremony) and after marriage! It's alot of fun!

Are you sure about that? if you read the bible a bit more you might find out that you should...don't take this too harshly though.
it is really rude for you to assume that I don't read the Bible. you know you don't really know anything about me.

besides I was meaning that I am allowed to state my beliefs and shouldn't be worried if they offend others I was stating what I believed not attacking someone else personally.
when he asked why it was immoral, I stated that it would depend on what his morals were based. I was not saying anything bad about where his morals were based.

I doubt you can find anywhere in the Bible that says that Christians should not answer questions when asked, or even find anywhere that says you should change you message to accomidate others beliefs.

Absolutely just as he had the right to comment on your beliefs and their hazards (in his opinion)
sure. I wasn't trying to fight. sorry. I just don't understand why sometimes everyone else's veiw is valid and mine is insulted.

Hmm. I've always wondered about the whole "adultery" thing. I mean, Abraham was ORDERED by God to have sex with his handmaiden. David had sex with a LOT of women (and God seemed to really like him). And was Joseph the father of Jesus? NO.

Too many contradictory examples for my taste.

it's not looked at in general society as 'wrong" as much as it used to be.

judging from what I have read so far though, I commend you in not rushing into a marriage, I think even though you are skeptical, that if you ever did get married that you would choose someone who you could really spend the rest of your life with :) most of the people who get divorced in the first 5 years of marriage, rush into marriage for all the wrong reasons.:( you don't seem like that type though.


Why, thankyou. Even though neither my boyfriend nor I want to get married, I'm still complimented that you feel I'm cabable of staying with him without giving up at the first obstacle.

I might even add that God killed Onan because Onan would not impregnate his wife's sister (who was recently widowed and by law came under Onan's care).

I don't really think that Sex before marriage is a problem. Sex after marriage can be though (take that as you want it)...

Why, thankyou. Even though neither my boyfriend nor I want to get married, I'm still complimented that you feel I'm cabable of staying with him without giving up at the first obstacle.
thank you. I was worried after I posted it that you may get offended (since I have trouble explaining what I really mean sometimes) but you took from it exactly what I was trying to say. :)

I don't really think that Sex before marriage is a problem. Sex after marriage can be though (take that as you want it)...

The sex I've had after marriage is orders of magnitude better, more often, and more exciting than the sex I had before marriage.

And was Joseph the father of Jesus? NO.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_gospels/jesus_is_born_02/lk01_35.jpg

Is this thread making anyone else incredibly horney? And yes, I did mean "the German-born American psychoanalist who emphasized the role of environmental and cultural factors in the development of neurosis." If it was the other thing, I would have said, "Is this thread making anyone else incredibly Kinsey?"

arg, now that I've read through like 6 pages of people trying to play devil's advocate for an activity that really doesn't promote any actual good in society.........

I am married.
I waited till I got married.
I have had no problems. :)

This is the full range of my experience.

Now my opinion on the subject.

No. Sex before marriage is not a good thing. It is like taking money from a bank without signing the loan. It is like getting something for nothing. And that is always a bad thing.

The "try it before you buy it" metaphore/comparision is the most evil tripe I have ever heard in my life. Soory, but it is. It is a nice convenient justification to make people feel better for going against a societal taboo.

If you DON'T try it first there are lots of good things that happen.
For one: You don't have anything to campare your sexlife too. because you didn't have one before.
Two: Husband and wife get to learn TOGETHER and grow even closer in the learning.
Three: There is no competing with past lovers. IE no jealousy.
Four: Sex becomes something even more special, even more intimate because it is rarer. You know, the rarer the diamond, the more it is worth?
Fifth: There is always the nice bonus of no STDs :)
Six: There is no background guilt. Try to deny it but I'll bet most people do have some residual guilt, even the so called modern ones.

There are many other reasons.
But it only truely works if neither has had sex before marriage. Which is what happened in my marriage. We both had that desire in mind, so it was that much easier.

Granted, Marriage still takes work. It always will. When you take two people and make them into one person there has to be adjustments. If you aren't married there is nothing holding you together, no need to work.

In other words, Marriage is the institution in which we become better people. It is the school of unselfishness, the classroom of love, the college of unity.

It is not easy. I think that is why so many people are so scared of it. So scared that they would rather have the brief bits of random uncommitted fun, than risk everything for the great and glorious union of two souls.

This is why choosing a spouse is important, but having the same goals is even MORE important.

I love my wife dearly, she is a glorious, loving, sweet angel and I am lucky to have her and I am glad that I saved myself for her. Marriage is not something to fear, but an adventure. :)

I've gone off on a little tangent, but I still stand by the "No premarital Sex" clause. And yes it does happen, but so do a lot of things that shouldn't. Just because something happens doens't make it good.

And for those who are bound to point out divorces or failed marriages. This happens. Banks fail too but we still keep making them and putting our money in them too.

And shacking up doesn't prevent divorce, in fact a study last year showed that at least half of all divorces were of people who lived together first.

:p

For those of you who are horny, and would want to become more horny, and who would want to walk into areas of marriage that others fear to tread, I would post a link to my personal blog, but I'm afraid that the mods here might think it was TOO MUCH. So, if you want a link to my blog, send me a telegram.

The sex I've had after marriage is orders of magnitude better, more often, and more exciting than the sex I had before marriage.

So you are divorced?

So you are divorced?
Divorced twice, and finally married again for the third time.

The sex on the third time around is unbelievably good. Of course, it helps to marry a woman 11 years younger than yourself who is unbelievably horny.

Hmm. I've always wondered about the whole "adultery" thing. I mean, Abraham was ORDERED by God to have sex with his handmaiden. David had sex with a LOT of women (and God seemed to really like him). And was Joseph the father of Jesus? NO.

Too many contradictory examples for my taste.
Abraham wasn't ordered by God to have sex with his handmaiden. His wife told him to and he did. and it caused a whole lot of trouble in his marriage.

As far as David goes, there was a period in his life when he was disobeying God left and right you can read in 2 Samuel all about it and the consequences he had to endure because of those sins.

Mary wasn't married and did not have premarital sex, virgin birth mean anything to you?? :rolleyes:

The sex I've had after marriage is orders of magnitude better, more often, and more exciting than the sex I had before marriage.


I meant that as a joke. Partially...some people who never had sex before marriage often end up having more after marriage...just not always with their spouses.

And shacking up doesn't prevent divorce, in fact a study last year showed that at least half of all divorces were of people who lived together first.

:p

...and the other half were of people who didn't. So?

You can choose a stable partner and not get married. Even though you want to stay together, by your morals, they still cannot have sex until an institution (either religious or not) says they can. That seems a but much.
To some, marriage is every thing you said. but to others, who love each other and have been together for a while, it's merely the signing of a bit of paper and a ring on your finger, changing nothing about how they feel to each other and others. The fact is, marriage doesn't work for or mean the same to everyone.

Abraham wasn't ordered by God to have sex with his handmaiden. His wife told him to and he did. and it caused a whole lot of trouble in his marriage.

