Sex before marriage?

boygeorge · 05-04-2011 2:59pm #1

Just wanted to know the general consensus about this topic.
Does our generation still think it is wrong to have sex until after we say those two little words "I do", or prehaps we think it is alright to do so after we say "I love you" ?
If it is love and not marriage, what about all those thousands of weddings that occur without love, is their consumation wrong?
And how many people do share the belief that it is wrong but engage in sexual intercourse anyway?
If it is wrong why is it wrong? And please no responses like "because the bible says so", if you want to make reference to the bible, remember the correct way to, college has at least taught you this much, speaking of which back to my tupid essay
.

rokossovsky · 05-04-2011 3:11pm

I dont know whether to laugh or cry

Max Power1 · 05-04-2011 3:14pm

As a reminder to those who consider the OP a troll poster, in order to be a "catholic", you must not have sex before marriage.

You cannot join a golf club, but for example not decide to follow the dress code because you dont agree with it.

alex73 · 05-04-2011 5:02pm

There has been some debate on Marriage.

Marriage in the east Orthodox does not unite a man and a woman. Rather, it is the Church's recognition of a union that God has already begun to work in their lives. If you love a woman and know that you will always be with that woman and love her, then Sex comes naturally. The Formal marriage is just a blessing, because its not the Church that marries you... Its you and your wife that marry each other.

The whole sex questions becomes problematic when people have sex without limits with various partners, this the act has no real love or commitment, its just an egoistic expression.

Zombrex · 05-04-2011 5:11pm

boygeorge wrote: »

Does our generation still think it is wrong to have sex until after we say those two little words "I do", or prehaps we think it is alright to do so after we say "I love you" ?

It would seem not, though most of our generation don't seem to be all that religious (I'm an atheist by the way)

boygeorge wrote: »

If it is love and not marriage, what about all those thousands of weddings that occur without love, is their consumation wrong?

From the Christian position they are. But again see above.

boygeorge wrote: »

And how many people do share the belief that it is wrong but engage in sexual intercourse anyway?

3,424,243 ... there or about :pac:

boygeorge wrote: »

If it is wrong why is it wrong?

Again from the Christian position it is wrong because it is a sin, it goes against God's instructions for how he wishes us to lead our lives.

Onesimus · 05-04-2011 5:28pm

alex73 wrote: »

There has been some debate on Marriage.

Marriage in the east Orthodox does not unite a man and a woman. Rather, it is the Church's recognition of a union that God has already begun to work in their lives. If you love a woman and know that you will always be with that woman and love her, then Sex comes naturally. The Formal marriage is just a blessing, because its not the Church that marries you... Its you and your wife that marry each other.

The whole sex questions becomes problematic when people have sex without limits with various partners, this the act has no real love or commitment, its just an egoistic expression.

So when did you graduate from Maynooth then Alex?

alex73 · 05-04-2011 5:38pm

Onesimus wrote: »

So when did you graduate from Maynooth then Alex?

Never :-) Gregorium.

ShowMeTheCash · 05-04-2011 7:56pm

I think there a really a few questions here and what you really believe in.
Is the bible the irrefutable word of god or a book of interpretation to how people thought 2000 years ago.

If you use the bible as the basis of you're entire faith and take it litterally you will probably have some real fundamentalist views.

I personally think the bible was heavily influanced by the politics and social order of its time. I think therefore it is no longer relevent nor should it be.

But I do believe in the institution or marriage, I think in terms of building a family it does provide a structure.

If sex before marriage is a real problem I think most of the country is going to hell :P

JonJoeDali · 05-04-2011 9:20pm

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I think there a really a few questions here and what you really believe in.
Is the bible the irrefutable word of god or a book of interpretation to how people thought 2000 years ago.

If you use the bible as the basis of you're entire faith and take it litterally you will probably have some real fundamentalist views.

I personally think the bible was heavily influanced by the politics and social order of its time. I think therefore it is no longer relevent nor should it be.

But I do believe in the institution or marriage, I think in terms of building a family it does provide a structure.

If sex before marriage is a real problem I think most of the country is going to hell :P

Heresy alert!

ShowMeTheCash · 05-04-2011 10:26pm

JonJoeDali wrote: »

Heresy alert!

