Total Posts:62|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Sex Before Marriage . . .

SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Discuss . . . agree . . . disagree . . . why . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 5:44:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Discuss . . . agree . . . disagree . . . why . . .:

I don't think one has to wait before marriage to have sex, but I do in some regards understand the premise behind being mature enough to have sex.

But to think that one needs to be married in order to accomplish that is ridiculous.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
HatedeatH
Posts: 386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 6:17:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 5:33:38 PM, Curious22 wrote:
Yes. People like sex.

Your mom likes sex.

sorry, couldn't resist.
vardas0antras: If Muhammad is great then why didn't he stop 911 ?
gavin.ogden: He was too busy starting it.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 6:21:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Discuss . . . agree . . . disagree . . . why . . .

I agree that people should have sex before they are married, as I believe that marriage is the ultimate commitment to each other, and that while a sexual relationship ought to be a major commitment, it is not as major as marriage and so should happen before marriage, as a stepping stone towards it.

I do, however, disagree with rampent sex with various people for pure pleasuring purposes.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
HatedeatH
Posts: 386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 6:46:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 6:21:16 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Discuss . . . agree . . . disagree . . . why . . .

I agree that people should have sex before they are married, as I believe that marriage is the ultimate commitment to each other, and that while a sexual relationship ought to be a major commitment, it is not as major as marriage and so should happen before marriage, as a stepping stone towards it.

I do, however, disagree with rampent sex with various people for pure pleasuring purposes.

This seems to be my views as well. I always thought the whole one night stand thing was stupid.
vardas0antras: If Muhammad is great then why didn't he stop 911 ?
gavin.ogden: He was too busy starting it.
boomeranghugs
Posts: 41
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 6:48:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 6:21:16 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Discuss . . . agree . . . disagree . . . why . . .

I agree that people should have sex before they are married, as I believe that marriage is the ultimate commitment to each other, and that while a sexual relationship ought to be a major commitment, it is not as major as marriage and so should happen before marriage, as a stepping stone towards it.

I do, however, disagree with rampent sex with various people for pure pleasuring :purposes.

These are literally my exact views. (:
Being a nerd really pays off sometimes.
Ken Jennings
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 6:52:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
It is a bad idea not to have sex before marriage. Sex is a big part of a relationship and can change everything. You may find out after marriage that you don't want to have sex with that person, or that they are into things you don't like, or that you don't work and sexual partners. Those are just some examples. A lot of times sex makes or breaks a relationship. people should test that BEFORE the law gets involved.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 8:03:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 6:52:23 PM, rogue wrote:
It is a bad idea not to have sex before marriage. Sex is a big part of a relationship and can change everything. You may find out after marriage that you don't want to have sex with that person, or that they are into things you don't like, or that you don't work and sexual partners. Those are just some examples. A lot of times sex makes or breaks a relationship. people should test that BEFORE the law gets involved.

I also think that people should live together for awhile first, and on their own, not like together at their parents, because the biggest single reason for marriages failing is financial issues. But that is a different topic.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 8:38:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 8:03:08 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/20/2011 6:52:23 PM, rogue wrote:
It is a bad idea not to have sex before marriage. Sex is a big part of a relationship and can change everything. You may find out after marriage that you don't want to have sex with that person, or that they are into things you don't like, or that you don't work and sexual partners. Those are just some examples. A lot of times sex makes or breaks a relationship. people should test that BEFORE the law gets involved.

I also think that people should live together for awhile first, and on their own, not like together at their parents, because the biggest single reason for marriages failing is financial issues. But that is a different topic.

I totally agree. I think people need to live as if they are married before they marry so that they are fairly certain the marriage will work.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 8:53:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Marriage is meaningless so it's absurd to wait for an arbitrary date to pass before you can have sex.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 9:02:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 8:53:32 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Marriage is meaningless so it's absurd to wait for an arbitrary date to pass before you can have sex.:

Well, meaningless if it has no meaning to you. I certainly don't see the inherent benefit to them either, but if others want a traditional marriage, it's no sweat off my sack. <--- I know, I'm charming ;)
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:55:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 8:53:32 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Marriage is meaningless so it's absurd to wait for an arbitrary date to pass before you can have sex.

I'm sad you think that.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:58:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Sex before love = No

Love =/= We fell in love after 1 month of dating.

Sex before Marriage = Yes
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:01:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 8:53:32 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Marriage is meaningless so it's absurd to wait for an arbitrary date to pass before you can have sex.

This.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:41:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 6:52:23 PM, rogue wrote:
It is a bad idea not to have sex before marriage. Sex is a big part of a relationship and can change everything. You may find out after marriage that you don't want to have sex with that person, or that they are into things you don't like, or that you don't work and sexual partners. Those are just some examples. A lot of times sex makes or breaks a relationship. people should test that BEFORE the law gets involved.

This.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:30:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
You get good at basketball by practicing many times and playing against many different opponents...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:49:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 2:30:29 AM, bluesteel wrote:
You get good at basketball by practicing many times and playing against many different opponents...

Haha. :)

Definately support sex before marriage.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
SusanBrei
Posts: 15
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 12:14:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
There's nothing wrong with it.

Even if I were Christian, or an adherent to some other sexually uptight religion, I would still recognize that people outside my faith have no tangible reason to abstain from sex before marriage. Absent some invisible man in the sky telling you to ignore your natural urges because he "says" so, one must only avoid the pitfalls (which are present whether you're married or not).