As far as David goes, there was a period in his life when he was disobeying God left and right you can read in 2 Samuel all about it and the consequences he had to endure because of those sins.

Mary wasn't married and did not have premarital sex, virgin birth mean anything to you?? :rolleyes:

And I suppose that Onan wasn't struck dead by God for not impregnating a woman who was NOT his original wife...

Keep waving those hands...

Yes, and I'm sure that Joseph was the butt of jokes at work, and I'm sure he was hoping that there weren't anymore "angels of the Lord" coming by to see Mary.

I might even add that God killed Onan because Onan would not impregnate his wife's sister (who was recently widowed and by law came under Onan's care).
Onan was killed for disobeying God. It was his responsiblility under the law to secure children for his dead brother. I don't see where you are going with this.

And I suppose that Onan wasn't struck dead by God for not impregnating a woman who was NOT his original wife...

Keep waving those hands...

Yes, and I'm sure that Joseph was the butt of jokes at work, and I'm sure he was hoping that there weren't anymore "angels of the Lord" coming by to see Mary.
til death do you part.
Her husband was dead, under jewish law he was her new husband.

anything else??

Onan was killed for disobeying God. It was his responsiblility under the law to secure children for his dead brother. I don't see where you are going with this.

Kinda goes against the other law - the commandment, in particular.

As a practical example, I'm sure your wife would be overjoyed if she caught you having sex with her sister.

Absolutely. Sex before marriage is cool.

Now sex with someone else other than your wife? That's a no-no.

Absolutely. Sex before marriage is cool.

Now sex with someone else other than your wife? That's a no-no.

If you and your wife are swingers, and you both agree to it and like it, then it's not a no-no.

I meant that as a joke. Partially...some people who never had sex before marriage often end up having more after marriage...just not always with their spouses.

After marriage, a person has no spouse at all. You can only have a spouse during marriage.

It seems that a lot of the people in this thread are equating marriage and wedding.

When you say sex before marriage - you are talking about before you are married (for many, this means before the wedding).

However, people seem to be using "sex after marriage" to describe sex during marriage. Once you have a wedding/make the commitment on your own, you are married. Any sex you have from then until you get divorced or one spouse dies is sex during marriage, not after.

To have sex after marriage, you either have to get divorced or have one spouse die.

If you DON'T try it first there are lots of good things that happen.
For one: You don't have anything to campare your sexlife too. because you didn't have one before.
Two: Husband and wife get to learn TOGETHER and grow even closer in the learning.
Three: There is no competing with past lovers. IE no jealousy.
Four: Sex becomes something even more special, even more intimate because it is rarer. You know, the rarer the diamond, the more it is worth?
Fifth: There is always the nice bonus of no STDs :)
Six: There is no background guilt. Try to deny it but I'll bet most people do have some residual guilt, even the so called modern ones.


1)Ignorance is bliss? Wouldn't you rather know it's good than not know it's bad because you don't know much of anything about the subject?

2)You shouldn't have to learn something you don't like. Like I've said about the kinkiness factor. If you want to learn how to be tied up, but your partner isn't comfortable with that, they shouldn't have to do it. But then maybe you shouldn't be togther if you aren't into each other on the same level. If this happens frequently it can be a real problem, not something you can "learn" your way out of it. If you both happen to be on the same page sexually, that's great, but that's luck. I'd rather have planning than possibly have luck.

3)You have to trust your lover. If you don't trust them because of past lovers that you're problem. Your emotional issue. Not their fault for having past lovers. If there really is a problem with them going with past lovers, then they aren't ready for marriage and you shouldn't have done it.

4)Shouldn't you be allowed to get as much as you want of something if you enjoy it (short of it becomming an addiction of course). It should be special because it's between two loving people who can really get each other's motor running because they know they like what the other has, not because it's unsual and therefore "rare". Sex that isn't frequent can lead to frusteration and going outside the marriage to satisfy natural urges.

5)Yes, that is an unfortunate risk. But if you get tested and are safe the risk is very low. Plus most STDs are curable. You can always just have oral sex and that way you avoid the incurable HIV. Unfortunately there's not much I can say about STDs, except know the person you are with if you do anything risky and get tested afterwards.

6)You would have guilt about sex because you don't think it's fun and valid and okay. If you never did sex that you didn't want to, then you won't have guilt. Every experience should be done understanding furture emotional states. If you still feel guilty even though it was consentual on both sides. Then it's really more of a maturity issue. That you aren't ready for sex with anyone yet.

I think it's fine, if it's between two consenting adults who aren't cheating on anyone else (spouse or significant other), are in a long-term relationship, and are using protection, unless of course they want to get pregnant.

I don't have a problem with premarital sex. I do, however, have a problem with irresponsible sex - promiscuity, adultery, tricking a person into thinking that you're going to have a long-term relationship with them and then leaving them after a one-night stand, that sort of thing.

Whatever you choose to do in bed in your relationship, whether it's hetero or homo, vanilla or not, is your business. Just don't be an idiot or an asshole about choosing who to have sex with and when, that's all I ask.

Kinda goes against the other law - the commandment, in particular.

As a practical example, I'm sure your wife would be overjoyed if she caught you having sex with her sister.
You are missing the part where he actually had sex with her but didn't uh... finish in a way that he was supposed to.
Oh yeah and also the fact that Onan wasn't married.

:gundge:
nearly all marriages require a bounteous sexual relationship in order to function properly. if you cant function sexually in a subjectively adequate manner then the marriage is likely to collapse. therefore sex before marriage is cool.

p.s. to abolish sex before marriage it would destroy the business of prostitution that is one of the oldest recorded proffesions

Personally, I'm a big fan of delayed gratification. When you make yourself wait for something, it makes when you get it all the better. Its not that you have to wait, but you make the decision that you want to; that you make to do without something decent in the short term to have something great later.

This argument about "try before you buy" is merely an attempt at justifying their unwillingness to have a bit of self-control. Its not really quite an argument, but all it shows is the lack of discipline people have in their own lives. So instead of admiting the fact that most likely, the people that didn't bother to control themselves regret the fact that they didn't, they make excuses to feel better about the decision they did make.

(And I'm no virgin, so don't spew me the "fight the fundamentalism" bullshit that's going around this thread. I have no religious affiliation, just standards. I've gone without for approaching 4 months now, not because I had to but because I felt I should)

ess of prostitution that is one of the oldest recorded proffesions

[Off-subject - True - in the Roman Empire it was so much a profession that there was actually a tax for it.]

It was just an example. It's not really feasible to avoid children. Perhaps it wasn't a very good example. I'll just try and explain and not use out there examples.

I think I see what you're saying: You're saying that you can't always tell what someone will like just by trying it with them first? Then perhaps they're not being open and honest with you about the experience. You also likely didn't do it enough and talk about it afterwards. It will be different but it's the big issues, that will become readily obvious after time. If there aren't any major glaring issues then it won't be such a big occasion. Then that's a good light to go ahead, but at least you know that ahead of time.