Refer to my statement above

If you use the bible as the basis of you're entire faith and take it litterally you will probably have some real fundamentalist views.

couldntthink · 05-04-2011 10:39pm

This is a crazy question to ask. look around you, at least 9 out of 10 people of my generation (25) are at it. And no, I dont have facts or figures to back it up. I have travelled quite a bit and met quite a lot of different races/religons and we Irish "catholics" are definitely the randiest. In for a penny in for a pound. Masturbation, blasphemy, sex before marriage, and contraception. If you tick any of those boxes and you're not in the clergy then do you consider yourself a "good catholic".

dvae · 05-04-2011 10:56pm

This is one of the few beliefs that i find i still have in common with the church.
The Bible talks about sexual immorality and impurity.
1 cor 7:2
" Nevertheless to avoid fornication let every man have his own wife and every woman have her own husband". There is no mention of sex before marriage other than a handful of scriptures similar to the one above.

A scripture you might find interesting Luke 2: 4
He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child.

If we look at Matt 1:18 19 :This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about his mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. 19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

How could Joseph divorce Mary before they were married?
Back then a marriage engagement was taken very seriously and if one of the party wanted to leave they would have to seek a divorce from the engagement.
Point being before Joseph married Mary, Joseph had planned to leave Mary because of the law and "yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace".
Possibly the disgrace of sex before marriage.

JimiTime · 05-04-2011 10:56pm

alex73 wrote: »

There has been some debate on Marriage.

Marriage in the east Orthodox does not unite a man and a woman. Rather, it is the Church's recognition of a union that God has already begun to work in their lives. If you love a woman and know that you will always be with that woman and love her, then Sex comes naturally. The Formal marriage is just a blessing, because its not the Church that marries you... Its you and your wife that marry each other.

The whole sex questions becomes problematic when people have sex without limits with various partners, this the act has no real love or commitment, its just an egoistic expression.

Excellent! I've always held this view, and often say it to people. Always saw it as the true and Godly definition of marriage. Never knew it was the orthodox definition.

Donatello · 05-04-2011 11:03pm

I'm a young fella. I'm Catholic, and naturally, I believe sex is for marriage where it is for the creation of lots of tiny babies and the good of the spouses. The husband and wife can raise the tiny children and lead them to God.

You can read about what the Church teaches about sex here:
http://www.chastity.com/

Zombrex · 05-04-2011 11:52pm

Donatello wrote: »

http://www.chastity.com/

"No fear tactics" followed by pages and pages of fear tactics ... nice one :P

Any wonder teenagers simply ignore this stuff

Donatello · 06-04-2011 1:08am

Wicknight wrote: »

"No fear tactics" followed by pages and pages of fear tactics ... nice one :P

Any wonder teenagers simply ignore this stuff

I think the viewers can visit the website and make up their own mind.

Me - I haven't a notion of what you're talking about.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 2:49am

Donatello wrote: »

I think the viewers can visit the website and make up their own mind.

Me - I haven't a notion of what you're talking about.

Really? None at all? How about the Q&A section which has such wonderful questions like "I heard that condoms can cause cancer. Is that true?"? That's not a scare tactic?

philologos · 06-04-2011 8:04am

OP: You can't exclude the Bible when you are talking about Christianity. The Christian case is that people wait until marriage even if this is currently countercultural. Christianity involves living for God in this world, and by living for God in this world we will inevitably stand out from others.

I believe in waiting until marriage because it is logical.

1. No risk of unplanned pregnancy or in the worst case scenario being responsible for taking another life through abortion. Although contraceptives are a significant advance in human development and knowledge there is always a risk of failure.

2. Both partners are on the same page when it comes to sexual intimacy. Often in relationships where there is sexual activity before marriage people can get into situations whereby one partner sees sex as being a bigger and more significant thing than the other, and when the relationship splits one can be left feeling incredibly hurt as a result of this.

3. Also to consider in the event of pregnancy and birth outside of marriage - In the case of family there is also significant evidence to show that marriages with mothers and fathers are the best for raising children in even in comparison to co-habitation.

There is significant value in the commitment that people make to eachother in marriage even if many marriages end in divorce.

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

If you use the bible as the basis of you're entire faith and take it litterally you will probably have some real fundamentalist views.

Not all of the Bible is written in a style where one can take it literally. For example Jesus' parables make very little sense if one considers it as an agricultural handbook, but if one considers them in respect to the Kingdom of God and God's relationship with mankind as they were intended to be written it becomes a lot more clear.

I do however take God's revelation to mankind through the Bible as the basis of not just my faith, but my entire life. If this makes me a fundamentalist I'm quite happy to accept the title :pac:

boygeorge wrote:

Does our generation still think it is wrong to have sex until after we say those two little words "I do", or prehaps we think it is alright to do so after we say "I love you" ?

What does "I love you" mean?

