Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Does losing your virginity before marriage really matter?

  • 26-07-2011 09:10AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭karaokeman


    Like a growing number of people I believe in sex before marriage. My friend thinks the reason the Catholic church in general disagrees with it is because you won't get STD's by only having one sexual partner.

    Thing about it is, when couples get married there is no guarantee it will work out and thus they may find someone else and have sex with them after their first marriage.

    It should also be noted that sometimes at a certain point in a relationship, even before marriage a couple would end up having sex as if they waited till marriage they would be lacking in experience.

    So whats your view, is having sex before marriage/with multiple partners really a big deal?

    Does it matter? 130 votes

    Yes, you should lose your virginity to "the one"
    0% 0 votes
    No, if you wait till marriage you will lack experience
    8% 11 votes
    Yes you could get an STD
    20% 27 votes
    No who wants to only have had sex with one person?
    2% 3 votes
    This is a pointless thread
    68% 89 votes


«13

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,474 ✭✭✭Crazy Horse 6


    No. Try before you buy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Is it a big deal? Not necessarily.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 664 ✭✭✭craggles


    No.


  • Posts: 81,308 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Liam Narrow Sorrow


    Sex "before" marriage assumes that everyone can/will/wants to get married.

    Might as well pick some other arbitrary cutoff point


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,861 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Sex feels good. Why wait until you're married?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    karaokeman wrote: »
    Like a growing number of people I believe in sex before marriage.
    A "growing" number of people? 99% of people under 40 at this stage have no problem with pre-marital sex. Most people would consider it essential to ensure sexual compatibility before you pledge yourself for life to someone.
    My friend thinks the reason the Catholic church in general disagrees with it is because you won't get STD's by only having one sexual partner.
    The catholic church disagrees with it because the catholic church believes that sex is for procreation only, and any enjoyment of the act is wicked and sinful.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 44,079 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    Burn in hell, sinners. Burn in a hot sexy hell.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭Johnny Bitte


    No, in fact I'd highly recommend it. Like, a lot!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,264 ✭✭✭✭jester77


    Would you purchase a car without giving it a test drive?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 418 ✭✭Chris Hansen


    Hi I'm Chris Hansen, why dont you take a seat over there?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭2 stroke


    Yes. It's absolutely essential.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,209 ✭✭✭CardBordWindow


    Virginity and respect for the Catholic Church have a lot in common.

    You're bound to lose them at some stage in your life.
    People make a big deal about them.
    Having them reduces the amount of fun in your life.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    seamus wrote: »
    The catholic church disagrees with it because the catholic church believes that sex is for procreation only, and any enjoyment of the act is wicked and sinful.

    Not quite, but a common mistake.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,938 ✭✭✭mackg


    Yes, you should lose your virginity to "the one"

    How many people are actually going to meet Keanu reeves?

    Also its hardly fair on straight men and lesbians is it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,495 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    people don't get married at 14 anymore. at the tiem the rule came in the average age was somethign like that. so yes it applied back then. (nto many young ones were gettign the freak on)

    but now a days its a ridicolous thing to ask people.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭MitchKoobski


    Are you offering?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,651 ✭✭✭✭El Weirdo


    mackg wrote: »
    Also its hardly fair on straight men and lesbians is it.
    You'd better get on to the Catholic Church as I'm sure they'd want to correct this oversight.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,919 ✭✭✭✭Gummy Panda


    Do whatever you wanna do, OP?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    El Weirdo wrote: »
    You'd better get on to the Catholic Church as I'm sure they'd want to correct this oversight.
    the catholic church keeps on telling me to use the rythm method,but where can i find a ceili band at four in the morning ?


  • Moderators Posts: 52,294 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    prinz wrote: »
    Not quite, but a common mistake.

    really? so they no longer consider masturbation, contraception or homosexual sex a grave sin?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 81,308 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Liam Narrow Sorrow


    koth wrote: »
    really? so they no longer consider masturbation, contraception or homosexual sex a grave sin?

    I think it was the "enjoyment of the act is sinful" part he was correcting, I don't think they mind that as long as you're doing it for procreation


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    koth wrote: »
    really? so they no longer consider masturbation, contraception or homosexual sex a grave sin?

    That's not what I said.


  • Moderators Posts: 52,294 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    prinz wrote: »
    That's not what I said.

    apologies, prinz. bluewolf cleared up my misunderstanding.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    bluewolf wrote: »
    I think it was the "enjoyment of the act is sinful" part he was correcting, I don't think they mind that as long as you're doing it for procreation

    Also not quite true. If you go to the Catechism of the RCC you will find mentioned that the role of sex in a marriage is twofold, one being procreation, one being for the "good of the spouses themselves", you will also find it said that sexuality between the spouses is a source of "joy and pleasure" and that expressing this sexuality is not something which is "simply biological".

    Also contraception based on the bodies own natural cycle is not against the Catechism and can actually be something positive :eek:

    "Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom"

    If they believed sex was for procreation only shouldn't they be saying that you should avoid sex during the infertile periods and restrict it to the fertile?

    So all in all to say that the Catholic Church believes that "sex is for procreation only, and any enjoyment of the act is wicked and sinful." is nonsense.

    Anyway enough said. It's not really going to change anyone's opinion on here :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,938 ✭✭✭mackg


    El Weirdo wrote: »
    You'd better get on to the Catholic Church as I'm sure they'd want to correct this oversight.

    To the Vatican!!!
    *mounts steed*


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,144 ✭✭✭Scanlas The 2nd


    IMO marriage and religion was invented at least partially as a means for men to control women sexually and to ensure that that their children were biologically theirs. This is why women were made to feel guilty for enjoying sex. They had to be controlled, they couldn't be free to have sex with whoever they wanted. Honeymoon apparently refers to the first month after marriage were the man takes a woman away for a full cycle of the moon which is a full menstrual cycle and has lots of sex with her. The point of this is to get her pregnant while "knowing" the baby must be his.

    This all came into to play IMO as a result of the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago. Men learned about the concept of property as they became settled on their piece of land and began to regard women as property. Women IMO are naturally promiscuous especially in estrus when they are ovulating and I believe men back then realised this so these new farmers had to think of a way to ensure that they could work hard and earn a woman without her going off and sleeping with someone else when she was in estrus. So they designed forms of religions with elements in it designed to control women's sexuality. Just look at some of the commandments. Thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shall not covet thy neighbours wife.

    So if you are against sex before marriage IMO you have been fooled by the manipulative early agriculturalists.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    mackg wrote: »
    To the Vatican!!!
    *mounts steed*

    I hope you married that steed before you mounted it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,439 ✭✭✭Kevin Duffy


    Lots of Catholic priests didn't get married before they lost their virginity, why should I?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    Burn in hell, sinners. Burn in a hot sexy hell.

    If this is hell? Then bring it on!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,916 ✭✭✭✭orourkeda


    If this is hell? Then bring it on!

    why does she still have her clothes on?


Advertisement
Advertisement