Sex before marriage?

[Metal Rabbit]

It's like a step ladder. Some people think of it merely as a ladder, while others see the subtle differences and call it a stepladder. You have to open your mind to the possibilities.

I have failed miserably.

[Rehab]

I assumed it was on this page, ha.

Side note- killed a thread? Greater D.C. area for life

[CGV]

Ok, to end Death's and MR's little spat... Death is actually right. If the penis goes in somewhere it's sex. Oral, vaginal or anal. Nothing else is considered "sex"

And believe me, I know. I AM in a sex class after all

[Dat Nick]

A little more serious point, to get back on topic.

Really, isn't it about time we looked at sex for what it is? Sex is a totally harmless act between two consenting adults. Now, you can go into rape all you want, but what service provided to us nowadays CAN'T be used for evil in some form? You can go to McDonalds and eat yourself to death. You can go to a hardware store and use a power drill to kill somebody. You can hold a guy's head in a water fountain in a park or a hospital or a pool or something and drown him. You can rent Mature movies or video games to intentionally corrupt your 8 year old kid's mind. It's the same story with Sex. Some evil stems from it. But some evil stems from EVERYTHING.

Now, two 18 year old kids, 17 or 16, that is the legal age in some places [it's 13 in Japan, but let's not get into that] oh fuck it, whatever country they're in, they're at the legal age of consent. They aren't married, they're both on birth control, and they want to have sex. Why shouldn't they? Will the moon explode? Will Charles Bronson turn over and start crying in his grave? Will Iran drop a nuke on them? Well, if Iran drops a nuke on two horny teenagers currently getting it on, I assure you the whole thing is fucking coincidental, okay? They would have been nuked even if they WEREN'T fucking at the time! They could just be sitting downstairs, watching old repeats of the 60s Batman show with Adam West, and BOOM! Their house is still going to get fucking nuked unless for some reason, God decided to spare them and teleport them away to some safe place faaaar away from the nuke JUST before it hit them. Whether these two people screwing are wearing a wedding ring or not, that nuke is going down, down, down, on their house. Jesus is not going to come out of their wedding rings, pick up the nuke, throw it back at Iran, and say "See kids? This is why you only have sex if you're married!", okay? A condom will offer you more protection than a wedding ring in this scenario. The way I see it, this does them nothing but good, sex is basically two adults enjoying each other and it can do nothing but good for a relationship. There's affairs, but recall the other bit of the argument, said bit being evil stems from all sources: If you're going to protest one, protest all of them. Go out there RIGHT now and demand that every single McDonalds in the world gets closed.

Now, if they're NOT on birth control, meaning dad ran out of condoms or doesn't use them, then yeah, that's different, unless they want one and have discussed it with their parents and who the fuck are we to judge their personal lives, but if Mary's on the pill and John's wearing a condom, and they know full well no child will spawn from it since they've taken all the necessary precautions, what horrible sin have these people committed? And when I say sin, I don't mean that as in biblical sins of the seven things god does NOT want you to do, I mean sin in a more literal sense, as a horrible evil thing. Now, what have these people done wrong? Who is being hurt if John inserts his penis into Mary's vagina, and neither one is wearing a wedding ring? Nobody! Nobody at all. In fact, it does a LOT more good than harm, because it gives peeping tom from across the street something to watch. Hell, it doesn't even change anything if it's Harry slamming his dick into John's ass, or if Wendy is eating out Mary's cunt, but that's another fucking topic, isn't it?

And, to raise a similar question, let's suppose we have two people who aren't in any sort of loving relationship, and have no intention to be, having sex. Are they doing something wrong? If they're not married, certainly not, and if they go out and have sex with other people, both of them full aware they're having sex with at least one other person, and then go and have some more sex, so what? Hell, even if it's a one night stand and they never see each other again, it's still not violating anything morally wrong. If they're married and their spouses have a problem with it, well, yes. But what if they are married and their spouses DON'T have a problem with it? Is this technically adultery? Yes. But morally, people. Morally. Not biblically. Because Susan catching Jack in bed with Nancy and joining in and Susan catching Jack in bed with Nancy and beating the royal shit out of him are two totally different fucking things, okay? Just so you know what the hell I'm talking about, let's call the scenario where Susan joins in "Consensual adulterers" and the scenario where Susan beats the shit out of Jack for having sex with Nancy "Violative adulterers", all puns intended. So now, let's talk about the violative acts these consensual adulterers consent to.