Also, I don't think our generation does because our generation has in many respects rejected God. I'm saying this as someone in my twenties.

boygeorge wrote:

If it is love and not marriage, what about all those thousands of weddings that occur without love, is their consumation wrong?

Marriage and love as I would see it go hand in hand. One naturally results from another.

Zombrex · 06-04-2011 11:40am

Donatello wrote: »

I think the viewers can visit the website and make up their own mind.

That is the issue though, isn't it?

Teenagers and young adults go to sites like this, see it is full of nonsense, and then ignore any good points the authors might be trying to make hidden in between any of the fear mongering and crazy claims.

If you have to mislead to someone to try and get them to agree to act the way you think is best for them it doesn't matter how well intentioned or how good the way you want them to act is, people will just ignore you because you lied to them.

Donatello wrote: »

Me - I haven't a notion of what you're talking about.

Well that is rather here nor there. The vast majority of teenagers in this country, and most western countries, would see straight through the claims of this site, and then dismiss it.

Didn't Jesus/Paul say something about being honest in how one explains his message?

Donatello · 06-04-2011 4:10pm

Wicknight wrote: »

"No fear tactics" followed by pages and pages of fear tactics ... nice one :P

Any wonder teenagers simply ignore this stuff

What's the issue here? Seems quite balanced to me.

I heard that condoms can cause cancer. Is that true?
Here's the story released on May 28, 2004 by Reuters Health:

BERLIN (Reuters) - Most condoms contain a cancer-causing chemical and their manufacture should be subject to greater quality control, a German scientific research institute said Friday. The Chemical and Veterinary Investigation Institute in Stuttgart, Germany, said it found the carcinogen N-Nitrosamine present in 29 of 32 types of condoms it tested in simulated conditions. "N-Nitrosamine is one of the most carcinogenic substances," the study's authors said. "There is a pressing need for manufacturers to tackle this problem." The carcinogen is thought to be present in a substance used to improve condom elasticity. When the rubber material comes in contact with human bodily fluids, it can release traces of N-Nitrosamine, the study said. Local government officials said condom users should not stop using rubber contraceptives based on results of the study because N-Nitrosamine does not present an immediate health danger. But Germany's Federal Institute for Risk Assessment said that daily condom use exposed users to N-Nitrosamine levels up to three times higher than levels naturally present in food.

So, while it's accurate to say that many condoms contain a chemical that can lead to cancer, it would be an exaggeration to say that people who use condoms will get cancer from them. For example, my garden hose says that it contains materials that are "known to the state of California to cause cancer." But I'm still going to use it to wash off my basketball court. Now, the problem with condoms is more serious, because, as the study says, we're talking about "one of the most carcinogenic substances," and the manufacturers haven't done much about it.

But because our world is infatuated with contraception, you can be sure that everyone will down-play this study, and say, "it's no excuse for unprotected sex." Too bad they can't see this as further evidence that we're just not meant to neuter each other.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 4:16pm

The issue is that they're wrong.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11759152

Donatello · 06-04-2011 4:44pm

Improbable wrote: »

The issue is that they're wrong.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11759152

In these matters, you'll find a ping-pong series of studies, one for, one against. Usually the supportive studies are made by big companies with a vested interest in showing the 'safety' of their products. The only thing we know is, the condoms have a carcinogen in them. That is the only point the chasity.com article is making. And in that, they are right. Even your own study confirms this:

In summary, the risk for the induction of tumors from nitrosamines in condoms is very low.

Very low, but still there. Which is exactly the point the article made.

Zombrex · 06-04-2011 4:50pm

Improbable wrote: »

The issue is that they're wrong.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11759152

And that this was just one of many examples of nonsense on this site.

Others include stating that

masturbation is harmful to you,
that sex outside of marriage leads to depression,
that sex outside of marriage leads to violence,
homosexuality is caused by too much "mothering"
that "hooking up" is equivalent to prostitution,
that looking at girls in swimsuits causes the brain to dehumanize them
wearing a swimsuit causes the brains of those looking at you to dehumanize you

and so on and so on.

This is nonsense pseudo-science trying to be used to back up a theological position. That is always doomed to failure. People aren't stupid, even teenagers. Lying to them won't work.

Donatello · 06-04-2011 5:26pm

Wicknight wrote: »

And that this was just one of many examples of nonsense on this site.