You two wish that you hadn't done it before? Well, that's only because now you know that you're both enjoying it now. If one of you had become totally offset by sex when you had it before, trust me, you'd be glad you'd done it and not entered a marriage not knowing that. You just got lucky that you both had sex in common. Either that or you're still not being honest with each other about your sexual needs but don't want to rock the boat by bringing it up because other things are going well. That's the other possibility.

We wish that we had not done it before with anyone else, not just each other. I really wish that I had never kissed anyone else, touched anyone else, etc.

As far as pre-marital sex with someone other than your intended, I had a couple of women approach me for sex with completely ulterior motives---one wanted to have sex with me to induce me to help her commit a crime, another wanted to have my baby, but not let me raise the child or have any contact-no marriage, just sperm donation. I rejected both of them.

On the other hand, the women I was involved with, in my mind at least, I thought that each one was the one. And one of them was really weird sexually, but I still loved her/wanted to be with her. It didn't work out, my heart was broken. :(

And the sex in common with my wife is that we both want to please each other. Simple as that.

well for a start, most ppl seem to be convinced they've found their one true love a half dozen times before they get married, following from that, what difference does marriage make? Nothing but a mental barrier, if it's about your relationship with 'God' God recognises you, not your priest, not your church, not the bible, You. It's you who will go to Heaven or Hell not the registry office records.. thus it's about whether or not one feels the love that would form reason for marriage is true or not.

For those who prefer to put their faith in such things as science, humanism, and all that temporal tripe ;-) the question is irrelevant. After you're married, the fact that you had sex pre marriage with same partner or other is a nonissue (assuming it wasn't on the sly :p) If you didn't..nothing but a regret.

A marriage begun without desire is meaningless in all but law; two people that can belay their feelings for eachother in favor of fickle, changeling, baseless beliefs probably shouldn't get married :p

imho ;-)



//


Delayed gratification is pointless, let's skip the nihilist. The delayed gratification argument assumes that discipline in and of itself is a good thing, that the delaying of the gratification is a good thing, that it somehow improves the pleasure. My own experience would tell me that there are many more factors, more pressing factors playing on anything than the speed with which it comes. Waiting till "the right time" .. sex is sex .. it won't change in two years, if it's good .. the delay or otherwise is completely irrelevant, if it's not.. the delay can only be harmful.

Having said that, there is more to a relationship than sex, a lot more.. which is yet another reason that making it a moral issue is a bad thing imo. Everything that a couple makeabig thing, stays a big thing, there's no avoiding that, place emphasis on something and it's remembered.. it becomes a worry. Sex is about gratification, about making your partner feel good, making yourself feel good, anything else is rape or mating :p

Anyways, imo, sex is good, your ability to "practise" a good thing should not be ignored. I'd imagine ppl who sit on the *only after* side of the fence probably have a problem with anything that isn't classic hetero missionary too ................. big :P

It's like saying "I could make you smile, make you laugh, my love.. but i won't because that'd be indicating a lack of self-discipline"

love :fluffle: & happiness ;)

The only reason to apply self-control to a thing that brings pleasure is if that thing has harmful "side" effects that outweigh the good.

imho ;)

This 'try before you buy' thing is a rather cold way of taliing about it - what, you're sexual partner is just some commodity to be bought? Anyway, you can still wait. Even if marriage isn't on the books, give it a little time. Who knows, you may enjoy the wait. Just having sex to see if you like a person enough to marry them is a ridiculous way of going about things. And i'm the person who doesn't want to get married.

This argument about "try before you buy" is merely an attempt at justifying their unwillingness to have a bit of self-control.

I disagree, but I'm not going to repeat myself. If you read carefully I have responded to that comment already.

Personally, I'm a big fan of delayed gratification. When you make yourself wait for something, it makes when you get it all the better. Its not that you have to wait, but you make the decision that you want to; that you make to do without something decent in the short term to have something great later.

This argument about "try before you buy" is merely an attempt at justifying their unwillingness to have a bit of self-control. Its not really quite an argument, but all it shows is the lack of discipline people have in their own lives. So instead of admiting the fact that most likely, the people that didn't bother to control themselves regret the fact that they didn't, they make excuses to feel better about the decision they did make.

(And I'm no virgin, so don't spew me the "fight the fundamentalism" bullshit that's going around this thread. I have no religious affiliation. Just standards.)


I suppose that you believe that swingers are exhibiting a lack of control. Evidently, France has between 400,000 and 3 million people practicing swinging on a regular basis - and there are high numbers in the US as well.

Trust and honesty are far more important to me than where my wife's private parts have been.

You are missing the part where he actually had sex with her but didn't uh... finish in a way that he was supposed to.
Oh yeah and also the fact that Onan wasn't married.

Actually, as I recall it, Tamar's husband died, so according to Jewish tradition (or, well, it wasn't Jewish yet), his brother had to marry her and concieve children with her. But he didn't want to have children in his brother's name (or didn't want to have children, period) so he practiced withdrawal when he had intercourse with her - which really wasn't fair to Tamar, because she wanted to have a child to support her in her old age.

Of course, it all worked out in the end, because after Onan died Tamar tricked his father (Judah, I think it was?) into sleeping with her and therefore taking her as a wife. Afterward he didn't sleep with her again, but he acknowledged his mistake and her position was secure.

A friend of mine had that particular story for her parsha (Torah portion) when she became a Bat Mitzvah, but she wasn't allowed to write her speech on it and had to talk about something else. Rather a pity - I think it's a pro-feminist kind of story.

Oh yeah and also the fact that Onan wasn't married.

Technically, he was. The minute his brother died without leaving an heir, his sister-in-law became his wife. So he was considered married by the law of the time - to her.

Most people say "yes" to this question, but I must say "no".

yes, yes i do

Technically, he was. The minute his brother died without leaving an heir, his sister-in-law became his wife. So he was considered married by the law of the time - to her.
oh yeah. I already covered that. he was saying that Onan was cheating on his wife by sleeping with his sisiter-in-law.

Technically, he was. The minute his brother died without leaving an heir, his sister-in-law became his wife. So he was considered married by the law of the time - to her.

Sorry to seem like a spammer, but...yeah, people forget that bit.

I don't think Onan got the thunderbolt for offending God by what he did - he didn't fulfill his familial obligations, which is a very bad thing in Judaism.

If Onan was smote just for spilling his seed, then Judah should have been for having sex with (what he thought was) a prostitute.

Actually, as I recall it, Tamar's husband died, so according to Jewish tradition (or, well, it wasn't Jewish yet), his brother had to marry her and concieve children with her. But he didn't want to have children in his brother's name (or didn't want to have children, period) so he practiced withdrawal when he had intercourse with her - which really wasn't fair to Tamar, because she wanted to have a child to support her in her old age.

Of course, it all worked out in the end, because after Onan died Tamar tricked his father (Judah, I think it was?) into sleeping with her and therefore taking her as a wife. Afterward he didn't sleep with her again, but he acknowledged his mistake and her position was secure.

