marriage vs. partnership

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:02 am

@Dragon Wench...that is entirely my opinion.
however, I don't think that being in a long relationship is neccesarily better than not. Some people are just not made for it.
If we are just discussing marriage vs long unmarried relationship though then that's what I think too.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:12 am

@Frogus, I tend to concur with your position. I believe it is true that some people are not suited to longterm relationships. Sometimes I seriously wonder if any of us are........

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:20 am

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn

Because sexual immorality is wrong.

And to look at it from a more secular perspective, because it is harmful to society. I don't doubt that premarital sex was happening all last century and before that, but not to the extent that it happens today. Now, because of premarital sex, there are a lot of teenage girls in high school who are pregnant and/or have kids. This causes problems for the teenage girl, especially if the father refuses to help take care of her and the child. This, in turn, can cause problems with the child as she grows up. The increase in teen pregnancies has also resulted in an increase in abortion which, according to all reports I've seen(non-Christian sources as well as Christian sources) is often very emotionally traumatic for the girl getting the abortion. It can also result in pushing apart a girl and her parents, causing the girl to end up out on her own with nothing, which can result in any number of things.

Those are just some of the consequences of pre-marital sex.

What are the pros about pre-marital sex? A few minutes of fun? If it's that fun, then it should certainly be worth the wait.

I hear what you are saying, but social acceptance of pre-marital sex is only one contributing factor to the increase in teenage pregnancy - not the only contributing factor. Others would include peer pressure, lack of education (it is possible to have sex and not get pregnant), and the fact that girls are maturing physically earlier than they did a hundred years ago...the list goes on...

On the sad subject of abortion, not only is it emotionally traumatic, it is also physically traumatic. As is being pregnant when so young. Regarding the child and the parents growing apart - to some degree this could also be caused by both parties now being forced to consider this child an adult - because of her experiences...

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 2:23 pm

Originally posted by frogus
No they do not teach it in schools. That is my belief as a result of a great deal of thought and reflexion on reality and experience. It is what I think is true, but to know where something came from is not to think any worse of it. I think it is a sad assumption that you think that one must be ignorant of somethings true nature to enjoy it.

I am not ignorant of Love's true nature. If either of us is ignorant of Love's true nature, it would be you(no offense meant). I also didn't say that thinking it's a by-product means you can't enjoy love. But by claiming it to be "nothing but a byproduct" is to claim that Love is not important. Decrease in importance put upon Love increases sexual immorality.

There's also the fact that God is Love. It is impossible for a creator to be a byproduct of his creation.

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 2:52 pm

Originally posted by Yshania

I hear what you are saying, but social acceptance of pre-marital sex is only one contributing factor to the increase in teenage pregnancy - not the only contributing factor. Others would include peer pressure, lack of education (it is possible to have sex and not get pregnant), and the fact that girls are maturing physically earlier than they did a hundred years ago...the list goes on...

although, if you take away social acceptance of pre-marital sex, you remove some of the peer pressure, which reduces the effect of lack of education, since teens nowadays probably have more education about sex and such than teens a hundred years ago. I hate to do this cause I feel like I'm trivializing it, but you can look at it like a mathematical equation.

A x B x C x D x E x F x G = H

If you decrease A by any amount, you decrease H. Same with the other factors. And since, in this case, B and C are affected by A, that increases the difference that results when you decrease A.

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 3:08 pm

I am not ignorant of Love's true nature. If either of us is ignorant of Love's true nature, it would be you(no offense meant).

*camp wrist flapping* oooOOOhh!!

But by claiming it to be "nothing but a byproduct" is to claim that Love is not important.

not at all. Saying 'bread is nothing but a type of food' does not mean that bread is not important. I honestly believe that love is a 'byproduct' as we are putting it, and I honestly believe that love is great and powerful. There is no contradiction.

There's also the fact that God is Love. It is impossible for a creator to be a byproduct of his creation.

I think saying 'god is love' confuses our words a bit. I think that God may well be the originator, creator, embodiment, epitomy, spirit of love, but I'm sure he isn't actually it. Also we are talking about romantic love, for a woman from a man etc. I'm sure you don't think that god is that type of love do you?

A x B x C x D x E x F x G = H
If you decrease A by any amount, you decrease H. Same with the other factors. And since, in this case, B and C are affected by A, that increases the difference that results when you decrease A.

We could just lock every girl in a pit with no male in site and never let them out if we are intending on restricting girl's liberty, but that won't get us anywhere. That would be reducing A to 0, and therefore eliminating H.

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 3:23 pm

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn

although, if you take away social acceptance of pre-marital sex, you remove some of the peer pressure, which reduces the effect of lack of education, since teens nowadays probably have more education about sex and such than teens a hundred years ago. I hate to do this cause I feel like I'm trivializing it, but you can look at it like a mathematical equation.