Others include stating that
masturbation is harmful to you,

that sex outside of marriage leads to depression,

that sex outside of marriage leads to violence,

homosexuality is caused by too much "mothering"

that "hooking up" is equivalent to prostitution,

that looking at girls in swimsuits causes the brain to dehumanize them

wearing a swimsuit causes the brains of those looking at you to dehumanize you

and so on and so on.

This is nonsense pseudo-science trying to be used to back up a theological position. That is always doomed to failure. People aren't stupid, even teenagers. Lying to them won't work.

Again, I'd let the rest of the class make up their own mind. This is the page you found problematic, amongst others:
http://www.chastity.com/chastity-qa/pornography-etc/masturbation/masturbation-harmfu

It must be borne in mind, that much of the truth about sex is concealed through the darkened intellect and disordered appetites of participants in impurity. I know because I was once in that way of life myself. When your mind is darkened, you cannot see spiritual realities, and you cannot see what is good and pure. Indeed, they are repulsive to the sinner, a subject of mockery and scorn.

The fruits of impurity are rotten, and there is nothing in that article which can be reputed.

Zombrex · 06-04-2011 5:40pm

Donatello wrote: »

The fruits of impurity are rotten, and there is nothing in that article which can be reputed.

You can choose to believe that if you wish, but again that is some what irrelevant to the point at hand.

Given that it simply isn't true, if you sent non-believers who you are trying to convince of the correctness of your position to such sites the will simply identify this stuff as not being true and most likely dismiss any other points that are tried to be conveyed to them.

This is true of any theological argument that resorts to pseudo-science to try and justify itself.

Christians would probably get further with young people if they simply said

"Look, these terrible things aren't going to happen to you if you have premarital sex, as you can probably tell by them not happening to everyone around you. But God has given us a plan, for what ever reason, and we do not need Earthly reasons to follow God's plan. If you believe in the existence of God you should follow his plan because it is his plan, not because we try and drum up scientific reasons why you should"

The teenager may not choose to follow God's plan, they may not even believe in God. But they will probably listen to the end, instead of switching off as soon as the first stupid scare-mongering "fact" is rolled out.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 5:40pm

Donatello wrote: »

Again, I'd let the rest of the class make up their own mind. This is the page you found problematic, amongst others:
http://www.chastity.com/chastity-qa/pornography-etc/masturbation/masturbation-harmfu

It must be borne in mind, that much of the truth about sex is concealed through the darkened intellect and disordered appetites of participants in impurity. I know because I was once in that way of life myself. When your mind is darkened, you cannot see spiritual realities, and you cannot see what is good and pure. Indeed, they are repulsive to the sinner, a subject of mockery and scorn.

The fruits of impurity are rotten, and there is nothing in that article which can be reputed.

What you're doing here is quoting Wicknight, saying that he's wrong and then talking about something else entirely and not giving a reason for why he is wrong.

"It must be borne in mind, that much of the truth about sex is concealed through the lack of intellect and disordered appetites of participants in sexually restrictive religious practices. I know because it's glaringly obvious. You cannot see actual reality and you cannot see that sex is not something to be ashamed of."

Just as a statement like that has no influence on you, your statement has no influence on me. If you wish to counteract scientific arguments, you should use scientific arguments yourself instead of ineffectual and non-factual religious opinion.

Zombrex · 06-04-2011 5:44pm

Improbable wrote: »

What you're doing here is quoting Wicknight, saying that he's wrong and then talking about something else entirely and not giving a reason for why he is wrong.

"It must be borne in mind, that much of the truth about sex is concealed through the lack of intellect and disordered appetites of participants in sexually restrictive religious practices. I know because it's glaringly obvious. You cannot see actual reality and you cannot see that sex is not something to be ashamed of."

Just as a statement like that has no influence on you, your statement has no influence on me. If you wish to counteract scientific arguments, you should use scientific arguments yourself instead of ineffectual and non-factual religious opinion.

Don't you know Improbable, it is concealed when ever someone shows it doesn't happen. It isn't concealed when someone wants to assert it does happen.

That seems to be a catch all in religion, everything is hidden, mysterious and untestable as soon as someone tries to show the religious version isn't accurate. It isn't strangely hidden, mysterious and untestable when the religious person was claiming it in the first place.

I must remember this post in the A&A forum the next time a theist tells us that they don't do this

Improbable · 06-04-2011 5:47pm

What I would really like to know is whether there are any proper peer-reviewed scientific papers that are not based on religion which say that masturbation is harmful.

Donatello · 06-04-2011 8:20pm

Improbable wrote: »

What I would really like to know is whether there are any proper peer-reviewed scientific papers that are not based on religion which say that masturbation is harmful.

