Christianity and Pre-Marital Sex

1. 53

   NewRepublicanposted 15 years ago

   I am a young adult and am disheartened to see so many of my generation engage in pre-marital sex, especially Christians.  It has become so rampant that people disregard that aspect of the religion as if it were not important.  When one is a Christian, he or she should be a Christian in all aspects, not in just the areas where it is convenient.  How do you think it is possible, in at least America, to regain this value?  Is it too late?  Is it too unrealistic in today's day and age?

   replyreport
   1. 83

      kerrygposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Would you buy a car without driving it first to see if suits you? You'll be stuck with your spouse a heck of a lot longer with your car (I would hope!) so if you're sexually incompatible better to figure it out now and break up before it requires a lawyer and a bunch of legal fees to do so.
      
      That's my perspective on the matter, anyway. I don't approve of promiscuity or one-night stands at all, but it's silly not to test your wheels before you buy them.
      
      Also remember that you'll be stuck with your spouse a lot longer than people were back in the days when virginity at marriage was expected and the life expectancy was 40 or 50. And even in those "good old days," premarital sex was quite common. A comparison of birth and marriage records in early Victorian Europe and America reveals that about 1/3 of brides were pregnant on their wedding day, with the figure often 60% or more in rural areas.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      LondonGirlposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Why disheartened? You do your thing, let them do theirs, everyone's happy.

      replyreport
      1. 56

         andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I agree with you.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            But if you believe that one of the benefits of marriage lies in social stability then the thing that others do also affects everyone else. Me, me, me isn't the answer to every issue (though it may be a great answer for some). Not to belabor the point, but modern culture tries very hard to make self-centered egomania and indulgence into an unquestionable moral good.

            replyreport
            1. 56

               andromidaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I agree that marriage has the potential of working as a social
               commitment for the stability of any society.Again this marriage has caused lots of divorces,fightings or even deaths-definitely commitment was missing.With proper education and personal development plan we can bring back the stability in our society.
               I also think waiting for the sex until marriage is a very good idea.I just wanna say that the relationships between social stability and pre-marital sex are very loosely connected.

               replyreport
   3. 64

      aka-djposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      The way to make change happen, is to start at home. You do what your conviction tells you to do. We can't change others, but we can change ourselves. Your own coscience will guide you.
      If it's "right" do it, if it's not, don't.
      Just because the majority do something does NOT make it right.

      replyreport
   4. 60

      Lady_Eposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You are so right. There are people who still stand their ground or should I say stick to their faith on this issue.  Sadly, society just laughs at them. America can regain this value but it will take a loooooooooot of hard work. In many schools now if you haven't lost your Virginity, it means your not cool.

      replyreport
2. 61

   VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 15 years ago

   In my opinion, sex should be confined between a particular pair better if it is postmarital.  It will affect a whole society if women tend to go as they like.   The nationality, the religious affinity and social specialities should be preserved at all costs.  That is why women are subjected to some restrictions in some places.  "Broad-minded" people will accuse me if I insist that women deserve restrictions.   
   
   But as a whole, if we specialise in social and traditional values and restrict ourselves, the national pride suffers a lot.  For example, Indian society is different from English.  We thought we have more traditional values than the English... what happened?  the English ruled us for a century.  Had we not specialised in tradition, we would have not let foreigners in.  We used to protect our tradition at any cost.. the foreigners came in and destroyed the traditon. 
   
   So, in my opinion, sex should be according to one's own tradition.. if that had to be overlooked to protect the national sovereignty, it should be overlooked... not by all... only by people directly affected.

   replyreport
3. 64

   SparklingJewelposted 15 years ago

   men and women need to be held to the same standards of sexuality. Either it is okay or it is not for men and women...when it is not, that is the cause for the loss of healthy traditions in a culture.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      kimback08posted 15 years agoin reply to this

      I was raised in a Free Will Baptist church in Eastern Kentucky.  One Saturday night out of each month the church held a "business" meeting where they discussed fund-raising issues, etc.  Guess what? During this meeting women weren't allowed to speak.  Also, the pastor of this church stated during a service that God was punishing the sin of New Orleans with the wrath of Hurricane Katrina.  Personally, I am more concerned with rhetoric like that instead of whether someone is getting their freak on.  My husband and I had a baby before we got married.  We were in a loving and committed relationship, and we still are.  What could be wrong with that?  Who were we hurting?

      replyreport
4. 82

   LondonGirlposted 15 years ago

   I agree with you. My other half and I aren't married, and we have a 3 year old son. We aren't hurting anyone, just living together, loving each other, working to support our family, and enjoying our lives.

