Sex, Virginity and Marriage

[Keithstone23]

A few days ago I was talking to a friend, and we came up with the three strongest arguments we could think of for allowing premarital sex. The argument goes as follows:

In today's society, the meaning of marriage is completely different than it was many years ago. According to statistics, the average age most people get married today is 27 years old. (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005061.html) Back in Biblical times the average age was 14. (http://www.gospelgazette.com/gazette/20 ... page20.htm) I'm not going to deny the fact that a major contributing factor of premarital sex is the media, but I am going to lay the blame on hormones. These hormones which fuel our sexual desires were never meant to be kept pent up until the age of 28, but were supposed to be released during the teenage years when most of the population would have been married. God never intended for the majority of the population to remain abstinent through the peak of their hormones, as that would be defying nature, the way God never intended it to happen.

And what really is marriage? Does love truly need a priest or pastor to combine the two souls for all of eternity and deem them as married or can it be done in private and seen by God's eyes? I'm, going to argue that it can be done solely in God's eyes, because he is the judge and the modern institution of marriage doesn't validate the intertwining of souls, that is for God to decide. I derived this argument, because in the creation story in Genesis 2:20-25, the High Priest (God) was the only one around to validate Adam and Eve's companionship/marriage. "But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.� 24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. Adam and his wife were both naked" You see, it doesn't take a clergy member to confirm a marriage. It only takes God. God was the only priest (being the High Priest) around and they became husband and wife as seen by the word choice in the final sentence of the Bible excerpt, and there was no service or exchange of vows.

The increasingly high rate of divorce in today's society is another sign that marriage is no longer a time-honored commitment. The most famous part of wedding vows is, "for better or worse," and it seems that society today disrespects the meaning those four words contain by divorcing without persevering through hardship. To make matters worse, people become married today for the most selfish and trivial of reasons. An example of a frivolous reason for marriage would be that a couple achieves better tax breaks than a single person. Finally another reason for marriage is the need for sex. Christians abstain from the "magical experience" of sexual intercourse, which can in turn make them have a heightened desire sex, to the point of marrying just to experience sex. Now that I have presented a few basic arguments (I can easily list many, many more reasons) is it beginning to make sense why marriage today is not what God intended? God intended marriage to be for one reason alone: love. It was never meant for the monetary gain or selfish desires that corrupt the institution today. I believe that the term premarital sex should apply only to people who have sex without love for each other. If a couple has a passionate love for each other and combine themselves in the eyes of the Lord they should be considered married, regardless if they have a legal document. There should be no papers, no transaction of money, no crowd, and no clergy that deems someone as married, because the High Priest is the only one who can truly validate a marriage.

Thank you very much for your time. I would love to hear a response as it is important to understand both sides of the argument.

[Darias]

There are pros and cons to being a virgin before marriage or not.

I'm 23, and I'm still a virgin. This isn't just due to a lack of opportunities but a conscious choice on my part. First, I'd like to save myself for someone I love -- not just any old hag. Second, I want to minimize my risk of catching stds from casual sex -- condoms aren't fool-proof all the time. Third, I have no desire for casual-loveless sex, as the very idea feels wrong and utterly unsatisfying. 4th, even if everything is fun and safe, I don't want to create an emotional bond with someone via sexual intercourse who I don't wish to marry; that causes all sorts of issues and heartbreak.

Now the downside to all of this will come in the form of my utter lack of experience and a possible effect on my performance. A complete lack of knowing what I like and how to please someone else.

This is serious; it's enough to have a huge impact on a marriage.

I do want to be married one day and I want that marriage to last. This is why I have been re-thinking the whole virginity thing.

If I wait until after marriage to find out that I'm sexually incompatible with my lover, or that she sees sex as painful, a chore, and completely unnecessary -- rather than the ultimate form of intimate love, then my marriage will be doomed.

Sex is not about lust and release, not for me at least. It's about intense emotional intimacy --- showing a part of yourself to someone that no one else will ever see. Having my future wife reject me and turn down sex because of her feelings about it would feel like one of the worst forms of hate, at least for me. If she thought it was too much work, of if it was dirty, sinful, or whatever -- that would be extremely upsetting to me, for the reasons I made above.