It is spiritually harmful. It is also damaging in so much as it distorts sex. It affects our bonding ability, so we won't be as attached to our spouse when we do marry if we slept around and masturbated a lot. It weakens the bond. Is that a problem? You decide.

There's so much abortion, pornography, broken marriages, rapes, sexual abuse, perversions, you don't have to wonder at the sexual revolution - the fruits are bad. Do you need science to tell you that? Just look at the newspapers.

Knight who says Meh · 06-04-2011 8:35pm

Donatello wrote: »

It is spiritually harmful. It is also damaging in so much as it distorts sex. It affects our bonding ability, so we won't be as attached to our spouse when we do marry if we slept around and masturbated a lot. It weakens the bond. Is that a problem? You decide.

There's so much abortion, pornography, broken marriages, rapes, sexual abuse, perversions, you don't have to wonder at the sexual revolution - the fruits are bad. Do you need science to tell you that? Just look at the newspapers.

You can say that again. My years of fiddling have also misaligned my Chakras, caused a yellowish hue to my aura and Im never beating it when the moon is in Uranus ever again

Improbable · 06-04-2011 9:15pm

Donatello wrote: »

It is spiritually harmful. It is also damaging in so much as it distorts sex. It affects our bonding ability, so we won't be as attached to our spouse when we do marry if we slept around and masturbated a lot. It weakens the bond. Is that a problem? You decide.

So someone who masturbates isn't as devoted to a spouse? Give me EVIDENCE. Give me evidence of any of that!

Donatello wrote: »

There's so much abortion, pornography, broken marriages, rapes, sexual abuse, perversions, you don't have to wonder at the sexual revolution - the fruits are bad. Do you need science to tell you that? Just look at the newspapers.

Show me the evidence that masturbation causes this.

philologos · 06-04-2011 9:23pm

Improbable wrote: »

Show me the evidence that masturbation causes this.

To cut in. Personally I don't feel that it is sinful in and of itself. Although, where sin does come into the equation is how we regard others.

Do we regard people as just sexual objects to be used, or do we regard people in their fullness?

Whether you are an atheist or a Christian, I think you can agree that in Western societies in general there is issues in how people regard each other in this respect.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 9:41pm

Jakkass wrote: »

To cut in. Personally I don't feel that it is sinful in and of itself. Although, where sin does come into the equation is how we regard others.

Do we regard people as just sexual objects to be used, or do we regard people in their fullness?

Whether you are an atheist or a Christian, I think you can agree that in Western societies in general there is issues in how people regard each other in this respect.

I still fail to see what that has to do with masturbation.

philologos · 06-04-2011 9:44pm

Could one really say that one can masturbate without lusting after someone? If not, that is problematic as I would see it. It has much more to do with the attitudes that we have towards people to me.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 9:46pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Could one really say that one can masturbate without lusting after someone? If not, that is problematic as I would see it. It has much more to do with the attitudes that we have towards people to me.

So what's the difference between masturbating while thinking about someone and having sex with that person?

Donatello · 06-04-2011 9:56pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Could one really say that one can masturbate without lusting after someone? If not, that is problematic as I would see it. It has much more to do with the attitudes that we have towards people to me.

Do you think masturbation gives glory to the Triune God? Bearing in mind our vocation is to love, do you think masturbation is a loving act? I'm curious as to your reasoning.

Donatello · 06-04-2011 10:00pm

Improbable wrote: »

So someone who masturbates isn't as devoted to a spouse? Give me EVIDENCE. Give me evidence of any of that!

Show me the evidence that masturbation causes this.

Are spouses devoted? Look at the divorce rates. Anyway, you can't hone in on one thing (masturbation) and then seek to show how it is to blame for all the woes of humanity. Such as simplistic approach is unrealistic. I would propose that the lack of holy chastity is the reason for so much abortion, rape, and broken marriages, disordered sexual practises etc...

Masturbation and porn are intimately linked. Where one is, the other is likely to be found also.

Check the appropriate link in my signature if you want to explore this issue further.

ShowMeTheCash · 06-04-2011 10:04pm

Just going to add to this.
I can understand people are set in their ways. They have their own values that they feel reflect their own religious views. But what I find dangerous and manipulative is when they try and use nonsence to back up their theorys or claims.
People that buy into these idiotic ideas are people who want to buy into them.
Reality is this, risk of cancer from a condom no greater than the risk of cancer from drinking from a pastic bottle.
Reality, HIV is a very serious and incurable disease which is on the rise.