A friend of mine had that particular story for her parsha (Torah portion) when she became a Bat Mitzvah, but she wasn't allowed to write her speech on it and had to talk about something else. Rather a pity - I think it's a pro-feminist kind of story.

yeah I already covered all that too. although maybe not as well, my posts have been spotty lately.
as for a pro-feminist story have you read Kings (I can't remember if it is in 1st or 2nd) where God tells a man that a woman will win the war for him and he brushes it off, and come to find out in the next chapter a woman has killed the guy he was going after by nailing his head to the ground. I love that story :D

well for a start, most ppl seem to be convinced they've found their one true love a half dozen times before they get married, following from that, what difference does marriage make? Nothing but a mental barrier, if it's about your relationship with 'God' God recognises you, not your priest, not your church, not the bible, You. It's you who will go to Heaven or Hell not the registry office records.. thus it's about whether or not one feels the love that would form reason for marriage is true or not.
imho ;-)


I'm sorry, but, no.

God doens't work that way. God made marriage. God layed out a plan, called people to be priests, gave authority for them to link two souls, gave them the ceremony and the words to say. God does not accept love as equal to marriage. God accepts marriage as a knot of two souls into one following the prescribed method He set down. :)


For Toblin:

Sex isn't about personal gratification. It can be twisted so that it looks that way. But really it is about me making my wife happy. It is about a couple growing together. Knitting their souls into one. It is all about the other person. If it is about you, you will never get enough out of it, but if you make it about them, suddenly that spiritual connection between the two ignites and marital bliss descends :)

yeah I already covered all that too. although maybe not as well, my posts have been spotty lately.
as for a pro-feminist story have you read Kings (I can't remember if it is in 1st or 2nd) where God tells a man that a woman will win the war for him and he brushes it off, and come to find out in the next chapter a woman has killed the guy he was going after by nailing his head to the ground. I love that story :D

No, I don't recall that. I really have to read the whole Bible cover-to-cover someday, including the New Testament, which I've only read part of.

EDIT: Oh, that's the story of Judith, isn't it?

No, I don't recall that. I really have to read the whole Bible cover-to-cover someday, including the New Testament, which I've only read part of.

EDIT: Oh, that's the story of Judith, isn't it?
oh sorry I messed up. It is in Judges chapter 4. It is an awesome story.

Sex isn't about personal gratification. It can be twisted so that it looks that way. But really it is about me making my wife happy. It is about a couple growing together. Knitting their souls into one. It is all about the other person. If it is about you, you will never get enough out of it, but if you make it about them, suddenly that spiritual connection between the two ignites and marital bliss descends :)

That's sweet, but I think that although doing something for someone else is great, living for someone else is dangerous. You still have to be your own person. I just ended a relationship where I tried to do everything for my partner. We had opposing views of sex and in the end it just exhausted us both. It was too much difference, too much compromise. It ended up being so neither of us got what we wanted because we were always thinking of what the other wanted. I worry about going into another relationship and compromising like that again. I need to find someone who will love me for who I am, not what I can do for them.

its only a sin, not like ive committed all of them :rolleyes:

There is an emotional and spiritual aspect to sex.
So are you assuming that all sex before marriage is mindless, hedonistic one-night stands?

Why shouldnt we have sex before marriage? Its one of our instincts to be lustful... i think if we shouldnt have sex we wouldnt have this feeling..

That's sweet, but I think that although doing something for someone else is great, living for someone else is dangerous. You still have to be your own person. I just ended a relationship where I tried to do everything for my partner. We had opposing views of sex and in the end it just exhausted us both. It was too much difference, too much compromise. It ended up being so neither of us got what we wanted because we were always thinking of what the other wanted. I worry about going into another relationship and compromising like that again. I need to find someone who will love me for who I am, not what I can do for them.

There is such a thing as compromising too much, but if you're looking for someone who you don't have to compromise for at all, you're going to get in trouble. They may accomodate you for a while, but then it will just be too much for them.

Sometimes living togeter without being married works out, and sometimes it doesn't. I don't think your experience is characteristic of all such relationships. It's more a case of how you handled the situation, not the situation itself.

I don't blame you, by the way. I had a very similar problem in one relationship. The best way to handle it is to try and do what you can for the other person, but let them know clearly what you want or don't want.

Sex before marriage is a sin no matter whether you belive it or not but I would try to outlaw it. It is a moral issue, it's between you and God. If you want to sin and not repent you can end up in hell, that's your choice.

So are you assuming that all sex before marriage is mindless, hedonistic one-night stands?

Well, if done correctly, then sure.

There should also be lots and lots of whipped cream.

Sex before marriage is a sin no matter whether you belive it or not but I would try to outlaw it. It is a moral issue, it's between you and God. If you want to sin and not repent you can end up in hell, that's your choice.


Right. That's fine. But what if you're an atheist? You'd outlaw something in the name of a religion that not everyone is part of, in the name of a God that not everyone believes in?

God doens't work that way. God made marriage. God layed out a plan, called people to be priests, gave authority for them to link two souls, gave them the ceremony and the words to say. God does not accept love as equal to marriage. God accepts marriage as a knot of two souls into one following the prescribed method He set down. :)

That may be your opinion, but is hardly the fact you try to lay it down as. In the OT, the minute a man and woman had sex, they were considered married. It didn't take a priest or a ceremony, although they often had a big party. In the early Christian church, there may have been a ceremony to have the community recognize the marriage, but the marriage was still between two people and God.

I would say that one doesn't need a priest for marriage any more than one needs a priest to confess one's sins. God knows what is in your heart, and he knows if two people have made the commitment to tie themselves together as you describe.

I do what I want :cool:

Right. That's fine. But what if you're an atheist? You'd outlaw something in the name of a religion that not everyone is part of, in the name of a God that not everyone believes in?

I think he missed a "not" in there - after all, he said it's between you and God, which implies that it's not something one should legislate.

I don't blame you, by the way. I had a very similar problem in one relationship. The best way to handle it is to try and do what you can for the other person, but let them know clearly what you want or don't want.

I did. We had great communication. It's just that we were different. We both knew what the other wanted and we both tried it a little bit we didn't like doing it. We lived together but weren't married, but if we had been married it wouldn't have been any better. I'm glad I knew that we weren't compatable sexually before marriage. That's where all my comments are coming from. We got along great otherwise, but romantically and sexually we clashed. We discovered that by having sex with each other before marriage. If we hadn't and then just got married then we would have been screwed.

I think he missed a "not" in there - after all, he said it's between you and God, which implies that it's not something one should legislate.

Okay. fair enough.

Sex before marriage is a sin no matter whether you belive it or not but I would try to outlaw it. It is a moral issue, it's between you and God. If you want to sin and not repent you can end up in hell, that's your choice.

Well, I think that just all boils down to, "Sex before marriage is a sin because I'm not getting any."

God hasn't mentioned anything to me about my sex life, so if he has an issue he really should have the chutzpah to come to me directly instead of sending middlemen.

