Sex and Dating.

Peter Thomas · Fri 16/04/2004 03:13:19

That girl is dumb... I mean - REALLY dumb...

Ben · Fri 16/04/2004 03:16:19

I think teh Butcher said it best in the EZBoard topic:

QuoteWhy would someone miss his virginity???

Sex is a human need and one of the best ways to have fun we get in life. Of course that doesn't mean you can't love someone because you don't have a sexual relationship with her, or that sex is the only thing that keeps a relationship together...but let's face it: It is the strongest base for a love relationship. Otherwise it's just friendship.

Sex is a need, a natural thing that we all eventually must experience to be healthy human beings. If it's a sin, than why isn't breathing, sleeping, or love a sin?

That said, you can't treat sex as freely as you do taking a dump in the bathroom. It's not just about ejaculating into some stranger only to find another to bend over tomorrow.. If you find someome you love and respect, it can be an emotional experience-- not just a bodily function, like it's doubles masturbating

.

Peter: I'm curious-- What do you think you'll be missing out on if you have sex before marriage? Is there really any difference, as long as it's heppening with someone you love?

Peter Thomas · Fri 16/04/2004 03:23:27

Quote from: Ben on Fri 16/04/2004 03:16:19
If it's a sin, than why isn't breathing, sleeping, or love a sin?

I completely respect your judgement, Ben, I really truly super-dooly do!

I could give a twenty-three point logic to answer your question, but it's really not necessary. It's a sin because it's BREAKING TRUST. If you disagree, that's great, but that is the reason why we regard it as a sin. Simple as that. Breathing, loving etc, isn't breaking a trust issue.

Sorry if it sounds like a nag - I was just trying to answer a question that seems to be in every seceon person's post...

Kinoko · Fri 16/04/2004 03:27:37

You can't argue against one side of the coin by bringing up an extreme case. Most people seem to do things like that. A lot of people that don't have sex before marriage live wonderfully rich and fulfilling lives just as plenty of people who do have sex and live with their parter for a long time before sex will eventually get a divorce or lead an unhappy marriage.

However, I think the argument for sex before marriage is better given like this: If you do have sex before marriage (and that doesn't necessarilly make it rash or sleazy - relationships reach a point where it's just the right time and most well-rounded people can tell when that is), AND live with your partner for a good few years before getting married (which to me is the most important thing, you NEVER know a person without living with them for almost every single day for years. Not just one year either... you have to experience a chunk of your life with them), your chances of having chosen your life partner wisely (that line totally reminds me of the old knight in Indiana Jones: Last Crusade ^_^) and living a relatively happy, well-balanced and harmonious life are GREATLY increased.

I believe in sex before marriage - I've done it heaps! (Sorry, I couldn't resist -_- I know it's an old joke... ack.)

I honestly would never, ever in my life look hopefully upon a marriage that happens before sex or moving in together for a long time.

I think someone once said something like until you've seen your partner on the toilet, had to look after them with an awful, disgusting cold and similar things like that, you're not ready for marriage.

EDIT: Peter, could you explain to me how it's breaking a trust? I'm not trying to flame you or anything, honestly, I just want to understand. I just can't get my head around it.

DGMacphee · Fri 16/04/2004 03:38:49

Quote from: Peter Thomas on Fri 16/04/2004 03:23:27
I completely respect your judgement, Ben, I really truly super-dooly do!

Peter Thomas · Fri 16/04/2004 03:45:20

DG always has the right picture for any situation...

KINOKO: It's breaking trust because we believe sex is pretty addictive (don't pretend you don't either

), and if you get 'addicted' to sex outside of marriage, it's hard to cope with 'limited' sex INSIDE marriage (let's face it, not everyone has the drive of a porn star). Thus it makes thoughts of infidelity cross your mind blah blah

I'm not saying everyone is like this - I certainly believe there are exceptions to the rule, however Christians prefer not to take that risk...

Ben · Fri 16/04/2004 03:55:42

Thanks for clarifying that.. I was about to ask the same thing, before Kinoko beat me to it

I should mention that I respect your views much more now that you've explained them. Sex certainly can be addictuve (as much as drugs/alcohol, even if it's a mental addiction and not a physical one), and can be destructive if you have little or no self control. I guess we all need to find our own way to cope..

Kinoko · Fri 16/04/2004 04:13:08

I think like any addiction you just have to have lots of other things in your life. A lot of people who get addicted or consumed by certains are doing so because there's too much room in their lives for it. There was a time when I had just moved in with my boyfriend and I got niggley over the stupidest things because I wasn't working, wasn't at uni, and I just had all day to stew over things - really ridiculous things. Now that I've experienced a lot of things and I do a lot with my life (like spending all night making adventure games! ^_-) I'm a much more personable gal.