These are: Unwanted pregnancy, rape, venereal disease and unequal levels of intimacy (which could lead to hurt feelings, jealousy or even violence). Again, all of these are present within the institution of marriage.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2011 3:33:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 6:21:16 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:

I do, however, disagree with rampent sex with various people for pure pleasuring purposes.

WTF is wrong with you?!
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:10:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/25/2011 3:33:41 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 1/20/2011 6:21:16 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:

I do, however, disagree with rampent sex with various people for pure pleasuring purposes.

WTF is wrong with you?!
Nothing merely due to the fact that he opposes something for pleasure. There is nothing wrong with him for opposing high-speed driving for pleasure, there is nothing wrong with him for opposing self-biting for pleasure, then what is wrong with him for opposing sex with various people for pure pleasure? If someone does not want to risk an idiot hanging on him for years to come, another idiot to tell him that some random child is his and bring a lot of trouble into his life, then he has, at minimum, two very good reasons not to have sex for pleasure with various people. In the end, people who follow safe ways will not risk their happiness as much as those who act nonsensically for pure pleasure (or idiocy), and time might show what is wrong with whom.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:21:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:58:14 AM, askbob wrote:
Sex before love = No

Love =/= We fell in love after 1 month of dating.

Sex before Marriage = Yes

Not everybody needs to be in love to have healthy sexual relationships, but it's definitely a great suggestion for emotional and practical reasons.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:26:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/26/2011 2:10:53 PM, Mirza wrote:
Nothing merely due to the fact that he opposes something for pleasure. There is nothing wrong with him for opposing high-speed driving for pleasure, there is nothing wrong with him for opposing self-biting for pleasure, then what is wrong with him for opposing sex with various people for pure pleasure? If someone does not want to risk an idiot hanging on him for years to come, another idiot to tell him that some random child is his and bring a lot of trouble into his life, then he has, at minimum, two very good reasons not to have sex for pleasure with various people. In the end, people who follow safe ways will not risk their happiness as much as those who act nonsensically for pure pleasure (or idiocy), and time might show what is wrong with whom.

You make a great point, but the counter-point is that while sometimes sexual behavior can be risky, there are ways to make it safer (such as having everyone involved tested for STDs, making sure the women are on birth control, etc.). Outside of that, you might oppose this behavior for moral reasons -- and that's fine though let's try not to derail this thread too much. But none of these dangers apply to the morality of the act, and if these risks can be minimized, then someone with a different moral view might find this to be a safe option and therefore find no reason to avoid pleasure (if it's not dangerous or hurting another).

However, I think regardless of one's moral view, waiting until you're in love to have sex is very practical (I just don't think it can be done by most couples... so waiting for monogamy might be the best option).
President of DDO
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:33:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/26/2011 2:26:55 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 1/26/2011 2:10:53 PM, Mirza wrote:
Nothing merely due to the fact that he opposes something for pleasure. There is nothing wrong with him for opposing high-speed driving for pleasure, there is nothing wrong with him for opposing self-biting for pleasure, then what is wrong with him for opposing sex with various people for pure pleasure? If someone does not want to risk an idiot hanging on him for years to come, another idiot to tell him that some random child is his and bring a lot of trouble into his life, then he has, at minimum, two very good reasons not to have sex for pleasure with various people. In the end, people who follow safe ways will not risk their happiness as much as those who act nonsensically for pure pleasure (or idiocy), and time might show what is wrong with whom.

You make a great point, but the counter-point is that while sometimes sexual behavior can be risky, there are ways to make it safer (such as having everyone involved tested for STDs, making sure the women are on birth control, etc.). Outside of that, you might oppose this behavior for moral reasons -- and that's fine though let's try not to derail this thread too much. But none of these dangers apply to the morality of the act, and if these risks can be minimized, then someone with a different moral view might find this to be a safe option and therefore find no reason to avoid pleasure (if it's not dangerous or hurting another).

However, I think regardless of one's moral view, waiting until you're in love to have sex is very practical (I just don't think it can be done by most couples... so waiting for monogamy might be the best option).
Yes, but since I think humans are becoming lazier, more foolish, etc., I do not trust their nature, in general, in order to be too optimistic about them checking their STD status, among many other things. Surely, for some people premarital sex has a few positives, but that does not change the overall facts.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:36:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:58:14 AM, askbob wrote:
Sex before love = No

Love =/= We fell in love after 1 month of dating.

Sex before Marriage = Yes

I agree with this.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:42:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:58:14 AM, askbob wrote:
Sex before love = No

Love =/= We fell in love after 1 month of dating.

Sex before Marriage = Yes

i love having sex...?
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:45:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/25/2011 3:33:41 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 1/20/2011 6:21:16 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/20/2011 4:44:55 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:

I do, however, disagree with rampent sex with various people for pure pleasuring purposes.

WTF is wrong with you?!

missed that bit.. i suppose it has gotten me into a fair few fights lol.
signature
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:51:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:55:07 AM, rogue wrote:
At 1/20/2011 8:53:32 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Marriage is meaningless so it's absurd to wait for an arbitrary date to pass before you can have sex.

I'm sad you think that.

Why? You're not a Christian who believes holy matrimony so what is marriage to you?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat