Originally posted by Astafas
I can't see why your question has to be answered first. Logically, there could be rights and wrongs, or advantages and disadvantages, both in premarital and in marital sex.
A few comments regarding the supposed research:
1) Premarital means "before marriage". Therefor, you could very well be of the age of 30 and still have premarital sex. Marital means "in marriage". Therefor, depending on national legislation and various religious beliefs, you can be relatively young and still have marital sex. You say a correlation was found between early sexual experience and dissatisfaction in marriages, unhappiness with the level of sexual intimacy, and a prevalence of low self-esteem. Don't you think the problem rather lies in bad sexual experience, regardless of the moment in life? Early sexual experience implies sexual experience. All experience is either good or bad (well, maybe one could argue for neutral experience...). So by having early sexual experience you necessarily expose yourself for the risk of bad sexual experience. But the same goes for having sexual experience at a later stage in life. Should we recommend everyone to stop having sex?
2) You say that sex is an art that is learned best in the safe environment of marriage. What makes a 20 year long marriage safer than a 20 year long partnership? You say that in healthy marriages, sex takes its natural place beside the intellectual, emotional and practical aspects of life and that married couples spend less time in bed than they do in conversation, in problem solving, and in emotional communion. Is this not also the case in healthy partnerships outside the bonds of marriage? You say that the "lie" that premarital sex prepares you for marriage denies the fact that sexual happiness grows only through years of intimate relationship and that the height of sexual pleasure, according to psychologists, usually comes after ten to twenty years of marriage. Do you really think you have to be married to have an intimate relationship? The difference in sexual pleasure has to depend on whether the fact that you're married turns you on or not. Since this is the personal preferences of the psychologists in question or the people partipating in their research, I find it hard to object.
3) This has to be the very personal opinion of the journalist and hardly the result of a research. I agree that, for myself at least, good sex requires trust. His suggestion as to where to find trust is once again a personal opinion, though.
4) You say that researchers found that sexually active teenagers are more likely to be prone to alcohol abuse and illegal drugs, and are more likely to have trouble in school. They reported that sexually active girls were more likely to be depressed, have low self esteem, feel lonely or attempt suicide. Could it possibly be that teenagers prone to alcohol abuse and illegal drugs and who have trouble in school are more likely to have sexual activity? Just like they are more likely to be depressed, have low self esteem, feel lonely and attempt suicide? Or should this research result be understood as that all these problems started because of sexual activity? No alcohol or illegal drugs were involved in the first sexual activity? These teenagers were all in good mental health, had a high self esteem, had lots of friends (and therefor never felt lonely), wouldn't ever dream of suicide and then, suddenly, they fell into the horrors of sexual activity after which everything in their life fell apart?
5) Use a condom.
6) You believe two persons in a partnership outside the bonds of marriage have sex with everyone who's willing? You believe no married person ever is unfaithful?
7) Marital sex isn't an expression of freedom either. Or do you think so?
8) As you said, this point is hard to understand for someone outside the Biblical worldview. Thus I will not comment the validity of the argument.
I think my question needs to be addressed first because no satisfactory answer has been given as to why pre-marital sex should be preferred over a monogamous marriage relationship, where sex is unquestionably safer, and intuitively more ideal.
1. I recommend everyone to exercise their self control and be more patient, and not buy into the lie that sex prepares you for marriage - it does not, because successful marriages have less to do with sex and more to do with communication and understanding. To reiterate Saturn, sexual intimacy is the icing on the cake, and not the cake itself.
2. Do I think you have to be married to have an intimate relationship? Of course not. My point is that you're more likely to have a safe, secure, and long-lasting relationship if you're married, as opposed to just living together. For although 50% of marriages end in divorce, the percentage of failed common-law relationships is even higher. Serious relationships need to be anchored by serious promises. This kind of reminds me of something the late CEO of Wendy's told to a class of grade 9s before he died. His biggest regret was not finishing high school, even though he had billion in the bank and owned a three thousand restaurants. When asked why he regretted this decision despite his incredible success, he replied that if he finished high school, "I'd have 6000 restaurants, and 2 billion in the bank!"
3. I'll skip this point, witty as it is.
4. The research findings are clear; question begging will not change the results. First came the sexual promiscuity, then came the depression, anxiety, alcohol abuse, illegal use of drugs... In any case, no research is necessary to recognize the effects sexual activity can wreck on young, immature, and impressionable minds and hearts. The psychological, emotional, and spiritual damage sex has on those not ready for it can be painfully obvious, and no psychological journals are required to tell us this. "Train wrecks waiting to happen on the way to nowhere," to quote Chantal Kreviazik (sp?)
5. Condoms provided virtually no protection from STDs. A study from Florida looked at couples in which one partner was HIV positive and the other was negative. They used condoms as protection during intercourse. After 18 months, 17% of the previously uninfected partners were HIV positive. That is a one-in-six chance - the same as in Russian roulette.
Condoms are inherently untrustworthy. The FDA allows as many as one in 250 to be defective. Condoms are often stored and shipped at unsafe temperatures which weakens the integrity of the latex rubber causing breaks and ruptures. Condoms will break 8% of the time and slip off 7% of the time. There are just so many pitfalls in condom use that you just can't expect immature teenagers to use them properly. And even if they do, they are still at risk.
If you knew (and you probably won't cuz he or she will not tell you) that the person with whom you'll be having sex carries a venereal disease, would you still go through with it with only .5 millimetres of latex to keep you from being infected? STDs are so common nowadays that it is not an exaggeration to say that most people who regularly have sex outside of marriage WILL contract a sexually transmitted disease.
6. See #2 above. I agree that a successful marriage depends a great deal on the spiritual and emotional maturity of the people involved, but I also think that a solemn pledge sanctified by God and seen by close family and friends help (but certainly not guarantee) the couple to remain faithful to their vows.
7. I think there is a certain, palpable freedom from guilt, worry, and societal pressure within marital sexual relationships.
8. Even though I'm speaking from the Biblical worldview, I think what I've been trying to express is reasonable, not to mention the traditional view held by most North Americans up until a few decades ago; that waiting for marriage to have sex is better and safer than the alternative.
Oh yeah... how long have I been married? I'm not. I'm 22, just recently graduated from university, and more in love with Aerie and Viconia than any real life females I know.