   replyreport
5. 0

   Royal Diademposted 15 years ago

   Would you buy a car without driving it first to see if suits you?   First, people are not cars.  Second, a car does not have a soul, and third a car can not give you a STD and destroy your life because you would not follow the truth that is in God’s Word.  Fourth, if you do not use the wisdom that is in the Word of God, you could pick a person, who is not mentally stable, and spend months seeking the courts in order for you to be protected.  The best thing to do is to wait on God, join a good spiritual base church, and pick someone accordingly to the Word of God.  Because having sex before marriage, is to me, being unrealistic that the person you are sleeping with won’t bring harm to your life.  Check them out and wait. When the Lord finally, brings you the man or woman, it would be wise to talk to him or her about sex along with your pastor in premarital counseling.
   
   Royal Diadem Ministries

   replyreport
6. 77

   soni2006posted 14 years ago

   I published a hub 7 months ago "Are you in favor of sex before marriage" to which I have got different comments from different people.
   
   There are people like livelovecoffee who say: "In favor - I think you need it in order to last like those cute old couples the females in our lives putter over. I mean how can you really know someone and be passionately in love with them if you have never been passionate? and if you haven't been passionate, are you really in love? I don't think the sex is everything but I do agree that you are truly giving that the closest part of "you" that cannot be shared, defined or expressed any other way. If are not satisfied in that state...you will never be satisfied with that person."
   
   and there are people like Babarushe who say: "Sex before marriage is a global controversial issue among the young and singles.
   This is one great challenge that is consistently and rapidly destroying the moral domain of most singles. Its impact is much felt among the teens.
   I am an assistant coordinator of a Youth Organization and we engage in a workshop every second Sunday of each month on any issue affecting singles.
   I must confess that the question that recalls often is that of sex before marriage.
   We see young men and women cohabiting before they exchange their marital vows. They want to know if they are sexually compatible and that is the foundation of their marriage. Most girls insist that the man must have them to ascertain his sexual power and expertise before exchanging marital vows.
   Young people spend more time in petting, kissing, fondling of bodies, which usually get them into trouble than in any viable activity. These acts are normal and accepted by the society but the effects are rejected.
   I have seen girls give birth to children especially in the developing countries who they abandoned in the gutter, street corners, motherless babies homes, and granny or aborted, and many of them thrown out of schools. This is a daily occurrence in my locality in the part of the world I live.
   
   
   
   
   
   The most painful part of it is that these children are left on their own and no wonder they turn to be street urchins and gangsters engaging in all sorts of crime -robbery, prostitution, theft, rape, as to survive. No parental care and instruction. They attach little or no importance to human existence. Many become street hawkers. It is disheartening.
   
   
   I know a guy who contacted gonorrhea when he was 20 years old but was poorly treated. The sickness resurfaced 20 years after in which the entire body fluid was corrupted. He died in the process.
   
   
   Another young man entered a lady once and came out with STD. Unfortunately that was his first time on sex.
   
   
   Most young men have used it to trap some girls on the pretense of marriage which is an issue in the developing world of Africa because it is believed that a lady is not fulfilled until she gets married to man no matter her wealth and educational background.
   
   
   Engaging in Pre-marital sex is like sitting on a keg of gun powder. It is a loaded gun waiting to explode.
   
   
   I don't encourage it among the singles."
   
   Why do you say?????

   replyreport
7. 0

   pgrundyposted 14 years ago

   I don't think premarital sex has anything to do with Christianity. Where is the scriptural reference where Jesus talks about disallowing premarital sex? This was something added later. The early Christians only begrudgingly allowed marriage when it became apparent to them that people would have sex no matter what (surprise!)--They thought the world would end any day and that they should all stay chaste until that happened, but many couldn't manage it. St. Paul talks about it, but not Jesus.
   
   Had early Christians been able to do stay chaste, we'd have less unpleasantness in the HP forums though.

   replyreport
8. 75

   spiderpamposted 14 years ago

   I wrote on this subject from personal experience. It's an epidemic. These articles may help.
   http://hubpages.com/hub/Holla-Back-Ladies
   http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Bible-has-m … ning-today

   replyreport
9. 85

   gamergirlposted 14 years ago

   This link is helpful too, in a way.
   
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_se … tive_popes
   
   I thought it was interesting reading, all snickering about the funny hat or the fact that it's from wikipedia aside.

   replyreport
10. 83

    RooBeeposted 14 years ago

    Interesting, GG, sexy popes, hmmm...or at least sexual ones.
    