To avoid that situation, I would have to have conversations about sex, even pre-martital sex with at least my future fiance if not a long term girl friend that I trusted.

I would do that to avoid a miserable marriage and subsequent divorce -- in which half my earnings would go to my partner.

Now there is a down side to the pre-marital sex as well. I would be giving up my virginity knowing they could freely have the option to move on if they felt we were sexually incompatible. That's the most depressing thing. To have sex with someone you love and find out that she hates sex or hates the way I act during sex, or cant be pleased because of some physical aspect of me that isn't good enough. There's no way I'd marry someone like that.

Then I'd be back at square one and have to give my heart to someone else; except then I wouldn't be a virgin anymore and it wouldn't be as special as before -- at least in my mind.

But yes the whole sex thing is very important to me. Hugging and romantic dinners can only take me so far, and would be utterly unsatisfying (loveless) by themselves. There are a lot of women who don't like sex and could live without it forever, and that's a nightmare scenario I hope to avoid -- and I certainly wouldn't want to find out after I had made vows to live with them forever. Then I'd be stuck with a woman that loved my charm and my money and my personality but not ME.

[thepandemicson]

The pastor was doing what was appropriate according to scripture. Jesus tells us that Moses allowed divorce but that in the beginning it was not so. In other words he was saying that divorce was not by God's approval, only that Moses allowed it. Jesus further said that if two people should choose to separate it should be that they either reconcile or remain separated. Still married but separated. And neither party should marry another person lest both be seen as adulterers. That is to say that if a man or woman is separated and they marry someone else they and the person that they marry are committing adultery. A pastor should not oversee a union that would be an adulterous one.

As far as not needing a group or symbol or ritual to acknowledge your union, you are right to a degree. Where you fall short is in abiding with the law of the land. Jesus said we must abide by the laws of the land. If the law of the land says that we need to register our marriage, our union, than we need to do that in order to be following Gods Word. Many say they don't need to formalize their union for anyone, that God knows the truth. But He also sees the truth of not abiding in the law of the land when it comes to marriage. Likewise, because God sees the choice made when two people come together He also sees when they separate. So with or without a certificate of marriage and divorce God sees it as you being married and then divorcing. And as is said in scripture "God hates Divorce." Furthermore, the only reason not to make it formal with ring and paper and witnesses would be if the person was just playing house and wanted to leave the door open for an escape. Or are ashamed by who they are with. We might play house and avoid the financial loss when the relationship goes south by not having a certificate of marriage. But in the end we are still going to be seen as divorced by God, and though we may not pay alimony to our spouse we will be paying it to the Lord Almighty in the end. Which do you think will be cheaper?

This is, of course, if I was looking at trying to play things by God's word. I am an agnostic after all, and I feel there are many things in the bible that are either misinterpreted or outdated, or edited in.

Mostly everything I've said here about this subject has been my own opinion on the matter; what I think a prospective deity would actually feel about this, and not what the scripture (any scripture for that matter) has to say about it. So, if I'm wrong by the scripture, then so be it. That doesn't convince me that I'm incorrect by God's standards, just by the standards of someone who claims to speak on God's behalf.

I don't see "leaving the door open" as being ashamed of the person I'm with. I see this as an acknowledgement that people can change. In time, love in a relationship can fade, and leaving the door open so they can leave peacefully without the financial damages that a lawful divorce can incur can be a preferred alternative.

[dusk]

@ Darias
I would say no marriage before sex.

I personally think virginity is hugely overrated by religious folk. Ask anyone of the people that don't think like you (about sex) and had multiple partners. The first time is often more odd than great (especially when both are inexperienced). Virgins are terrible in bed unless one is such a weirdo that likes to dominate or posses. I think it all comes down to I don't want to be compared with someone or this is mine alone. If both have some prior experience it is usually a more fulfilled love life and people don't bolt so easily for small things.