Is this a scare tactic? YES
Is there an agenda? YES

By no means do I think people should take sex lightly, but churning this brainwash nonsense will only lead to teenage pregnacy and rise to STI's it will not stop people having sex, married or not!

philologos · 06-04-2011 10:06pm

Improbable wrote: »

So what's the difference between masturbating while thinking about someone and having sex with that person?

There isn't as I would see it, or as the Christian faith presents it.

The understanding that many people have in the West of people effectively as sexual objects to be used is genuinely damaging. It diminishes the dignity and respect that people ought to have for eachother in society.

People aren't sexual objects and they aren't to be treated as such. Personally, I'm a bit of a hopeless romantic, but I think that there is more to human relationships than sexuality.

The stance that the Christian faith takes on this issue, is obviously very difficult for anyone who wishes to follow it, but to be honest with you it is beautiful at the same time that Christianity can break down these chains and allow us to see the world differently and as it was originally intended to be.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 10:06pm

Donatello wrote: »

Are spouses devoted? Look at the divorce rates. Anyway, you can't hone in on one thing (masturbation) and then seek to show how it is to blaim for all the woes of humanity. Such as simplistic approach is unrealistic. I would propose that the lack of holy chastity is the reason for so much abortion, rape, and broken marriages, disordered sexual practises etc...

Masturbation and porn are intimately linked. Where one is, the other is likely to be found also.

Check the appropriate link in my signature if you want to explore this issue further.

Yes, there are a lot of spouses who are devoted. I never said that masturbation caused those things. You did.

Improbable wrote: »

What I would really like to know is whether there are any proper peer-reviewed scientific papers that are not based on religion which say that masturbation is harmful.

Donatello wrote: »

It is spiritually harmful. It is also damaging in so much as it distorts sex. It affects our bonding ability, so we won't be as attached to our spouse when we do marry if we slept around and masturbated a lot. It weakens the bond. Is that a problem? You decide.

And what is the evidence that you show for the "lack of holy chastity" being the reason for abortions rapes etc?

ShowMeTheCash · 06-04-2011 10:10pm

Donatello wrote: »

Are spouses devoted? Look at the divorce rates. Anyway, you can't hone in on one thing (masturbation) and then seek to show how it is to blame for all the woes of humanity. Such as simplistic approach is unrealistic. I would propose that the lack of holy chastity is the reason for so much abortion, rape, and broken marriages, disordered sexual practises etc...

Masturbation and porn are intimately linked. Where one is, the other is likely to be found also.

Check the appropriate link in my signature if you want to explore this issue further.

I think that you're idea that the lack of holy chastity is a reason for rape astonishing. I mean really astonishing!!

I pose the lack of safe sex has a much greater impact on abortion rates than anything you have mentioned!!

Seth Brundle · 06-04-2011 10:17pm

Donatello wrote: »

Do you think masturbation gives glory to the Triune God? Bearing in mind our vocation is to love, do you think masturbation is a loving act? I'm curious as to your reasoning.

So based on your logic, a loving married couple cannot indulge in mutual masturbation?

Improbable · 06-04-2011 10:22pm

Jakkass wrote: »

There isn't as I would see it, or as the Christian faith presents it.

The understanding that many people have in the West of people effectively as sexual objects to be used is genuinely damaging. It diminishes the dignity and respect that people ought to have for eachother in society.

People aren't sexual objects and they aren't to be treated as such. Personally, I'm a bit of a hopeless romantic, but I think that there is more to human relationships than sexuality.

The stance that the Christian faith takes on this issue, is obviously very difficult for anyone who wishes to follow it, but to be honest with you it is beautiful at the same time that Christianity can break down these chains and allow us to see the world differently and as it was originally intended to be.

So when you have sex (if you ever have), physical attraction is never something that's on your mind?

Donatello · 06-04-2011 10:29pm

Improbable wrote: »

Yes, there are a lot of spouses who are devoted. I never said that masturbation caused those things. You did.

And what is the evidence that you show for the "lack of holy chastity" being the reason for abortions rapes etc?

Well, abortion, rape etc... are sin... a lack of virtue ergo lack of virtue (holy chastity) = increase in sin.

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I think that you're idea that the lack of holy chastity is a reason for rape astonishing. I mean really astonishing!!

I pose the lack of safe sex has a much greater impact on abortion rates than anything you have mentioned!!

Studies show that as contraception availability increases, so too does the abortion rate. You can read a commentary on that here. The first two comments below that article are worth reading as they support my thesis.

philologos · 06-04-2011 10:33pm

Improbable wrote: »

So when you have sex (if you ever have), physical attraction is never something that's on your mind?

You're jumping to conclusions. Physical attraction is a part of every romantic relationship. However, it isn't solely because of the physical attraction that you are in this relationship. It is because the very being of the person is attractive, right down to the personality.

This is a different way of understanding people for who they really are, and indeed in aiming to love people for who they really are. Aiming to form a bond before one expresses it sexually is important.

I don't agree with the "test drive" analogy that people often bring to this discussion because I don't think one should be in a relationship solely for the quality of someone sexually.

opinion guy · 06-04-2011 10:40pm

I'm going to turn this one on its head. Sex before marriage should be a requirement, not a taboo. Might get less broken marriages/homes that way.

Improbable · 06-04-2011 10:41pm

Jakkass wrote: »

You're jumping to conclusions. Physical attraction is a part of every romantic relationship. However, it isn't solely because of the physical attraction that you are in this relationship. It is because the very being of the person is attractive, right down to the personality.

I'm not. I asked you what the difference was between masturbating while thinking about someone and having sex with that person. You said that there wasn't one. So presumably, if masturbating while thinking about someone is wrong, then having sex with that person while thinking about them is wrong.

Jakkass wrote: »

This is a different way of understanding people for who they really are, and indeed in aiming to love people for who they really are. Aiming to form a bond before one expresses it sexually is important.

To be honest, if 2 consenting adults want to have a purely physical relationship, then that's none of my business. And I don't really see why other people think that it's any of their business.

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't agree with the "test drive" analogy that people often bring to this discussion because I don't think one should be in a relationship solely for the quality of someone sexually.

The test drive analogy as you put it has no bearing on whether the relationship is based solely on sex. It merely acknowledges that sex is important. Just in the same way that I would prefer to get to know someone to see if we are mentally and emotionally compatible, I would like to get to know them sexually to see if we are sexually compatible.

philologos · 06-04-2011 11:07pm

Improbable wrote: »

I'm not. I asked you what the difference was between masturbating while thinking about someone and having sex with that person. You said that there wasn't one. So presumably, if masturbating while thinking about someone is wrong, then having sex with that person while thinking about them is wrong.

Lust as I would see it would be desiring inappropriately after a person. Desiring them as mere sexual objects for example. However, it is important to remember that what people treat as mere sexual objects are people worthy of dignity and respect even if some don't realise it.

In a loving marriage where sexual intimacy is present, it is a multi-faceted romantic relationship in which sexual expression is a single component rather than the sum total.

I think it is in how we understand people that we have a problem with masturbation.

Improbable wrote: »

To be honest, if 2 consenting adults want to have a purely physical relationship, then that's none of my business. And I don't really see why other people think that it's any of their business.

Well, it is up to people to decide how to live their lives, but the question of the thread is asking what do we as Christians think about sexual expression outside of a marriage bond. I think there are huge problems with how we see sexuality in the Western world in the 21st century. Problems which get right to the core of how much we respect human dignity, or the true nature of love. It is my view that much opinion is pretty harmful in respect to this. Our views of people influence our interaction with them.

Improbable wrote: »

The test drive analogy as you put it has no bearing on whether the relationship is based solely on sex. It merely acknowledges that sex is important. Just in the same way that I would prefer to get to know someone to see if we are mentally and emotionally compatible, I would like to get to know them sexually to see if we are sexually compatible.

Test drive analogy puts the idea that the sexual component of the relationship should be more important than the presence of love in a relationship in and of itself. Over the past few years on this forum I've seen some posters who have expressed this. For me there has to be a certain bound of trust involved before anything like that can be considered. Marriage is the bound of trust that Christians believe God gives us. Hence two people become one spiritually, and it is at this point when two can become one physically also.

Zombrex · 06-04-2011 11:12pm

Improbable wrote: »

The test drive analogy as you put it has no bearing on whether the relationship is based solely on sex. It merely acknowledges that sex is important.

Again this is the issue here. The religion, through groups like chastity.com and even through posters here, put forward an alternative to Christian relationships that has little bearing on the real world. It is simply not what the alternative is, and as such it is like hearing from a virgin priest how bad sex outside marriage is.

They can do that all they like, if it makes them happy go for it. But they equally shouldn't be surprised when people go "No, actually that is nonsense" and simply ignore it.

Nor is it particular constructive to say "Oh well that is just sinful materialistic non-Christian society". No actually it isn't, it is just the real world, where not everything is the extreme cases that are rolled out to show what happens when you don't follow the rules.

You picked a classic example here, the idea that lust is disrespectful. That maybe what the Bible says should happen, but it doesn't bare out in reality, and teenagers and young adults realize this.

For example I would have zero problem with the idea of some masturbating to my image or while thinking of me (if overweight nerds gets them off of course :pac:). Most people wouldn't. So when Christianity says that is disrespectful most people go "Er, no it isn't". When Christians say it leads to objectification most people say no it doesn't. When Christians say it leads to the break down of relationships most people say no it doesn't.

Put simply Christianity is doing a pretty poor job at convincing people that these notions and rules have any baring on reality. It is a sort of social Creationism, values and notions that are outdated and irrelevant to what actually happens in real relationships.

Christians can cling to them all the like, but the original point was about whether you are going to convince anyone else who hasn't already made up their mind that these things are true.

Seth Brundle · 06-04-2011 11:18pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Lust as I would see it would be desiring inappropriately after a person. Desiring them as mere sexual objects for example.

As you see it? Is your view more right that mine or anyone elses?
Anyhow, to use a more meaningful definition, the oxford dictionary describes it as having a "strong sexual desire". So therefore I lust after my wife. And you think this is inappropriate? Should I not lust after my wife?

Jakkass wrote: »

I think it is in how we understand people that we have a problem with masturbation.

Are you including everyone in this "we" when you say that "we have a problem with masturbation"? I certainly don't have a problem with it.

Jakkass wrote: »

Well, it is up to people to decide how to live their lives, but the question of the thread is asking what do we as Christians think about sexual expression outside of a marriage bond. I think there are huge problems with how we see sexuality in the Western world in the 21st century. Problems which get right to the core of how much we respect human dignity, or the true nature of love. It is my view that much opinion is pretty harmful in respect to this. Our views of people influence our interaction with them.

I'm a Christian. I also believe that people are free to express their sexual feelings as long as it is consenting. I don't follow the claptrap spouted by the likes of the sexually obsessed "do as I say and not as I do" catholic church.

Donatello · 06-04-2011 11:43pm

opinion guy wrote: »

I'm going to turn this one on its head. Sex before marriage should be a requirement, not a taboo. Might get less broken marriages/homes that way.

Again the facts would not support that. Co-habitation - trial marriages - are not a good basis for lasting marriages.

kbannon wrote: »

As you see it? Is your view more right that mine or anyone elses?
Anyhow, to use a more meaningful definition, the oxford dictionary describes it as having a "strong sexual desire". So therefore I lust after my wife. And you think this is inappropriate? Should I not lust after my wife?
I'm a Christian. I also believe that people are free to express their sexual feelings as long as it is consenting. I don't follow the claptrap spouted by the likes of the sexually obsessed "do as I say and not as I do" catholic church.

You make a good point in your last sentence.

The fact of the matter in all this is this: we can argue all we want, but it won't make too much difference. What would make a difference to the modern man is the witness of the Christians. Check this out, from the document EVANGELII NUNTIANDI of Pope Paul VI:

41. Without repeating everything that we have already mentioned, it is appropriate first of all to emphasize the following point: for the Church, the first means of evangelization is the witness of an authentically Christian life, given over to God in a communion that nothing should destroy and at the same time given to one's neighbor with limitless zeal. As we said recently to a group of lay people, "Modern man listens more willingly to witnesses than to teachers, and if he does listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses."[67] St. Peter expressed this well when he held up the example of a reverent and chaste life that wins over even without a word those who refuse to obey the word.[68] It is therefore primarily by her conduct and by her life that the Church will evangelize the world, in other words, by her living witness of fidelity to the Lord Jesus- the witness of poverty and detachment, of freedom in the face of the powers of this world, in short, the witness of sanctity.

42. Secondly, it is not superfluous to emphasize the importance and necessity of preaching. "And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?... So faith comes from what is heard and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ."[69]

We can talk about morality and purity all we like, but the only way to convert the world is to show them the alternative: an authentic Christian witness of a life lived joyfully. Only then will the world see that, Yes, there is an alternative to this way we have been living. From what I call a living death (a life of despair interrupted, made somewhat bearable by timely interludes of pleasure - whatever pleasure can be had) - the life of those who are not in Christ - we can discover true life, the only life there is - life in Christ.

As St. Escriva says: “When you decide firmly to lead a clean life, chastity will not be a burden on you: it will be a crown of triumph.”

Seeing that crown, the world might be drawn to find out more, to enquire as to what it is that makes the Christians joyful, even in the face of adversity and persecution.

Sex before marriage?

Comments