I did. We had great communication. It's just that we were different. We both knew what the other wanted and we both tried it a little bit we didn't like doing it. We lived together but weren't married, but if we had been married it wouldn't have been any better. I'm glad I knew that we weren't compatable sexually before marriage. That's where all my comments are coming from. We got along great otherwise, but romantically and sexually we clashed. We discovered that by having sex with each other before marriage. If we hadn't and then just got married then we would have been screwed.

Okay, I misunderstood what you were saying. But my point is, in a relationship, you have to be willing to compromise, and I got the impression that, after this experience, you weren't. As you said, you and your SO just weren't compatible.

I'm glad, though, that you gave it a try. Maybe it didn't work out this time, but that, unfortunately, is life.

I'm sorry, but, no.

God doens't work that way. God made marriage. God layed out a plan, called people to be priests, gave authority for them to link two souls, gave them the ceremony and the words to say. God does not accept love as equal to marriage. God accepts marriage as a knot of two souls into one following the prescribed method He set down. :)

Yes, but what about people who were married before 2000 years ago? Marriage existed before the concept of a Judeo-Christian God did. I mean, deny it all you want, but the Greeks were marrying one another before Everybody's Favorite Carpenter Who's Not A Karen was a twinkle in the Holy Father's cosmic eye.

No. Sex before marriage is not a good thing. It is like taking money from a bank without signing the loan. It is like getting something for nothing. And that is always a bad thing.
That's just flawed logic. You can take property for nothing, which is called stealing, and that is wrong. Sex is not property.

Divorced twice, and finally married again for the third time.

The sex on the third time around is unbelievably good. Of course, it helps to marry a woman 11 years younger than yourself who is unbelievably horny.
Hello Whispering Legs!

Do you beleive in sex before marriage? :fluffle:

Sure. It happens all the time.

Believing whether it's right or not is another matter. :rolleyes:

But I get your point. Yes! My boyfriend and me are in a steady loving relationship - why shouldn't we be able to have sex!?

I am against it. IT leads to more STDs and is sort of odd in my mind.

I see nothing wrong with it. It just gives you a little more......freedom. :)

Okay, I misunderstood what you were saying. But my point is, in a relationship, you have to be willing to compromise, and I got the impression that, after this experience, you weren't. As you said, you and your SO just weren't compatible.

I'm glad, though, that you gave it a try. Maybe it didn't work out this time, but that, unfortunately, is life.

Yes, thank you. I might have gone to the other extreme and not compromised at all. So it's good that you pointed out that I'm going to have to compromise a bit, that was just too much.

But anyway I hope I finally made my point, and that the thing is I did "try it out". I worked at sex before I married so that I could discover it wouldn't work. What I'm trying to say is that you have to work at it before you decide to be together forever. An incompatible sex life can single handedly ruin a relationship. Those of you who never had sex before marriage and are glad you didn't were just lucky that you ended up with spouses' who's sexual appetite matched yours to some degree. But I think that it was only because of luck and not having sex before marriage is leaving an crucial aspect of a relationship up to luck.

Ideally I think there would be a lot less pain and crime in the world if more people would consider saving their virginity for marriage, or at the very least saving sex for meaningful relationships.

Lust seems to be the worst "mortal sin," because it leads to all of the others...greed, assault/murder, coveting, etc etc etc. My interpretation of the bible would be more along these lines, since I do recognize who wrote the bible and when, and that a good deal of it shouldn't be taken literally.

I would throw a fit if any government ever tried to make sex before marriage against the law, however.

I've seen so many people hurt over sexual issues, I can't agree that it's harmless. It's not. Someone somewhere always gets hurt, be it one of the people participating, or the person they end up with in the future.

However, I actually think that living with someone before you marry them is perhaps more telling (or maybe more important) than sexual compatibility. I think sexual compatibility can be created and sustained...but if you can't get along in shared quarters, then you're really "screwed" for the rest of your life if you stay with that person, since that involves more fundamental differences.

I am against it. IT leads to more STDs and is sort of odd in my mind.

Um, yeah...like one year when I went to the doctor for my "annual" physical, and she recommended I get the full STD work up even though I'd been in a monogamous relationship for years, stating that there was "a bad outbreak of gonnoreah (sp) going around Iowa City."

That was nice to hear.

However, I actually think that living with someone before you marry them is perhaps more telling (or maybe more important) than sexual compatibility. I think sexual compatibility can be created and sustained...but if you can't get along in shared quarters, then you're really "screwed" for the rest of your life if you stay with that person, since that involves more fundamental differences.

Now that is an excellent point. Anyone can make a "relationship" work between the sheets. It's when you're trying to figure out who will be washing them that the real work begins.

In my observations "sex" can be divided into three catagories: 1) A wonderful part of a meaningful relationship, 2) a emotionally empty physical exercise 3) a large sourse of friction in a otherwise healthy marriage. Observing my parrents, I have come to the conclusion that two people who are not sexually compatable simply should not be married. It is such a large part of marriage that the disagreement related to that spill over to everything else. :(

That said, I feel sex for the sake of sex cheapens it. I have been with only one partner and think waiting for her (we are currently married) was one of the best descisions of my life.

Now that is an excellent point. Anyone can make a "relationship" work between the sheets. It's when you're trying to figure out who will be washing them that the real work begins.

Great little summary there. :)

However, I actually think that living with someone before you marry them is perhaps more telling (or maybe more important) than sexual compatibility. I think sexual compatibility can be created and sustained...but if you can't get along in shared quarters, then you're really "screwed" for the rest of your life if you stay with that person, since that involves more fundamental differences.

Yes, I agree. You have to be able to live together first. Our household was great, it's just the bedroom that wasn't. Sexual compatibility can not be created out of thin air or even hard work. I have the experience to prove that. We tried everything for a year, until we'd worked ourselves to exhaustion. Sometimes you just can't make sex good between two people and it's good to know that before getting married.

I am against it. IT leads to more STDs and is sort of odd in my mind.

Actually, no, promiscuity and incorrect protection leads to more STDs. Sex before marriage doesn't automatically equate to condomless orgy before marriage.

So are you assuming that all sex before marriage is mindless, hedonistic one-night stands?
no
someone asked me if protection was used what consequences could there be. I was pointing out that in addition to pregnancy and disease that there could also be emotional and spiritual consequences as well.

Anyone can make a "relationship" work between the sheets.

Got to disagree with that having spent 18 years with my parrents. It didn't work between the sheets and it spilled out to everything else too (I'm surprised they were able to have me,... although I am an only child)

no
someone asked me if protection was used what consequences could there be. I was pointing out that in addition to pregnancy and disease that there could also be emotional and spiritual consequences as well.

If protection was used... pregnancy ensues... I take it you don't mean all the time, but it can happen, yes? That post sounded very general, as if protection makes no difference.

no
someone asked me if protection was used what consequences could there be. I was pointing out that in addition to pregnancy and disease that there could also be emotional and spiritual consequences as well.
Is that a typo? If you use protection, I thought you generally don't get pregnant or diseases.