Of course the other big thing is that young couples often think they have to have a certain kind of relationship to be normal or to prove that they do in fact, have a good relationship. Like "We only have sex once a week! What's WRONG with us?? It's not normal, we need counselling!!". People do need to realise that just living happily in your own way is what's important. Good sex is better than frequent sex - and thats only talking about sex. Couples get hang-ups about all sorts of things they think are important, like how much of an interest your partner should have in what you do, what they should or shouldn't do for Valentine's Day and things like that.

DG - Nice ^_^

LordHart · Fri 16/04/2004 04:19:20

Quote from: Peter Thomas on Fri 16/04/2004 03:45:20
It's breaking trust because we believe sex is pretty addictive (don't pretend you don't either ), and if you get 'addicted' to sex outside of marriage, it's hard to cope with 'limited' sex INSIDE marriage (let's face it, not everyone has the drive of a porn star). Thus it makes thoughts of infidelity cross your mind blah blah

I'm not saying everyone is like this - I certainly believe there are exceptions to the rule, however Christians prefer not to take that risk...

I don't understand your point. I respect your views and all, but that doesn't make sense. What if you are in a relationship, get married and then consumate the marriage... and THEN get addicted to sex, that you then start to think about infidelity...

Its a double-edged blade no matter if you have sex before or after... $:-\$

Meowster · Fri 16/04/2004 04:34:59

If sex is addictive, then anything is addictive, arguably.

Anything is arguably.

Why can't I sleep?

Kinoko · Fri 16/04/2004 04:35:07

Actually, I was having trouble with that point myself. Just let me clarify...

Are you saying that if you have sex outside of marriage, you may get addicted to it (with the implication that you'll be doing it with more than one person). If you then get married, you won't be able to handle only being able to sleep with just one person, and may commit adultery. Is that it or did I interprete wrong?

If so, I understand that you're saying the chances of you wanting to sleep with someone else once you're married are increased if you've slept with other people previously, but I have to disagree. I think it's just as likely that you may start to experience feelings of limitation if you've only slept with one person and are married (and hence in a sense, "tied") to that one person. Of course that's not necessarilly going to happen at all, but I think it's just as likely a danger as what you're saying.

It could even be argued that having sex outside of marriage with a few people could get curiosity out of your system, and when you meet the person you want to marry and fall in love, the sex with them will be 100 times better than loveless sex and you won't feel the need to look back after that.

Just saying these are possibilities though ^_^ Not concrete.

Layabout · Fri 16/04/2004 05:15:43

I agree with Kinoko.

If the sole reason not to have sex before marriage is so that you don't get addicted to it (a condition that very few people actually have. I requires one to need sex 24/7 and not get any enjoyment out of it, except a release of frustration, much like drugs), then the argument is void. It's more about the choices a person make. If they choose to have sex outside of the relationship/marriage, then they are breaking the trust issue, the sex isn't. It is free will, which apparantly was given to humans by GOD because he was allegedly too lazy to ccontrol humans. God gives free will, people choose to have an affair. I think the problem is with GOD. Blame GOD, everyone else does.

The chances of having an affair are probably greater when a person has only one sexual partner, as the mind tends to wander and think, what would sex be like with THAT person as opposed to my wife. That is THOUGHTaffair. Now if they follow through with the transaction (a word i probably shouldn't use but i am too lazy to use a more appropriate word), then they commit adultery. When you have had experience, you are less likely to go shopping, as you have been down that path before, and you are ready to settle down.

If this makes sense to anyone but me, i'd be suprised!!

Kinoko · Fri 16/04/2004 06:58:41

Makes total sense to me! SURPRISE!

Peter Thomas · Fri 16/04/2004 07:24:00

Actually, I have to disagree with Pirate Jack.

83% of all affairs occurr when the partner doing the cheating has had sex with multiple people. That's because they experience 'levels' of sex (good, bad, awful, fan-freaking-tastic), and can easily become unsatisfied when they think the sex-level is slipping.

Only 0.3% of "Christian" affairs are the result of people getting 'tired' with the one spouse.

And - as I've said repeatedly, I know not everyone get's addicted to sex! But what happens if you are the 1 in 70 (or whatever the stats are) that ARE?! Christians (again, as I said before) prefer not to take that risk.

