Sexual morality

Remove all ads!

@DR:

My point isn't that it is morally right to do so, but rather that if you're thinking about marriage, either you are ready to tell the person everything, or its too soon to be thinking about marriage. I realize that people don't always do things like that, and that's part of why the divorce rate is so high today, but only part.

1.) then it only makes sense to avoid behaviors that build these up as much as possible, making them as few as possible.
2.) Like I said, the other person should have told you before you got married.

But we're talking about why the other 99% of western society should be different, so it does apply. This is the sexual morality thread, after all.

But I didn't say it negated the value of the action, just lessened it.

No, I'm assuming it progresses through each stage, spending due time in each. I've been in stage two with my gf for about 3 years now, maybe more. I don't see what that has to do with anything.

Actually, here, it depends on the society. The relationship I thought you described would be unusual to our society, maybe to humanity as a whole, and thus a quirk, whereas the norm would be what happens most frequently.

And that's what I mean. Sexual activity, and by this I mean much more than just vaginal intercourse, but anything that involved heightened states of arrousal, like heavy petting, or even light petting, automatically produces intimacy of a stage that bothers future partners. That level of intimacy should, ideally, only happen once.

1.) I'm not counting makeout sessions, though I understand how you could.
2.) I never said I was restricting myself to it, rather than it is better. If my gf wasn't a virgin, I would be bothered, but I'd still be dating her so long as she had repented from that kind of lifestyle, and that's between her and God.

I think the vast majority of people have other reasons for not holding themselves to that standard.

@Aldeth:

You're assuming that's a sizable portion of the virgin community, which it may be today, but I'm talking from the religious ethos position, and others, so what I'm advocating doesn't fall into this.

A very good point, and while both of us may be able to imagine it, there's no real way of knowing how accurate our imagined responses would be to reality.

Interesting how you connect physical experience with personal experience. Either that or you're placing an aweful lot of value on what they want physically and not allowing much room for maleability. On the one hand, some degree of physical experience usually does go hand in hand with personal experience. Though I didn't even kiss my gf until we had been dating 6 months, I imagine that was the quirk this time, and the norm is much shorter than that. Hell, there are people ready to marry after that time. I won't say anything about how long those marriages usually last. Physical experience isn't actually NEEDED for her to know what kind of a guy (personality, humor, intellect, etc.) she is looking for. At the same time, however, intimate experience isn't absolutely neccessary to know what you're looking for, it just helps to identify problems ahead of time. My gf and I are perfect for each other. Neither of us had ever been in an intimate relationship before and I don't think we knew what to look for, but we know there aren't any problems. I'd also imagine a woman without any experience will have problems identifying exactly what the problems are, but not knowing that they're there. She may also not notice these problems until later in the relationship, but it should still be long before you consider marrying.

@HB:

Then it does matter. Maybe one isn't inherrantly better than the other, but there are differences and it does matter.

 

It just doesn't matter to ME. Clearly it matters to a lot of you, otherwise you wouldn't be having this lengthy debate. If you stay a virgin before marriage, that's cool. If you have several partners before marriage, I can live with that. If you don't get married, that's also fine.

 

Considering how I'm not married yet and I honestly have no idea when I'll get married - 4 years at the least it's going to take me - but I know I won't hold a sexual history issue as a requirement (not being a virgin/being a virgin). However, don't think I could co-exist with somebody who wants to be a virgin till they are married, because our mindsets would most probably differ on so many other issues. Those last two statements might be viewed as conflicting, but I'm talking about before meeting the girl/having relations with her. I can imagine no end of strife if her virginity is based on religious reasoning, dare say I'd never marry a devout member of any religion. Not to mention I'd most probably want to have sex with her before I even pop the question... last thing I want to find out was that "she" used to be a he or something.

 

It most assuredly would be the "last" thing you find out. Can't imagine you would stick around to find out much more after that.......

 

Unless you're into that sort of thing...

 

1) I would agree with this, but it's also true that having sex also cures many of the hangups people tend to have about sex, and thus makes them more comfortable with it. The arguement can be made both ways, but at the end of the day I still contest that what you're saying is not universal and depends on the individual. Sex brings different pressures to different people.
2.) And like I said, not if they aren't aware of any problems to begin with, which a virgin wouldn't necessarily be. It's kind of like when a flight-school cadet doesn't disclose a childhood facial injury to his superiors because he isn't even aware that his peripheral vision is impaired. This will be uncovered only through practice or professional physical examination, neither of which the "wait till marriage" approach would likely afford you.