A x B x C x D x E x F x G = H

If you decrease A by any amount, you decrease H. Same with the other factors. And since, in this case, B and C are affected by A, that increases the difference that results when you decrease A.

But western society has already evolved to accept pre-marital sex as a norm, This will be unlikely to reverse overnight, what arguement could one offer to convince? Also, consider that the onset of puberty is so much earlier now, the human body is physically mature, before it is emotionally mature enough to consider the risks of being sexually active so young...teenagers today are more rebellious, and if pre-marital sex wasn't a norm - wouldn't that make it more desirable? It is not something we have the freedom to remove from an equasion. Challenging social norms and values is a pastime for most young adults at some point in their lives...removing the social freedom will not remove the temptation...better to be open and guide, than to push it underground.

So as to whether pre-marital sex is the cause of teen pregnancies...of course it is - these kids are not married, I did not disagree...but we are here now we cannot change this, so we can only hope to affect the other contributing factors where we can by educating...That said, I do respect your viewpoint

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 3:33 pm

if pre-marital sex wasn't a norm - wouldn't that make it more desirable? It is not something we have the freedom to remove from an equasion. Challenging social norms and values is a pastime for most young adults at some point in their lives...removing the social freedom will not remove the temptation...better to be open and guide, than to push it underground

I agree entirely. @SS...I might be opening up a can of vipers with this one, but what exactly is wrong with pre-marital sex?

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 3:53 pm

Originally posted by frogus
I think saying 'god is love' confuses our words a bit. I think that God may well be the originator, creator, embodiment, epitomy, spirit of love, but I'm sure he isn't actually it. Also we are talking about romantic love, for a woman from a man etc. I'm sure you don't think that god is that type of love do you?

God is Love. It's simple as that. What do you mean by "Romantic Love"? When I refer to love, I'm refering to unconditional love.

We could just lock every girl in a pit with no male in site and never let them out if we are intending on restricting girl's liberty, but that won't get us anywhere. That would be reducing A to 0, and therefore eliminating H.

We need to figuratively do that to ourselves. For me, at least one of the factors that leads to pre-marital sex is at 0, thus meaning I will not have sex before marriage. It's really not as hard as one might think.

Robnark · Post by **Robnark** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 4:02 pm

Oh, figuratively lock every girl in a pit. that's alright then

.

(Hopefully) no-one is forcing girls (or boys, for that matter) to have premarital sex, and since it is legal it would be a far more constructive path to ensure that the necessary information is given to them so that they can make a sensible decision. To label something 'wrong' will simply give it an illicit appeal and may leave those who do it without the necessary information to make the right choice for themselves.

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 4:07 pm

Originally posted by frogus
@SS...I might be opening up a can of vipers with this one, but what exactly is wrong with pre-marital sex?

I already told what's wrong with it. Look back at where I listed consequences of it.

Why don't you tell me what is not wrong with pre-marital sex? The only pros I see about pre-marital sex don't even come close to outweighing the consequences.

@Ysh, while it is true that western civ has already reached the point where it is mostly accepted, it is not completely accepted, and there is a way to reverse it, but no, it won't happen overnight. Have you ever heard of True Love Waits? All it is is signing a card indicating that you have made the commitment to wait until you're married to have sex. Grant it, signing a card probably seems rather meaningless, but like marriage is a symbol of the commitment you make to your partner, signing the card is a symbol of the commitment to not have sex until you are married. It's not a difficult commitment to make, and if you 'put it in writing,' it makes it even easier to keep that commitment. Schools should be teaching abstainance(sp?) rather than teaching that "it's okay as long as your careful." Unlike girls who think it's okay to have sex before marriage, I have no chance of getting pregnant while not married because I've made a commitment to myself, my future mate, and to God that I will not have sex until married.

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 4:10 pm

Originally posted by Robnark
Oh, figuratively lock every girl in a pit. that's alright then .

(Hopefully) no-one is forcing girls (or boys, for that matter) to have premarital sex, and since it is legal it would be a far more constructive path to ensure that the necessary information is given to them so that they can make a sensible decision. To label something 'wrong' will simply give it an illicit appeal and may leave those who do it without the necessary information to make the right choice for themselves.

No, figuratively lock ourselves in a pit, boys and girls alike. Meaning, make a commitment to abstain from sex until we're married.

How many teens make sensible decisions, whether they have the necessary information or not?

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 4:38 pm

Erm....SS....... some time ago were you not questioning the age at which people should embark upon a serious relationship.....?

I recognise that "serious" does not necessarily imply sex....but if one considers that somebody is emotionally or mentally mature enough for a relationship at a relatively young age.....it does beg a few questions......

No offence intended btw

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 4:49 pm

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn

I already told what's wrong with it. Look back at where I listed consequences of it.

Why don't you tell me what is not wrong with pre-marital sex? The only pros I see about pre-marital sex don't even come close to outweighing the consequences.