In the past pre martial sex was bad for good reasons. Bastards and orphans had a bad life and there was no contraception. Only married people should have children. Things are different now and contraception works if you aren't a complete idiot about it or under drugs or whatever.

BTW there are also a lot of women that are just as horny as the next guy. Usually in our society women are just not allowed to express that as openly as men. There are then called all kinds of names while from a man it is expected. Doesn't mean they are any different.
The difference between some asexual and a normal woman you'd definitely figure out in simple talks. Doesn't even need talks it is usually easy to tell from behavior. Just to figure that out and get the general approximation I think you don't have to loose your virginity.
Though at some point you or her (if she is a virgin) won't truly know what you like yourself until you try.

Me personally I wouldn't want to marry a virgin. There is little chance though anyway.

[Darias]

@ Darias
I would say no marriage before sex.

I personally think virginity is hugely overrated by religious folk. Ask anyone of the people that don't think like you (about sex) and had multiple partners. The first time is often more odd than great (especially when both are inexperienced). Virgins are terrible in bed unless one is such a weirdo that likes to dominate or posses. I think it all comes down to I don't want to be compared with someone or this is mine alone. If both have some prior experience it is usually a more fulfilled love life and people don't bolt so easily for small things.

In the past pre martial sex was bad for good reasons. Bastards and orphans had a bad life and there was no contraception. Only married people should have children. Things are different now and contraception works if you aren't a complete idiot about it or under drugs or whatever.

BTW there are also a lot of women that are just as horny as the next guy. Usually in our society women are just not allowed to express that as openly as men. There are then called all kinds of names while from a man it is expected. Doesn't mean they are any different.
The difference between some asexual and a normal woman you'd definitely figure out in simple talks. Doesn't even need talks it is usually easy to tell from behavior. Just to figure that out and get the general approximation I think you don't have to loose your virginity.
Though at some point you or her (if she is a virgin) won't truly know what you like yourself until you try.

Me personally I wouldn't want to marry a virgin. There is little chance though anyway.

Well I can't pretend my religious upbringing or my Southerness hasn't had an impact on my choice to be a virgin, at least for now.

While I've been reconsidering that -- I'm still not up for casual sex. One of the biggest reasons is that I don't particularly find loveless sex to be arousing at all.

I'm sure that most people living in other cultures, in cities or those who are non-religious treat casual sex very lightly. It's fun and makes them more experienced. I say good for them but for me that's just not something I'm up for just for personal reasons.

However, I've been considering to be open to the idea of premarital sex with a long term girlfriend or a fiance.

Of course if that sex turns out to be bad -- which most first times are --- but stays horrible and there are problems, then I have to start over again. At that point my virginity will be gone, so it won't be as romantic as I would have liked with my next partner (Hey, I saved myself for you -- I ain't like all these other guys who hump everything with a pulse). That won't really be true anymore. But even at that point I doubt I'd be asking for sex 3 weeks into my next relationship. If I'm gonna have sex with someone, I want some sort of chance that a relationship will continue on afterwards. This is again because I view sex not as something casual and fun but as something deeply personal, emotionally intimate, and loving.

I could not imagine a marriage with an asexual person; unless they were demisexual and could develop sexual attraction in time.

I personally don't classify as demisexual because while I don't want to rush into sex, I still have "normal" sexual attraction for others (and by that I mean only women).

But yes the whole "try before you buy" idea is starting to sound preferable to any depressing realizations after marriage.

I never thought about the possibility that a woman would not want to marry me on grounds of me being a virgin, but I'm a fast learner and sex is something important to me so I'm sure it wouldn't be too horrible in the bedroom for too long before it starts getting better.

I personally wouldn't mind marrying a non virgin, but I must admit that if she had a large number of past sexual partners that would be of concern to me (aside from the ick factor -- the fact she might get tired of me and move on to a bunch of other dudes would be a huge red flag for me).

[dusk]

At that point my virginity will be gone, so it won't be as romantic as I would have liked with my next partner (Hey, I saved myself for you -- I ain't like all these other guys who hump everything with a pulse). That won't really be true anymore.

