Why is sex outside of marriage wrong?

Debating issues regarding sexuality

Moderator: Moderators

RUSLAN
Student
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 11:36 pm

Why is sex outside of marriage wrong?

Post #1

Post by RUSLAN »

I'll ask a very simple question.

In Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, sex is allowed only within marriage.

Of course there are some believers who do not really agree with this, but my question is for those who do agree with it.

Can someone (Christian, Muslim, or Jew) explain why sex outside of marriage is wrong, but without citing any religious text(s)?

User avatar
KingandPriest
Sage
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 1:15 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Why is sex outside of marriage wrong?

Post #121

Post by KingandPriest »

Clownboat wrote:
mubasher1984 wrote: Technically speaking, there should be some difference between a man and an animal.
Well, there isn't. Humans are animals. Great apes to be specific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
It's funny how you are willing to accept underlying assumptions when they favor your perspective, but disagree that others should not. The link you referenced included
Several revisions in classifying the great apes have caused the use of the term "hominid" to vary over time. Its original meaning referred only to humans (Homo) and their closest non-extant relatives. That restrictive meaning has now been largely assumed by the term "hominin", which comprises all members of the human clade after the split from the chimpanzees (Pan). (See below, for a fuller discussion of related and very similar terms, at Terminology.) The current, 21st-century meaning of "hominid" includes all the great apes including humans. Usage still varies, however, and some scientists and laypersons still use "hominid" in the original restrictive sense; the scholarly literature generally shows the traditional usage until around the turn of the 21st century.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 8142
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 310 times

Re: Why is sex outside of marriage wrong?

Post #122

Post by Clownboat »

KingandPriest wrote:
Clownboat wrote:
mubasher1984 wrote: Technically speaking, there should be some difference between a man and an animal.
Well, there isn't. Humans are animals. Great apes to be specific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
It's funny how you are willing to accept underlying assumptions when they favor your perspective, but disagree that others should not. The link you referenced included
Several revisions in classifying the great apes have caused the use of the term "hominid" to vary over time. Its original meaning referred only to humans (Homo) and their closest non-extant relatives. That restrictive meaning has now been largely assumed by the term "hominin", which comprises all members of the human clade after the split from the chimpanzees (Pan). (See below, for a fuller discussion of related and very similar terms, at Terminology.) The current, 21st-century meaning of "hominid" includes all the great apes including humans. Usage still varies, however, and some scientists and laypersons still use "hominid" in the original restrictive sense; the scholarly literature generally shows the traditional usage until around the turn of the 21st century.
I beg you to explain which part in all of that claims that humans are not animals.
Readers, please note my words: "Humans are animals. Great apes to be specific."

Does Kingandpriest think he has refuted this? Are humans not animals now? If so, I have missed it in his explanation.
:confused2:
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

Jagne
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:58 pm

Re: Why is sex outside of marriage wrong?

Post #123

Post by Jagne »

[Replying to post 9 by Danmark]

I think It’s not healthy mentality, physically, emotionally or spiritually to have sexual relations with multiple partners. Its a toxic lifestyle and It’s not good for people in the long run.

But "How is it not healthy physically to have sex with someone if you’re both tested?" You may ask

Well,
Let’s be honest here, not everyone gets tested. Wasn’t the AIDS epidemic a pretty good warning back in the day? And keep in mind: if people didn’t fool around and pass around transmitted deceases, then we wouldn’t need tests. This is a no-brainer. If we refrain from sex outside of marriage, we will be protected from the risk of sexually transmitted diseases.

"But how is not healthy mentally or emotionally? Maybe for some people that aren’t mature enough for it it’s unhealthy?"

One reason God tells us to keep the marriage bed pure relates to baggage. We carry baggage into our sexual relationships. Past memories, emotional scars, and unwanted mental images can defile our thoughts, making the marriage bed less than pure. Certainly, God can forgive the past, but that doesn't immediately free us from lingering mental and emotional baggage.

And regarding maturity,
there are consequences to sin. Its effects can be devastating. An unwanted pregnancy, a decision to have an abortion or place a child for adoption, broken relationships with family—these are just a few of the possible outcomes we could face when we have sex outside of marriage. Consider the snowball effect of sin. And what if the relationship does not last? Sin hinders our lives and easily entangles us. We are better off to avoid sin's negative consequences.