And please for the love of god forget what they told you at church, when Father Jackson and the penguins told you these people don't exist. They fucking exist no matter how much you, your parents, Father Jackson, the penguins, and the alter boy everybody suspects is gay because they caught him in the confession booth blowing the Father wants them not to, okay? And they're not bad people. They haven't done anything morally wrong by doing what they do. The sea didn't turn green, the church didn't burn down, and every single remaining copy of The Beatles's White Album did not simultaneously explode all at once when they did what they did. They just really like sex. They like their cocks getting sucked and their pussies getting licked and their penises in vaginas and their vaginas having penises in them and dicks in their asses, et cetera et cetera. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and if there is, then I refuse to be right, and I will battle right to the very end.

And since these people haven't done anything wrong, why is John banging Mary at her dad's house before the reception wrong? We've already discussed how wedding rings don't prevent the flying spaghetti monster from scooping up and eating couples that aren't married or anything like that, so I won't get too into that big fucking mess again, but truly, in both scenarios, between the consensual adulterers and the legal age teenagers screwing in dad's car, think about that. Think if they've actually committed a crime. And I know, you may ask, why did I even get into the consensual adulterers if I had already provided a solid case as to why sex before marriage isn't a problem? Why did I do that? Well, because both of these issues stem from the same, ancient and almighty hailed and horribly fucked up assumption, don't they? That sex is evil unless the two people doing it are married.

And to expand on what I began with, isn't it really time we all grew up about sex? There's no reason we should be disgusted by sex scenes in movies: If it's okay to do in your mother's silver Sorento, it's okay to do on the silver screen, okay? And that's basically how we sum the whole thing up: Sex isn't this evil demon that's going to rape the children, like some people like to think it is, sex is this relaxing activity adults do when the TV breaks and there's nothing better to do. And that's okay, and there's nothing wrong with that, and it's about time we started being more casual about it.

So everybody, just chill the fuck out and get laid.

EDIT: Oh yeah.

And I don't care if you want to wait until you're married, you only want to do it with one person, or you don't want to do it at all. That's none of my fuckin business. But please, don't give me all this crap about how sex is evil and how anybody who commits it before marriage is rotten and needs to fry.

Edited March 15, 2009 by Vyland

[Paper Jam]

Rajaion and Ena never got married, and it's implied that Ashnard and Almedha didn't either, so it's not that much of a surprise to me that most Fire Emblem fans aren't put off by the idea of premarital sex.

Neither am I, to be honest. On the other hand, I am not ready to deal with the consequences of getting a woman pregnant, I refuse to take that risk until I am, and once she and I agree that we want the have a kid, we might as well consider ourselves married until the kid has grown up (whether we really are married or not).

[deleted35362]

Apparently the administrator gives you get a warn when

you simply answer the question at hand. How nice.

I don't believe in sex before marriage, since it was intended

to be for giving birth to a child, and married couples work

together to take care of hm/her.

[eclipse]

*reads through the entire topic*

Disclaimer: I worked in a law office that dealt with paternity cases.

I'm much against premarital sex. Part of it is spiritual, the rest deals with the way paternity cases are handled.

Some women use sex as a last-ditch effort to keep their man with them ("If I'm pregnant with his child, he'll marry me!") If she's successful (and refuses an abortion), and the man decides he'll leave her anyway, he's STILL financially responsible for the child. That means monthly child support checks, which may include having his wages garnished. If he's interested in raising the child, there's issues such as visitation that need to be ironed out. All of this is similar to. . .

. . .a divorce case.

The difference is that if the woman decides to divorce her husband (even while pregnant), she'll probably walk away with more money than she came into the relationship with (assuming he's worth more than her financially, which is the majority of the time).

There's also the issue of cuckolding (woman gets pregnant off of one man and tries to convince another man that it's his kid). While that's easily disproved by a paternity test, such tests aren't given away for free.

Did I mention that most lawyers are going for over $300/hr.?

tl;dr version: The potential consequences outweigh the benefits of sex before marriage in my opinion. If I'm having sex, it's WITHIN marriage, so if my husband walks out on me, I'll probably wind up richer.