Eh, I still think this is one area where we'll disagree. Though I don't like thinking about my lady's past, I'm grateful that she HAS a past. That she's had that life experience. She's told me over and over that being with so many "wrongs" has convinced her that I'm her "right," if you get my drift. Life experiences, good or bad, strengthens all of our character. Believe it or not, character can be attained through means other than religious discipline.

And I say that if you really think my choices have lessened the action, then I can categorically say you have no idea what you're talking about and couldn't be more wrong.

Definitely true in a general sense. I should have clarified that I was referring to men like me who don't engage in casual sex, but who are only interested in monogamous relationships. But you're right - most people just want to git bizzay.

I can appreciate that. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

 

You're correct with that one. I was assuming that you were like most people where the phrases "adult life" and "still a virgin" are mutually exclusive. While it's true that you say that I was once a virgin as well, I haven't been since I've been 17, and as a result, I don't think I can say that I have an adult perspective on it.

Even in the your case, DR, I know my priorities and lifestyle changed a lot between when I was 21 and 26. So many things happened in those five years. I got both my undergraduate and graduate degrees, got my first real job, moved out of my parent's house and became financially independent. So just because you were 21 instead of 17, I'm not sure that's even old enough to say you have a sound adult perspective on it. NOG sounds like he's around 30 or so, and as such has done all that other stuff you need to do to reach adulthood.

No, I'm not talking about a sizeable portion of the virgin community, but rather a subset of that population. Specifically, it's the f'ed up subset of the virgin population.

The second part is what I mean. While physical experience isn't the only aspect of personal experience, I do not think you can completely seperate the two either. As you say, the two do go hand in hand. So I wasn't saying that the one is the same as the other, but rather the physical aspect does in fact make up a piece of the total personal aspect.

I proposed to my wife five months after I met her, we were married eight months after that, and currently we have been married for 3.5 years and are just as happy now (arguably happier) than the day we met.

Can I get an amen to that brother...

 

I'm just observing that a topic that is headed up "Sexual Morality" has spent 90% of two pages talking about sex and 10% about the morality of it.

 

I think the fact of my future wife being a virgin is possible, even in my mid thirties, because of my religion. It is not mandatory though. It is possible that she will be a widow or divorced. She could have a past that's not pure either. It's less about the past, more about the future we make for ourselves...

 

@HB and Abomination:
I can respect your positions in your last few posts.

@DR:

But that suggests that these things would be equally cured if you waited for marriage or not. Again, it isn't a real reason to waid, but its no reason to not wait either.

You're right here that it is possible to have problems that could only by uncovered through the act. I have no idea how common it is, but I'd guess its rather rare. Ideally, sex shouldn't be a pass/fail issue in a marriage, meaning the marriage shouldn't live or die on how good the sex is, but I can see how it could be an issue.

Are you suggesting I might get a little fanatical with my religious views?
Yes, I know that hard experiences build character and, believe it or not, being religious and going to church doesn't always build character. I know plenty of christians with characters weaker than dust bunnies.

@Aldeth:

..... ..... ..... ..... .....
I'm . . . I'm not really sure if I should take that as a compliment or not. I'm actually 22, still living with my parents, working on my masters degree and am about to start my professional career. In other words, I'm on the verge of doing all those things you said start an adult life. Wow. This is kind of embarassing.
...And funny.
I'm glad to hear I sound so mature.

Ok, I'm confused now. That was the first part of what I said, not the second. The first part wat that you connect physical experience with personal experience, which is what you seem to have said. The second possibility was that you were placing a lot more emphasis on physical experience than I, and assuming the human sex drive was more or less immaleable. If you could just clear that up...

Wow. I'm glad I elected not to say anything. Seriously, though, that's very uncommon. Most people today rush into relationships like that (I understand the two of you may have just hit it off like that, but most people don't) don't last long in marriage before they find out they actually drive eachother nuts. I guess congrats on finding the right one are in order.

 

I've heard of stories where these marriages do work out. In my religion, they aren't that uncommon. I have at least three cousins that married within 6 months of meeting their spouse. One couple has been married 14 years...