    I've seen too many farce marriages and too many beautiful, committed, loving non-married couples for me to believe that marriage is a superior state of being for two people to reside in.
    
    Marriage is great, but let's get real. It does not ensure faithfulness and I betcha God doesn't spend a lot of time smoting (smiting?) unmarried fornicators.
    
    So, you have two people. Committed, caring, good parents, good citizens, good folks. Not married. Am I to believe that they are sinful and lesser in the eyes of God than another couple simply based on the fact that they haven't exchanged legally binding vows?
    
    There's no convincing me that this isn't just another of man's little additions to the original word.

    replyreport
11. 60

    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    Does anyone think that perhaps one of the benefits of marriage lies in social stability?

    replyreport
    1. 75

       spiderpamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Yes, when it starts to waiver, we see the reaction fatherless children, single moms, truly sad.

       replyreport
12. 60

    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    Sex is too big a part of a marriage (and it should be) to not take part in it before the commitment is made. Everyone can make their own decisions on the matter. It isn't premarital sex that causes problems, it is the lack of sexual health education. Again, just my opinion.

    replyreport
13. 83

    RooBeeposted 14 years ago

    I personally don't see the connection between being an ego-maniac and not being sold on the idea that marriage is the only way.
    
    Not trying to be antagonistic, just an honest (and humble!!) opinion.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Is it or is it not easier to bail on a relationship when it has not been confirmed and recognized socially and legally? Avoiding the commitment that comes with marriage leaves the individual free to leave anytime he or she wants with far fewer complications and (gasp!) guilt. It's still me, me, me and no one has 'tied me down' or entangled me in a way I can't pick up and leave tomorrow.

       replyreport
       1. 76

          frogdroppingposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          And that, sensei, is your opinion. Which is great in theory, I have to agree.
          
          In practice it's a lot more complicated than simply boiling it down to having a selfish or even a carefree attitude towards commitment.

          replyreport
14. 85

    gamergirlposted 14 years ago

    tksensei,
    
    Your point would be valid if the same choice wasn't available to married folks.
    
    Married people do, and have in abundance in the past, just "pick up and leave."

    replyreport
    1. 83

       RooBeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       or 'simply' have an affair..

       replyreport
15. 60

    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    So, are y'all saying that a greater commitment to marriage and fidelity would lead to greater social stability? I guess I'd have to agree. Conversely...

    replyreport
16. 76

    frogdroppingposted 14 years ago

    Marriage does not hold any one person to another. If we were being totally honest ... and let's try it on for size ... then the fact that individuals remain in defunct marriages is often nothing to do with the fact that they're married.
    
    And a lot more to do with fear. Of financial instability, loss of social standing, being alone, becoming homeless and so on.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Then why does it require a legal process to enter into or exit from?

       replyreport
17. 83

    RooBeeposted 14 years ago

    (replying to tk) Yes, sure...in theory. Just as in theory it would be great for the social structure of the world at large if people would get over their petty differences and stop fighting each other over them.
    
    It's one of those things that's nice sounding, but just doesn't apply to reality.
    
    Fidelity & commitment are not one in the same with marriage. Too many people do it (get married) out of societal pressure and feelings of guilt based on the moral judgments of others. This inevitably leads to being unfulfilled and unhappy which leads to deception, resentment, and a whole host of nasty things.
    
    Marriage, when entered by two loving hearts, is such a beautiful thing. Don't take me wrong on that. However, just because someone isn't doesn't mean that they are just going to bail out at the first sign of inconvenience.
    
    Quite the contrary, I personally consider my commitment to my partner to be of utmost importance and sacredness. I don't take our union lightly in the least bit. If someone is going to be a commitment-phobe or so self-involved that they'd run from a relationship at the drop of a hat, they'd likely do the same in a marriage (they'd probably just lie about it for a while first).

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       But it's easier to do so, right?

       replyreport
18. 76

    frogdroppingposted 14 years ago

    Are you talking about legally? Or physically? The two are slightly different.
    
    Legally yup - you can't just tear the paper up. Physically, no.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Isn't that partly why there's a legal process?

       replyreport
       1. 76

          frogdroppingposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Are you intentionally obstreperous sensei. Or is it just natural?

          replyreport
19. 83

    RooBeeposted 14 years ago

    For the most part. However, if we're getting down to semantics, many long-time partnerships qualify as civil unions and are therefore subject to all the red-tape a marriage would be. Dissolving such a union can involve property division, custody battles, and all that jazz.
    