...I hope so.

Got to disagree with that having spent 18 years with my parrents. It didn't work between the sheets and it spilled out to everything else too (I'm surprised they were able to have me,... although I am an only child)

Damnit! Stop analyzing my flippant sound byte!

Got to disagree with that having spent 18 years with my parrents. It didn't work between the sheets and it spilled out to everything else too (I'm surprised they were able to have me,... although I am an only child)
Failed incest?! :confused:

Seriously, I think s/he was talking about extra-familial relationships.

And my family relationship, or lack thereof, doesn't work too well either... [/hijack]

I don't support marriage. I love sex. Yes, I would say I believe in sex before marriage.

Is that a typo? If you use protection, I thought you generally don't get pregnant or diseases.


...I hope so.
I am sorry I am running on sudafed today, just because it sounds clear to me doesn't mean it actually is.... :p
what I was trying to say is that pregnancy and std aren't the only consequences that sex can have and that even if those too were "taken away" that you could still have emotional and spiritual consequences.

the person to whom I was speaking had made a statement that led me to beilieve that if you used protection that sex is consequence free. (and of course it isn't)

Damnit! Stop analyzing my flippant sound byte!


It was a very good sound byte... but as some famous philospher said (I think it was Descartes I'm not sure), "A snappy saying proves nothing."

Czardas: Damn, you're right it does read bad. I meant it didn't work between my parrents and it hurt our family life.

I don't see why sexual compatibility is such a big issue.
You can just talk about it before marriage… see if your partner has any odd "quirks". And if you do believe in saving it 'till marriage, then you are likely to be uncomfortable with "kinky stuff" as well (demographic groups).
Even if you are "sexually incompatible", it's not such a big problem. Sex doesn't have to be a part of marriage; love is what marriage is supposed to be about, and it's perfectly possible to love someone without sex.

Of course, I could be totally cold-hearted and arrogant saying this, but what the hell.

People shouldn't be allowed to get married. Seriously.

I don't see why sexual compatibility is such a big issue.
You can just talk about it before marriage… see if your partner has any odd "quirks". And if you do believe in saving it 'till marriage, then you are likely to be uncomfortable with "kinky stuff" as well (demographic groups).
Even if you are "sexually incompatible", it's not such a big problem. Sex doesn't have to be a part of marriage; love is what marriage is supposed to be about, and it's perfectly possible to love someone without sex.

Of course, I could be totally cold-hearted and arrogant saying this, but what the hell.
hmm. sounds like something my husband would say. but then again someone accused me of being a robot earlier because I said that marriage isn't about being instantly happy.....

It was a very good sound byte... but as some famous philospher said (I think it was Descartes I'm not sure), "A snappy saying proves nothing."


Which just begs the question, "What exactly DOES prove anything here on NS?"

I am sorry I am running on sudafed today, just because it sounds clear to me doesn't mean it actually is.... :p
what I was trying to say is that pregnancy and std aren't the only consequences that sex can have and that even if those too were "taken away" that you could still have emotional and spiritual consequences.

the person to whom I was speaking had made a statement that led me to beilieve that if you used protection that sex is consequence free. (and of course it isn't)
If you use protection, however, it's very unlikely that there will be all too many physical consequences. Unless you happen to be allergic to latex, of course. Emotional and spiritual consequences? I've never heard too much about any of those.

I don't see why sexual compatibility is such a big issue.
You can just talk about it before marriage… see if your partner has any odd "quirks". And if you do believe in saving it 'till marriage, then you are likely to be uncomfortable with "kinky stuff" as well (demographic groups).
Even if you are "sexually incompatible", it's not such a big problem. Sex doesn't have to be a part of marriage; love is what marriage is supposed to be about, and it's perfectly possible to love someone without sex.

Of course, I could be totally cold-hearted and arrogant saying this, but what the hell.

Absolutely it is possible to love someone without sex, but for many people sex itself is important and there if you can't get it from your spouse where should you get it?

No, not at all. Infact, it's interesting really (especially in Japan) since most teenagers are so stressed about school, they really don't have time to do that stuff. But otherwise, no, I don't believe in it -- it is so unmoral.

:fluffle: :mp5:

It was a very good sound byte... but as some famous philospher said (I think it was Descartes I'm not sure), "A snappy saying proves nothing."

Czardas: Damn, you're right it does read bad. I meant it didn't work between my parrents and it hurt our family life.
Whoever said incest was bad? ;)

I see no reason not to have sex before marraige.its not like nobody ever having sex outside marraige would benefit anyone in any way.there'd still be unplanned pregnancies and STDs

I have a friend that calls herself a "free spirit," meaning she tries to get on every guy she sees...and in a college town, that's sadly not difficult to do. There are bars here commonly referred to as "meat markets." I kid you not, I have always hated those bars, and never wanted to go.

The last time (and it will be the last time unless there's some very, very good reason I'd have to go to one of them) she drug me out to one of them, I hadn't been in a very long time, and didn't know what to do, realizing I was no longer used to guys trying to grope me. Literally. If you're a girl and you walk into that place, guys grab you, touch you, lick you, grab you and won't let go, and there's little you can do about it because the place is packed like a can of sardines. They also get away with it, because the place is so big they can easily escape in the crowd.

I've watched her do this time and time again, sometimes with her friend's boyfriends or ex-boyfriends (I assume out of some need to feel superior or wanted), and she looks more and more empty all the time. The worst part about it is that she now has a four year old daughter, who she brings the guys around, or dumps off at her parents' house so she can go "get laid." Her daughter even told her "Mommy, no more boys. I don't like them."

Then she wonders why she's unhappy, and why guys she actually cares for every once in awhile have a problem with her past. I just don't get it.

People shouldn't be allowed to get married. Seriously.

But then where would we get our drunken bachelorettes?

If you use protection, however, it's very unlikely that there will be all too many physical consequences. Unless you happen to be allergic to latex, of course. Emotional and spiritual consequences? I've never heard too much about any of those.

Spiritual depends on your beliefs, but emotional hurt happens quite a lot regardless.

Which just begs the question, "What exactly DOES prove anything here on NS?"

Well a well-reason and thought out logical argument with agreed upon starting conditions.... :confused:

but snappy saying are much more fun to read. :p

People shouldn't be allowed to get married. Seriously. You might have a few societal issues if you made that into law. Also, some mobs.

Most teenagers only do have girlfriends only for sex -- which lowers society even more.

Absolutely it is possible to love someone without sex, but for many people sex itself is important and there if you can't get it from your spouse where should you get it?
You can call (207) 555-4321....*

Note: This is a made up telephone number. Czardas cannot be held responsible for any accidents that might occur. Thank you and have a nice day.

I see no reason not to have sex before marraige.its not like nobody ever having sex outside marraige would benefit anyone in any way.there'd still be unplanned pregnancies and STDs
Yeah, they'd just occur later on.

Most teenagers only do have girlfriends only for sex -- which lowers society even more.

What a generalisation. I'm insulted.