 

It may have something to do with the environment you grew up in. In the end, it isn't how long you date as much as it is how well you get to know the person in that time. If you live in a close-knit society, you probably share many of your beliefs and opinions already, which hastens the process, or you may have just been brought up to make better use of the time than most Americans today. This is quite believable as most Americans today are very superficial.

 

The belief structure is the same in all three cases I know personally. But that belief system helps immensely (but not perfectly) in making marriage work.

 

I thought this conversation was about sexual morality, not time before getting married?

 

I believe that when you have sex with someone, you commit yourself to that person, whether that's called marriage or not. (I think I would call that marriage, though)
I don't need a piece of paper from my church or alderman (?) to be allowed to have sex. I do so as I please, with love and respect, bearing in mind that having sex is something special and not just a thing to consume with 'all the world and his wife' (that sounds weird...), but only with the one you really love.

 

Well, if you are going to a church or alderman for marriage, that suggests a religious belief system, which you should follow. This means that if you are a christian, or muslim, or jew, or any other religion that defines marriage and proper sexual practices, you should follow those laws. If you aren't, I don't think anyone will suggest you have to follow those laws.

 

On the contrary: religious systems should not be followed by the faithful, since those are often erected by regular priests and whatever moral way *they* see to represent the church (an organization).

So, if you are a christian, or muslim, or jew, or any other religion that defines marriage and proper sexual practices, you should follow only what their corresponding holy book says about the matter and use your common sense (so if the advice is seriously outdated, it leaves you to your own devices).

 

@Wordplay:
First of all, 'those laws' was meant to refer to the laws in the holy text, sorry if that wasn't clear. Second of all, I'd be careful applying your logic to God's laws. Sure it's a good idea, but be careful. Your logic is dependant on what you know. Just because you don't know anything is wrong with X doesn't mean nothing is wrong with X, just that you can't see anything wrong with X. If you know something is wrong with X, and it would have been terrible at the time, but we can now work arround that, then you can carefully consider it, but still don't assume that was the only reason. Assumptions are your worst enemy in anything, especially religion.

 

The reason that I assumed you were closer to 30 is that you said you were already with your fiance for several years (I don't remember the exact number, but I thought you said it was somewhere around 4 years). While I'm certainly aware of people that meet the person they marry in college, it usually doesn't work out that way, because after college you pursue different career paths, may have to go to different areas of the country to find jobs, etc. I'm certainly not implying that something like this is going to happen to you, I'm just saying that I had a gf of 4.5 years who I was willing to marry move half way across the country which basically caused us to break up, and yeah, that sucked.

However, in your case, because you were planning on getting married already, I had assumed that you met this woman after getting out of college, finding a career, acheiving financial independence, etc. I would recommend to everyone to acheive those things before getting married, as I feel you have to be able to take care of yourself first before you can worry about others. Since most people don't do that until around 25, and you said you had been with your fiance for several years already, I guessed that your age was approaching 30. In hindsight, all I can say is - my bad.

Yeah, that's what I was talking about too - I don't know why I said the second part.

Let me tell you a quick story about me. I have been engaged twice. (And this is a different woman than the above referenced one that I spend 4.5 years of college life with.) The first woman I was engaged to I did everything the "right way" - we didn't co-habitate, we kept all of the bills and everything seperate, etc. About the only thing you likely would have had a problem with about our courtship is we did have sex. We had been together for a little over 3 years. Due to a confluence of events, it became necessary to move in together about 2 months before we got married. We both found jobs in an area out of state, and it was senseless for us to get seperate apartments for two months before getting married. The thing was, it wasn't until after we moved in together that we realized we drove each other crazy. So with about 6 weeks to go before the wedding, she called it off.

With my current (and only) wife, everything moved very quickly. We did move in together shortly after I proposed, and everything worked out just fine. So I'm living proof that doing everything "by the book" is not the only way the guarantee success. For that matter, I'm also living proof that doing everything "by the book" does not guarantee success either.

 

There are things we know, things we don't know, and things we don't know don't know. Didn't one of the rather infamous presidents of US say something along those lines a while ago? Answer nonsense with nonsense and you are safe. At the street, though, you would be considered just a raving lunatic. Would you be so safe then, against the hard realities of the world?