And it's not JUST about the trust thing, either. That's just the most common-sensical explanation used... It's also quite exciting to share that 'special something' with the person you plan to spend your life with. If you've done it with every second girl on the street, there's nothing super-duper fantastic about it.

Another reason is pregnancy. Despite the pill, condoms etc etc, you can never NEVER guarantee with 100% confidence that something won't go wrong. The condom might break, as well as all other manner of things. What happens if the girl DOES fall pregnant?! Christians don't believe in abortion (that is a generalisation. There's debate when it comes to things like pregnancy after rape etc), and they certainly don't believe in just walking away and dumping child support with the mum every month...

I could go on, but there's no need to....

DGMacphee · Fri 16/04/2004 08:17:50

Quote from: Peter Thomas on Fri 16/04/2004 07:24:00
Only 0.3% of "Christian" affairs are the result of people getting 'tired' with the one spouse.

Acutally, the rate is a lot higher.

You're probably only looking at divorce statistics because that's the only concrete way to tell when a one spouse is tired of the other.

And many Christian couples don't divorce because the sanctity of marriage prohibits it.

So, I have a feeling that the number of people tired with their spouses in Christian relationships is higher -- but you just can't measure it, because Christians can't do a thing about their spouse if they're sick of them.

QuoteAnother reason is pregnancy. Despite the pill, condoms etc etc, you can never NEVER guarantee with 100% confidence that something won't go wrong. The condom might break, as well as all other manner of things. What happens if the girl DOES fall pregnant?! Christians don't believe in abortion (that is a generalisation. There's debate when it comes to things like pregnancy after rape etc), and they certainly don't believe in just walking away and dumping child support with the mum every month...

These things are called "risks".

Human beings adapt to them.

In high school, my best friend got his girlfriend pregnant by accident.

However, they've got two kids, are happily married, she's working in law and he's working a senior position at the local Woolworths.

So, don't scare people with the "WHAT IF THE GIRL BECOMES PREGNANT?" routine.

People accept it, live with it, and turn out fine.

MrColossal · Fri 16/04/2004 08:28:08

"So, don't scare people with the "WHAT IF THE GIRL BECOMES PREGNANT?" routine."

unless i missed a sentence somewhere it seems like Peter has said many times "these are my personal views and i don't judge anyone by them, you can do what you want."

so he isn't trying to scare or convert anyone

he's just rockin' along to his own thing and letting everyone else rock on to theirs

which is the only way to rock

edit: crap sorry! there's another way to rock that i forgot about, you can "Rock out with your cock out." phew! that would have been embarrassing

Barcik · Fri 16/04/2004 10:20:01

There is a long way to go between having pre-marriage sex and an addiction to sex. Just if a person chooses to have sex before marriage, doesn't mean he'll go around banging everything he sees.

But ultimately, I think this debate is pointless. It's a matter of free choice, and truly there is no right or wrong here. If you want to save yourself for that special someone, go ahead. If you don't, just as well.

Peter Thomas · Fri 16/04/2004 11:00:29

THANK YOU, ERIC!

I am deeply in love with you, and now wish to have your child. Repeatedly. I shall change gender JUST to make it possible....

Yes, DG, I am aware of what dictionary.com defines as a risk. It's a relatively common word. But that doesn't make it safe or right.

Robbing a bank is a risk, because - hell - you could get shot.

I know there's a difference between banks and sex blah blah blah - but it explains my viewpoint.

If you want to take the risk - fine. I don't

P.S - I realise I talk to much, and I often seem to get very defensive about things..... I'm trying my hardest to remain sedated... forgive me...

Babar · Fri 16/04/2004 12:47:11

Although this has little to do with all that has been discussed so far, one thing that surprises me is the evolution of this so called "love" and "sex and dating". Humanity has to reproduce to survive. So what did Nature do? It made them ENJOY doing....umm...
*Babloyi thinks for a euphemism that has not been used yet*
...jig-jig

. Of course, that, which while perhaps helped in reproduction, caused a whole bunch of moral problems, and then what? Someone thought up contraception.

Quote from: Kinoko on Fri 16/04/2004 03:27:37
that line totally reminds me of the old knight in Indiana Jones: Last Crusade ^_^

Someone brought that up! The poor knight! He stayed for 800(?) years in a temple underground with no one else. I wonder what he did to pass time?

Nacho · Fri 16/04/2004 12:58:45

The answer is... |\/| @ 5 T 3 R 8 @ T 1 0 |\|

Not... really... Sex is not phisically different than climbing a hill or making jogging... Why do you give such importance? Sure Peter Thomas has something to distract his attention from sex, it's not that difficult...