Absolutely it is possible to love someone without sex, but for many people sex itself is important and there if you can't get it from your spouse where should you get it?

I'd think you should realize there are things more important than sex, and if "getting it" is such a priority, you're living a pretty shallow life.

I have a couple of guy friends (one recently married) who referred to sex before sex with the girls they met they actually cared for as "a place to dump the load." They also said they didn't really know what sex was supposed to be until it was meaningful, and one of them was pretty much crippled with guilt for the way he'd treated women in the past because of his missing the whole point of sex his entire life.

Well a well-reason and thought out logical argument with agreed upon starting conditions.... :confused:

but snappy saying are much more fun to read. :p

Meh, been posting on this site for years (well, two years, anyway, so the plural is justified) and the only thing a well-reasoned and thought out logical argument proves is that people don't read posts longer than two paragraphs.

Meh, been posting on this site for years (well, two years, anyway, so the plural is justified) and the only thing a well-reasoned and thought out logical argument proves is that people don't read posts longer than two paragraphs.

lol

Sad, but in many cases also true.

What a generalisation. I'm insulted. Let me guess, you're a teenager. I'm a teenager too, and I'm insulted.

What a generalisation. I'm insulted.

Not really. I said "most" not "all". And most is the correct term if you cannot come up with an estimate. If you want an estimate, then every 3/5 or 4/5 teenager has a girlfriend for sex only. When she says no, then the boyfriend gets mad. (According to articles I read in Japan about America).

It's typical.

Meh, been posting on this site for years (well, two years, anyway, so the plural is justified) and the only thing a well-reasoned and thought out logical argument proves is that people don't read posts longer than two paragraphs.

Two paragraphs? That's a bit much. 5 lines, maximum. ;)

I don't see why sexual compatibility is such a big issue.
You can just talk about it before marriage… see if your partner has any odd "quirks". And if you do believe in saving it 'till marriage, then you are likely to be uncomfortable with "kinky stuff" as well (demographic groups).
Even if you are "sexually incompatible", it's not such a big problem. Sex doesn't have to be a part of marriage; love is what marriage is supposed to be about, and it's perfectly possible to love someone without sex.

Of course, I could be totally cold-hearted and arrogant saying this, but what the hell.
You can love someone without sex. That's called a friend. . .
Some people just have no sex drive and are a-sexual. I'm not one of them. I would be miserable without sex.

Not really. I said "most" not "all". And most is the correct term if you cannot come up with an estimate. If you want an estimate, then every 3/5 or 4/5 teenager has a girlfriend for sex only. When she says no, then the boyfriend gets mad.

It's typical.

You know what, in my experience couples like that are in the minority. Maybe your experience is different, but values are actually changing.

Two paragraphs? That's a bit much. 5 lines, maximum. ;)
5 lines? Are ya kiddin'? Most people just read the title, and the poll options if there are any. Sometimes not even those.

You know what, in my experience couples like that are in the minority. Maybe your experience is different, but values are actually changing.

Really? How? (No seriously, I want to know how values are changing since your arguement might be right then).

Then she wonders why she's unhappy, and why guys she actually cares for every once in awhile have a problem with her past. I just don't get it.

There's counciling for that. I was all for "it's her life" right up until the kid thing. That's where I draw the line. Neglecting her child because you like sex so much shows that she's a sexaholic.

You can love someone without sex. That's called a friend. . .
Some people just have no sex drive and are a-sexual. I'm not one of them. I would be miserable without sex.
why would you be miserable? because you would choose to be.
contrary to popular belief sex isn't a need. no, food, water, shelter, these are needs nobody needs sex.

There's counciling for that. I was all for "it's her life" right up until the kid thing. That's where I draw the line. Neglecting her child because you like sex so much shows that she's a sexaholic.

I would have said "it's her life" too, if she hadn't trampled so many people, including mutual friends, in the process. Her little sister is pretty much a depressed and nervous wreck, and a large part of that comes from having to take care of Sara.

In truth, I don't even think she's a sexaholic. I'm not sure what it is, but I think it's more of a desire for drama (which she inevitably causes all the time--she does a lot of drugs and drinking too), to be the center of attention, and to feel wanted, if only for five hasty minutes in a bathroom with some sweaty stranger somewhere.

I worry more about the example she's setting for her daughter than the amount of time her daughter spends with her grandparents, which is surely a more healthy environment.

I'd think you should realize there are things more important than sex, and if "getting it" is such a priority, you're living a pretty shallow life.

I have a couple of guy friends (one recently married) who referred to sex before sex with the girls they met they actually cared for as "a place to dump the load." They also said they didn't really know what sex was supposed to be until it was meaningful, and one of them was pretty much crippled with guilt for the way he'd treated women in the past because of his missing the whole point of sex his entire life.

Are there more important things than sex? Absolutely. Is my marriage based entirely on my sexual compatiability with my wife? No. Is it an important part of my marriage? You bet. Would our marriage be as meaningful and fullfilling if we weren't sexually compatable? I don't think so. Like I said, sex can be divided into 3 catagories: 1) a wonderful part of a meaningful relationship, 2) an empty physical act, 3) large sourse of friction in a otherwise healthy marriage. I certainly don't want it to be 2, but being raised with parrents where it was 3, I know I don't want that either.

I do not agree.

Its a special union between two people who love each other, when they are married. I know what your thinking, " you dont have to be married to love each other " I know that. I am in love with my girlfriend.

What I am saying is; Its something you save for the person you love. Something you have not given to anyone else. You waited to give the person you love, the greatest gift you can.

You dont have anything to compare them with, you dont have thoughts of anyone else in your mind, you have saved everything for the person you love.

Sex before marriage is also a sin. Not meaning that oh no, your a bad person! everyone is bad, evil is in our nature. Sin is doing something that seperates you from God. And that not something I want to do. :)

Are there more important things than sex? Absolutely. Is my marriage based entirely on my sexual compatiability with my wife? No. Is it an important part of my marriage? You bet. Would our marriage be as meaningful and fullfilling if we weren't sexually compatable? I don't think so. Like I said, sex can be divided into 3 catagories: 1) a wonderful part of a meaningful relationship, 2) an empty physical act, 3) large sourse of friction in a otherwise healthy marriage. I certainly don't want it to be 2, but being raised with parrents where it was 3, I know I don't want that either.

I see. I agree with you. I guess from my own personal experience, I don't see how anyone would ever want option 2, knowing option 1 is infinitely better in all ways (including the way in the bed) anyway.

why would you be miserable? because you would choose to be.
contrary to popular belief sex isn't a need. no, food, water, shelter, these are needs nobody needs sex.

I don't need books either, but would be pretty miserable without them.

Not really. I said "most" not "all". And most is the correct term if you cannot come up with an estimate. If you want an estimate, then every 3/5 or 4/5 teenager has a girlfriend for sex only. When she says no, then the boyfriend gets mad. (According to articles I read in Japan about America).

It's typical.