    Emotionally, it would depend on what marriage means to you in your own moral structure. For many, I'm sure the failure of the marriage itself (and all that it represents to them) would be terrible to endure above and beyond the breakdown of the relationship with the other person.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Another argument in favor of marriage.

       replyreport
       1. 83

          RooBeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Sure, for those people I'm referring to who view the institution itself as being of utmost importance rather than the human relationship therein.

          replyreport
          1. 60

             tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             How 'bout 'as well as' instead of 'rather than'?

             replyreport
             1. 83

                RooBeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Sounds fine to me. That would probably be a better way to say it, as I'm certainly not trying to pit one "side" of this debate as being inferior to the other (or less caring, and so on).

                replyreport
20. 89

    Paragliderposted 14 years ago

    Just out of interest, does anyone here believe that if you never meet someone you want to marry (and who wants to marry you) you should go through your whole life without sexual relations? Does anyone think that is healthy?

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       While having safe sex is healthy, I don't know if abstaining from sex is unhealthy. Like I said, I personally have decided to have pre-marital sex. My sex life is healthy and attributes to my healthy overall well being. But abstaining from sex for a lifetime, while frustrating, probably doesn't have negative health effects (but I could be wrong).

       replyreport
       1. 89

          Paragliderposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I think there's plenty of evidence that it can have psychological ill-effects.

          replyreport
21. 60

    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    I think it is a personal choice to remain a virgin until marriage. If the reason is because of religious belief, then I think that is great. Being true to your religion and religious values is important.
    
    I am a young adult as well (21). I do not find fault in my peers who engage in pre-marital sex as long as they are being safe and smart. Staying a virgin you are not made fun of. No one was in my high school anyways. I waited until I was a freshman in college, I was never made fun of. My friends that had sex in high school told me that they wish they had waited.
    
    I think there is a misconception that virgins are made fun of, when they aren't at all.
    
    If someone is going against their religion, then that is a different issue. It is not unrealistic to stay a virgin for religious reasons. I'm not sure (because I'm not a Christian) where staying a virgin is plays a part in Christianity.

    replyreport
22. 85

    gamergirlposted 14 years ago

    tksensei,
    
    Actually, it's not a point in favor of marriage.
    
    A person, married or not, can choose at any time, with or without a good reason, to leave their partner.  It can and does happen quite frequently.
    
    Many people choose not to enter into 'legal' marriages with their life partners.  They do so for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons, I'm sure, is that a marriage license is not a requirement for a happy, successful, fruitful relationship.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       So, when society values the institution enough to make leaving it "without a good reason" taboo, then society becomes more stable, and conversely...

       replyreport
    2. 60

       tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       What are the other reasons?

       replyreport
23. 83

    RooBeeposted 14 years ago

    - and also what gg said

    replyreport
24. 76

    frogdroppingposted 14 years ago

    Sensei - do you always sneak around the bushes before pouncing or is there a possiblilty that you'll stop playing with your food. And just devour it and be done.

    replyreport
25. 85

    gamergirlposted 14 years ago

    Y'know, I'm not sure why I keep trying to respond to you, tk.  You don't seem to want to be straightforward in your replies.  Answer your own questions - I know the answers to the ones I've asked. 

    replyreport
26. 60

    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    Can't think of any other reasons, huh?

    replyreport
    1. 80

       earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Still sliming every forum tk?

       replyreport
27. 60

    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    Maybe YOU can think of some other reasons.

    replyreport
28. 91

    Rochelle Frankposted 14 years ago

    Can't answer this one from experience. Married almost 47 years. Neither of us drove the car before we married, though we are not church-goers.
    Just old-fashioned, I guess.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       countrywomenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       WOW!! 47 Years is a long time. That "test drive" concept really dehumanizes us to be equivalent to inanimate things(and I never like it). Btw can you write a hub about secrets for a long happy married life?

       replyreport
       1. 91

          Rochelle Frankposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Who said "happy"? 
          No. I'm sorry the secrets are  . . . well  . . . secret.

          replyreport
          1. 60

             countrywomenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Oh Ok. No worries.

             replyreport
29. 60

    tksenseiposted 14 years ago

    "Drove the car" I like that!

    replyreport
30. 60

    JonTutorposted 14 years ago

    Earlier it was a license to have sex....Now marriage is just a piece of paper.

    replyreport
31. 69

    Sunny Robinsonposted 14 years ago

    Alright, this is gonna be coming from an agnostic.
    
    I agree with LondonGirl.  You let them do their thing.  As far as STDs go, that can happen within marriage, too.  It can happen in many different ways.  The fact is, pre-marital or not, you take the steps to protect yourself and be smart about it.
    