It would still be true at least the second part.

[LiamOS]

At that point my virginity will be gone, so it won't be as romantic as I would have liked with my next partner (Hey, I saved myself for you -- I ain't like all these other guys who hump everything with a pulse). That won't really be true anymore.

It would still be true at least the second part.

This is true.
Sex is infinitely better with somebody you really care about, but I don't see why anybody'd expect that to only be one person over the course of your life.

[PREEST]

Virginity should be seen as a blessing. Especially to those who are tempted but do not allow their desires to over ride their virtue. Sex has a purpose, bringing life into the world. Sex is the joining of the flesh of two and the child is the proof that the two have united. The two become the one flesh of the child. When two have joined as one flesh they are seen as married in the eyes of God, according to scripture. He is the witness. So to are your neighbors however, it matters not whether those around you acknowledge your marriage. Their lack of acceptance does not undo what has been done or change the fact that God has witnessed the union. Because we must live with mans laws, good counsel would be that, we should seek to formally announce the union with a marriage certificate. In the old testament marriage was see as sexual cohabitation. It is the foundation for common law marriage.

You don't get to try it on to see if you like it. You try it and it's yours for life. Our favorite band is ABC this month but next it is XYZ. This does not work when it comes to marriage and the responsibility you are suppose to shoulder when you claim your mate by having sex with them. It may start as love and lust. But when that fades and changes into work and frustration, too bad. Marriage is not about love. It is about responsibility. For richer or poorer in sickness and health. Marriage is about accepting your spouse as your helpmate. Together you enter into a responsibility not only to each other but, also you children and to God. Your responsibility is to help each other through this trying life. To overcome the challenges and trials together. It is such a big responsibility we should not rush into marriage just because we lust of love the person today. If after years of getting to know them you find you still love and desire them then you would have a better chance upon a lasting marriage.

We seek to chase our desires. Some may say that they are gay and it is normal for them to be attracted to the same sex and they would be right. But what is not right is yielding to their desire when they know it is not what God wants for us. A pedophile could say it is normal for them to lust after children, and they would be right. But that does not make it any less wrong to act upon their desires. Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed by God because the people made no attempt to control their desires. Living only for their desires and personal pleasures destroyed them. Lot's wife turned to a pillar of salt because she acted on her desire to take one last look after being warned not to.

Says who? You? Can you prove that the christian god is real before you make absurd assertions about human sexuality please.

This an example of the type of christian attitude that we need to do away with. The christian attitude towards sex is disgusting and disgraceful. Christians constantly demonize sex, and tell us that we should feel disgusting for enjoying it, The only purpose for sex is reproduction. Religion makes us feel guilty and disgusted by our own sexuality. Sex is beautiful, yet christians want to tell us that we are not to enjoy it and that is purely for reproduction. Tell a young pubescent teenager not to masturbate, or that he is disgusting for thinking sexual thoughts or wanting to have sex. Religion wants us to suppress our natural human urges to have sex. Christians make sex out to be immoral, and condemn loving individuals for having and wanting to have sex.

I am a grown man with a girlfriend that I love. We don't need a piece of paper to acknowledge that we love each other and that we want to have sex. I love my girlfriend and she loves me, no christian can dare tell me that we shouldn't have sex together.

[bluethread]

If you are asking whether Adonai needs human sacroments, my answer is no. I find no record of a wedding ceremony in the Scriptures until Yakov(Jacob) and that is to show how he was deceived. A wedding ceremony is for social order. It is public acknowledgement of a private commitment. My point is what makes fornication a sin is not the lack of a ceremony, but the lack of consideration for the communities interest in the private contract. No one is an island. That is why we have public contracts, whether they be for marrage or the rental of an apartment. If one expects others to recognize the agreement, one has to at least make those others aware of that agreement. If there is no agreement, the community has the right to protect itself from the reprocussions of the actions of an indicidual by establishing community standards.