According to the articles I read in America about Japan, every single Japanese is vastly into yaoi/hentai and has a fixation with seeing school girls in bondage situations. Mind you, I read some fairly specialized articles.

See, though, that's the point. To say something like that is rather irresponsible because unless we actually know what you're reading, there's no way we can determine the bias. And trust me, there's a bias. There's always a bias.

I believe sex befor marriage or haveing a lifelong partner is bad because of the deseases it causes.
IT's not religious or anything it's just not safe anymore

I do not agree.

Its a special union between two people who love each other, when they are married. I know what your thinking, " you dont have to be married to love each other " I know that. I am in love with my girlfriend.

What I am saying is; Its something you save for the person you love. Something you have not given to anyone else. You waited to give the person you love, the greatest gift you can.

You dont have anything to compare them with, you dont have thoughts of anyone else in your mind, you have saved everything for the person you love.

Sex before marriage is also a sin. Not meaning that oh no, your a bad person! everyone is bad, evil is in our nature. Sin is doing something that seperates you from God. And that not something I want to do. :)
At last, a religious person has a sensible argument!

Kudos, and while I'm here, congratulations on your first post and welcome to the madhouse. :)

I do not agree.

Its a special union between two people who love each other, when they are married. I know what your thinking, " you dont have to be married to love each other " I know that. I am in love with my girlfriend.

What I am saying is; Its something you save for the person you love. Something you have not given to anyone else. You waited to give the person you love, the greatest gift you can.

You dont have anything to compare them with, you dont have thoughts of anyone else in your mind, you have saved everything for the person you love.

Sex before marriage is also a sin. Not meaning that oh no, your a bad person! everyone is bad, evil is in our nature. Sin is doing something that seperates you from God. And that not something I want to do. :)

Like I said, I do believe the world would be much healthier if more people believed this.

That said, is your girlfriend also a virgin? If she wasn't, being in love with her, would you be hurt? Would you stay with her regardless?

why would you be miserable? because you would choose to be.
contrary to popular belief sex isn't a need. no, food, water, shelter, these are needs nobody needs sex.

Well, if you want to know. It distracts me from life. I feel tense, irritable. I also feel "full" down there all the time. I become bitter and frustrated with talking with people I find attractive. It really starts to detract from my life. I don't need it to live, but to be content with my life I do. Someone with a slow sex drive wouldn't understand. It's actually a very powerful physical urge in some people. And no I'm not generally cranky, when I get regular sex I lighten up considerably.

why would you be miserable? because you would choose to be.
contrary to popular belief sex isn't a need. no, food, water, shelter, these are needs nobody needs sex.
I don't need NationStates either, or my music, or my exercise, or my drugs. Yet I have all of them (well, ok, except the drugs. I'm not that depraved yet;)) anyway, and what's more I find it difficult to imagine life without any of those things. And when I do have to live without one or more of those things, I become miserable. Why? Because I want them, of course. Not because I choose anything. Ok, I choose to want them. But still.

No, my girlfriend is not. But that said, her past is in the past. She is deeply sorry and has asked God for forgiveness, and thats all that matters. I hold nothing against her.

I see. I agree with you. I guess from my own personal experience, I don't see how anyone would ever want option 2, knowing option 1 is infinitely better in all ways (including the way in the bed) anyway.

I agree with you. My experience with sex has always been option 1, but I think it is important to make sure it is not option 3 before commiting to spend the rest of your life with someone. (My wife and I waited till we were engaged)

I don't need books either, but would be pretty miserable without them.
my point is that you would choose to be miserable in the first place. just because you want something and don't get it doesn't mean you have to be miserable. you choose how you feel, you then would choose to be miserable without books.

No, my girlfriend is not. But that said, her past is in the past. She is deeply sorry and has asked God for forgiveness, and thats all that matters. I hold nothing against her.

You're a very strong person, I admire you, and I hope your resolve continues to stay strong. If you don't mind my asking, how old are you?

my point is that you would choose to be miserable in the first place. just because you want something and don't get it doesn't mean you have to be miserable. you choose how you feel, you then would choose to be miserable without books.
Unfortunately one does not choose their emotions. If this were true no one would cry, or feel worthless. Physical demands of the body happen whether we like them or not. I can choose to ignore it over and over and over again, by busying myself with something else. But, what kind of life is that? running from something that makes you happy?

I do not agree.

Its a special union between two people who love each other, when they are married. I know what your thinking, " you dont have to be married to love each other " I know that. I am in love with my girlfriend.

What I am saying is; Its something you save for the person you love. Something you have not given to anyone else. You waited to give the person you love, the greatest gift you can.

See, now, I always thought the greatest gift I could give a person was my time. My time is very valuable to me and for me to voluntarily give it to someone is, in effect, saying, "Because you are so important to me, you are more important than me, and that's saying something because I like me and am pretty important to myself." You seem to be making the whole relationship about the sex. Over the course of a relationship, I would give my partner many things. Perhaps my virtue could have been one of them. I could have also possibly given them a pony. The point is, none of those things compares to me voluntarily limiting my own life so as to fit neatly into theirs. Sex isn't the "greatest" gift, just one of them. Committment is the greatest gift.


You dont have anything to compare them with, you dont have thoughts of anyone else in your mind, you have saved everything for the person you love.

Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. People grow bored, particularly in our hypersexualized society. The exact fact that you don't have anything to compare them with is the problem. They start to wonder what someone else would feel like, smell like, do in bed. That wonder drives a wedge into what may be a very compatible relationship. Besides, all that other flowery stuff should be true in a good relationship regardless of the state of one's hymen.


Sex before marriage is also a sin. Not meaning that oh no, your a bad person! everyone is bad, evil is in our nature. Sin is doing something that seperates you from God. And that not something I want to do. :)

So, here's a question. If it's a sin, why didn't God just set it up so that sex would only feel good with the right person?

my point is that you would choose to be miserable in the first place. just because you want something and don't get it doesn't mean you have to be miserable. you choose how you feel, you then would choose to be miserable without books.

Actually my experience is that I don't choose how I feel. I can do things to make me feel better, (like reading, or video games, or running,... oh yeah sex too). However, if you take those things away from me I will be miserable and there will be nothing I can do about it.

I don't need NationStates either, or my music, or my exercise, or my drugs. Yet I have all of them (well, ok, except the drugs. I'm not that depraved yet;)) anyway, and what's more I find it difficult to imagine life without any of those things. And when I do have to live without one or more of those things, I become miserable. Why? Because I want them, of course. Not because I choose anything. Ok, I choose to want them. But still.
you are going to understand me a whole lot better if you understand that one of the things that helped me turn my life around ( and believe me I was headed down the wrong road full steam) is that I truely believe that emotions are easily controled
happiness, being miserable, feeling unloved, being angry these in my opinion are all choices.
I can not control what happens to me, only how I choose to react to it.

I know this philosophy doesn't work for everyone, but it works for me.

You're a very strong person, I admire you, and I hope your resolve continues to stay strong. If you don't mind my asking, how old are you?

Thanks. I'm 24