    Quite honestly, Christianity doesn't even enter into equation when it comes to pre-marital sex.  For me, anyway, so this is my personal opinion.  Pre-marital sex is a choice that does not have to hinder spiritual growth in regards to your god.  Pre-marital sex does not even have to exist as a term other than a generic "Yes, we had sex before marriage".  Approving of only people that have sex after marriage because of your religion leaves so many others out of the loop: the gay or lesbians, the people who never plan to get married legally, etc.  Not only that, what about the people who *know* they are married in the eyes of God if not the law, who are against using a piece of paper to say they are married?  Then you are leaving those religious (or even non-religious) folks out, too.
    
    Consider that you approve of sacred human relationships where there is honesty and respect between lovers rather than focusing so much on recent human institution.  How is such a recent human institution so important in an old historical holy book? 
    
    
    
    
    
    As for this, don't judge their value on their private lives and sexual behavior (which is human and normal), but rather on their convictions, honesty, ethics, and compassion.  Your god knows better than to condemn them for what he has given them; he is more interested in better things than that.
    
    
    
    
    As for the 'driving the car' analogy, I don't like it much.  I think that this analogy has ugly implications; using people, testing people, etc.  Take this into consideration: People aren't to be steered or judged on their performance.  They are to be appreciated by value of who they are.  So, with that in mind, I would use an alternative like... enjoying your own sexuality with other people, or some such, provided that you are smart about it and have set up your own comfort boundaries.
    
    If you want to believe God, I would remove the Bible as the source of be-all, end-all information, it shouldn't be.  It's a historical book from historical times written by men; our times are different, we know more about what makes so many of the Bible irrelevant.  I would ask God himself; I would consider that he (may or may not) have given us a brain and soul and instincts to learn things on our own.  We eventually find lessons in our lives that says we made a mistake, we can do better.  Anything about sex at all is one of them.
    
    
    
    Ahh, sorry.  I wrote too much.  I've been doing a lot of reading on sexuality as of late, so this one kind of sparked my brain a bit in the religious direction.

    replyreport
32. 86

    Everyday Miraclesposted 14 years ago

    I personally don't believe that this is a religious issue. When I was still a pagan I chose to wait until I was married. And while I was still a pagan I made the mistake of choosing to sleep with the man to whom I was engaged (and never did marry). I require two hands to count the number of men I've been with (and then add in two women). I have found myself continually questioning the decisions that I have made, having to deal with the pain of splitting off from someone to whom I gave myself that deeply. I have had to gain an understanding of the fact that I acted out due to various emotional issues that I had at the time. I have to confess that I lack/ed self control.
    
    I also, however, feel that we are stretching marriage. I am married, but not legally. I am frustrated continually by the supposition that a marriage isn't "real" if it isn't legal. There were a variety of reasons that we couldn't marry legally when we were finally married in a small, private ceremony. We are no less married than someone who went the legal route, but there are many religious figures who believe that we are "in sin" in spite of our covenant and our vows.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       JonTutorposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Gotta hand it to you for your honesty.

       replyreport
33. 59

    seemorebangkokposted 14 years ago

    I'm not against two people promising to be with each other forever. But think religion and sex should be separated. One doesn't having anything else to do with the other.
    
    Cave men have been having sex without any type of "holy union" for ages and they were perfectly fine.
    
    I also think early christians used the subject of sex to gain members into the church by preaching pre marital sex as unholy. My hats off to the man who put that idea to people heads as that's the greatest con-artist on this earth besides Bernie Madoff.

    replyreport
34. 0

    Leta Sposted 14 years ago

    Wow.  Really old forum post.
    
    Pre-marital sex is great, .  I've been having it for 5 years....  Oh, guess it wouldn't be pre-anything, as I'm not sure I believe in Mah-rriage, as Teresa McGurk might say.
    
    Seriously, I'm watching Larry King and the big 'news' about Gov. Sanford's affair.  And all I can think is 'slow, slow news day.'  It's not even juicy.  Just kind of boring.  Got him traced over e-mail, I guess, though, yawn.  He's Christian-ist, though, and must confess his sexual infidelity and the pain he has caused so many on live TV with tears in his eyes.
    
    Bottom line:  I don't want to know about this stuff.  ...I mean there is sort of a general consensus ethics/morality I think people are aware of and share, I don't deny that, but I find personal choices of this nature should not be public discourse.

    replyreport
35. 60

    JonTutorposted 14 years ago

    I just got back from my exams... I was going through my history.

    replyreport