"But spirituality, that’s a personal thing but if morally someone thinks it is ok and doesn’t make them a bad person, how can you objectively say it’s bad?"

Morality is not subjective. It’s not up to the individual to decide by personal preference, what is moral and what is immoral. That said, If we put concerns for our partner's needs and spiritual well-being above our own, we'll be compelled to wait for sex. We, like God, will want what's best for them. That is morality correct. When we choose to have sex outside of marriage, we settle for less than God's perfect will—for ourselves and our partner. We may live to regret it.

Here's food for thought: If your partner wants sex before marriage, consider this a warning sign of his or her spiritual condition. If you are the one who wants sex before marriage, consider this an indicator of your own spiritual condition

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 8142
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 310 times

Re: Why is sex outside of marriage wrong?

Post #124

Post by Clownboat »

Jagne wrote: [Replying to post 9 by Danmark]
I think It’s not healthy mentality, physically, emotionally or spiritually to have sexual relations with multiple partners. Its a toxic lifestyle and It’s not good for people in the long run.
I hear your claim Jagne, now please show that you speak the truth otherwise you might as well be yelling at us that the world is flat.
Well,
Let’s be honest here, not everyone gets tested. Wasn’t the AIDS epidemic a pretty good warning back in the day? And keep in mind: if people didn’t fool around and pass around transmitted deceases, then we wouldn’t need tests.
This shows a general lack of knowledge about STDs. I know it is confusing, because 'sexually, is in the name, but regardless, many are transmitted without sexual intercourse.
This is a no-brainer. If we refrain from sex outside of marriage, we will be protected from the risk of sexually transmitted diseases.
And here readers, is great example of the problem with getting information from priests and pastors. Certainly such poor info does not come about from reading a medical journal.
One reason God tells us to keep the marriage bed pure relates to baggage. We carry baggage into our sexual relationships.
Really? Tell me, how much baggage did your previous sexual relationships bring in to your marriage bed?
I did not notice this baggage you speak of myself. Why do you think that is?
Past memories, emotional scars, and unwanted mental images can defile our thoughts, making the marriage bed less than pure.
How do you tell the difference between a pure marriage bed and one that is not pure?
Certainly, God can forgive the past, but that doesn't immediately free us from lingering mental and emotional baggage.
Not sure which god you are referring to, but I'm not aware of any god concept that has ever freed a person from, well... anything. Please provide examples that would show your claim to be accurate and not just some empty claim preached from the pulpit.
And regarding maturity,
there are consequences to sin. Its effects can be devastating.
I know your new, but please keep in mind that preaching is against the rules.
An unwanted pregnancy, a decision to have an abortion or place a child for adoption, broken relationships with family—these are just a few of the possible outcomes we could face when we have sex outside of marriage.
Why did you leave out finding out that you (generic) and your partner are sexual compatible before you decided to enter into a marriage agreement? Pointing to some possible negative effects do not make the positive effects go away.
Consider the snowball effect of sin. And what if the relationship does not last?
You mean like a marriage that doesn't last because the two are not sexually compatible?
Sin hinders our lives and easily entangles us. We are better off to avoid sin's negative consequences.
More preaching. It would be great if you could abide by the rules you agreed to when you signed up here. Consider... what would Jesus do perhaps?
Morality is not subjective. It’s not up to the individual to decide by personal preference, what is moral and what is immoral. That said, If we put concerns for our partner's needs and spiritual well-being above our own, we'll be compelled to wait for sex. We, like God, will want what's best for them. That is morality correct. When we choose to have sex outside of marriage, we settle for less than God's perfect will—for ourselves and our partner. We may live to regret it.
More preaching. Oh hum...
Here's food for thought: If your partner wants sex before marriage, consider this a warning sign of his or her spiritual condition. If you are the one who wants sex before marriage, consider this an indicator of your own spiritual condition.
And some food for thought for you. We are biological beings that reproduce via sexual reproduction. Encourage suppressing this at your own risk. See the Catholic church.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Post #125

Post by marco »

Jagne wrote:
Here's food for thought: If your partner wants sex before marriage, consider this a warning sign of his or her spiritual condition. If you are the one who wants sex before marriage, consider this an indicator of your own spiritual condition


Moderator Comment

Welcome to the forum. We encourage debate here and you are free to take whatever side of an argument you choose. But it is best to avoid dispensing moral advice or preaching. I hope you enjoy your stay with us and find much to challenge and interest you.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

Post Reply