If one were to have a bunch of sexual encounters and short term relationships that last anywhere from an hour to a month, just for the fun of it, with no plans to commit on the part of either party, in 2012, what would the community's legitimate interest possibly be?

Sorry to take so long to get back, The primary community interests are, disease control, the provision for any offspring that should result and the violation of other contracts the individual and that individuals partners have made.

Keithstone23

@bluethread

You brought up that marriages, specifically weddings, take place because of the need for social order. Could lack of consideration for the community's interest in the ceremony really be considered a sin?

Yes, it is not loving one's neighbor as oneself. To what extent one should acknowledge public ceremony is debatable. However, the fact that there should be some form of public acknowledgement is not.

[Cewakiyelo]

Says who? You? Can you prove that the christian god is real before you make absurd assertions about human sexuality please.

This an example of the type of christian attitude that we need to do away with. The christian attitude towards sex is disgusting and disgraceful. Christians constantly demonize sex, and tell us that we should feel disgusting for enjoying it, The only purpose for sex is reproduction. Religion makes us feel guilty and disgusted by our own sexuality. Sex is beautiful, yet christians want to tell us that we are not to enjoy it and that is purely for reproduction. Tell a young pubescent teenager not to masturbate, or that he is disgusting for thinking sexual thoughts or wanting to have sex. Religion wants us to suppress our natural human urges to have sex. Christians make sex out to be immoral, and condemn loving individuals for having and wanting to have sex.

I am a grown man with a girlfriend that I love. We don't need a piece of paper to acknowledge that we love each other and that we want to have sex. I love my girlfriend and she loves me, no christian can dare tell me that we shouldn't have sex together.

You are right. You do not need a piece of paper to acknowledge your love or your desire to have sex. God is witness to that. You are right sex is beautiful however it is meant to be beautiful between a man and a woman who accept the responsibility of what it is intended for, bringing life into the world. It is about responsibility, which most do not want to accept. Oh they want the sex but none of the responsibility. We wan't to play house, mate like rabbits, but be able to leave the door open so that when our mates aren't as pretty or as funny we can trade them in and move on to another rabbit. You read my words and believe I speak of sexuality when actually I speak of responsibility and the lack of it. I speak of having the integrity to live by your word and your choices rather than promoting a disposable society. We live in a society of disposable phones, diapers and relationships. Divorce has become the acceptable norm. This leads to children who do not have a solid foundation on which to base a healthy relationship from. Instead they get to see parents that move from one relationship to another. They get to build bonds with the people that move in and out of the parents and child's life, often to have those bond severed because of the adults lack of committed responsibility to a steadfast relationship. Children who do not have an example of what responsibility in a relationship means. A whole world of me me me as long as it is good for me. Self has become the highest authority they need serve. Who cares what it does to those around them as long as they get their desire met.

A friend of mine is an alcoholic, out of work, puts all his responsibilities off until it is to late. He wants to find a good woman so he can have a sexual relationship with her. Never mind that any relationship he has with a woman is going to end up with her not wanting to be with him because of all of his issues. Sure he could hide them long enough to get the relationship going but, eventually the issues are going to become such a burden to the woman that she will not tolerate him anymore. He has nothing to offer to a relationship except to waste another persons time and maybe hinder a child's development, if children are involved. He might teach the child that men can't be counted on to do right by their woman or should be lazy drunks and let the woman take care of them. Followed by moms example of well this isn't what I signed up for so off to the next. But none of this should matter to him, should it. Because he wants sex.

With or without the morality of scripture sex for sex sake leads to unplanned pregnancy, single parents, abortions (which men do not have to carry upon their conscience for the rest of their lives), passing STDs from partner to partner to partner, Children that end up caught in the middle. God or no God these things are not good or healthy. Sex for sex sake is nothing but selfish. You claim to be a grown man. A man should be selfless not selfish especially where his woman is concerned. Don't be surprised when you loose your woman to another player. After all without that token, that ring or paper, she is technically still on the market and she will be well aware of that. In her head she isn't married either. She can hang until she finds something better. If we want to play grown up than we ought to grow up.