My own opinion. I believe that there is a difference between making love and having sex, but let us call it sex for ease of reference

In my opinion, sex is an important ingredient in a relationship, whether you are married or not. It is an opportunity to meet on a different physical and emotional level...now, consider you marry and the sex does not satsify...do you (intended as a general address) continue to live a celibate life? I would hope that my children were happy in all areas of their relationships before they committed...

Posted by SS -

@Ysh, while it is true that western civ has already reached the point where it is mostly accepted, it is not completely accepted, and there is a way to reverse it, but no, it won't happen overnight. Have you ever heard of True Love Waits? All it is is signing a card indicating that you have made the commitment to wait until you're married to have sex. Grant it, signing a card probably seems rather meaningless, but like marriage is a symbol of the commitment you make to your partner, signing the card is a symbol of the commitment to not have sex until you are married.

No I haven't heard of it, who asks you to sign this card? I understand that this is your personal viewpoint...but as my own personal viewpoint is that a marriage certificate does not confirm commitment - I am more convinced that this is an exercise of free will

If it is your choice to abstain - well fair play to you, if it is my choice to commit with or without a piece of paper....this is my choice too. Whether I hold that piece of paper or not should not question my commitment....

Posted by SS -

It's not a difficult commitment to make, and if you 'put it in writing,' it makes it even easier to keep that commitment. Schools should be teaching abstainance(sp?) rather than teaching that "it's okay as long as your careful." Unlike girls who think it's okay to have sex before marriage, I have no chance of getting pregnant while not married because I've made a commitment to myself, my future mate, and to God that I will not have sex until married.

As I said before, I respect your personal viewpoint - as I would my daughter should she take this stance in the years to come. However, I would hope that she feels she has a choice...an informed choice....there are some parents out there that feel the same way, but are perhaps unable to communicate with their child - come the time, my daughter may not listen or talk to me. In that situation, I would hope that education in school and peer learning would give her the role models and information she needs to find a safe way through....

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 4:50 pm

Originally posted by dragon wench
Erm....SS....... some time ago were you not questioning the age at which people should embark upon a serious relationship.....?

I recognise that "serious" does not necessarily imply sex....but if one considers that somebody is emotionally or mentally mature enough for a relationship at a relatively young age.....it does beg a few questions......

No offence intended btw

No offense taken. My topic having to do with age differences in relationships was not having to do with sex. A romantic relationship and a sexual relationship are two very different things, though they may sometimes occur at the same time.

I'm not excactly sure what you mean though when you say "if one considers that somebody is emotionally or mentally mature enough for a relationship at a relatively oung age.....it does beg a few questions......"

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 5:15 pm

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn

No offense taken. My topic having to do with age differences in relationships was not having to do with sex. A romantic relationship and a sexual relationship are two very different things, though they may sometimes occur at the same time.

I'm not excactly sure what you mean though when you say "if one considers that somebody is emotionally or mentally mature enough for a relationship at a relatively oung age.....it does beg a few questions......"

Yes...I do remember that your thread involved age differentials...but I seem to recall that you also questioned whether or not it would be acceptable for you to embark upon a relationship with a twelve-year-old who had developed something of an infatution for you.....or if you should wait until she is older......

You are right...a romantic involvement and a sexual involvement are not necessarily the same.....however they can frequently intersect and the boundaries between the two, given the intensity of feeling that can arise, are often far from well-defined.... Thus.....in speculating whether or not an adolescent is emotionally or psychologically mature enough to handle a relationship..... the more physical component does require at least some consideration.....

Moreover...... on a more general level I do not think you can arbitrarily decide that an individual is mature enough for a relationship in the one sense while disregarding the sexual dimensions......

VoodooDali · Post by **VoodooDali** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 5:17 pm

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn

I already told what's wrong with it. Look back at where I listed consequences of it.

Why don't you tell me what is not wrong with pre-marital sex? The only pros I see about pre-marital sex don't even come close to outweighing the consequences.

@Ysh, while it is true that western civ has already reached the point where it is mostly accepted, it is not completely accepted, and there is a way to reverse it, but no, it won't happen overnight. Have you ever heard of True Love Waits? All it is is signing a card indicating that you have made the commitment to wait until you're married to have sex. Grant it, signing a card probably seems rather meaningless, but like marriage is a symbol of the commitment you make to your partner, signing the card is a symbol of the commitment to not have sex until you are married. It's not a difficult commitment to make, and if you 'put it in writing,' it makes it even easier to keep that commitment. Schools should be teaching abstainance(sp?) rather than teaching that "it's okay as long as your careful." Unlike girls who think it's okay to have sex before marriage, I have no chance of getting pregnant while not married because I've made a commitment to myself, my future mate, and to God that I will not have sex until married.

The majority of schools in the US do teach abstinence as opposed to methods of birth control. There's sort of an attitude here that "teaching sex education is letting the fox in the henhouse." As a result, we have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the developed world. There's another side to that issue, as well. I think that a lot of teenagers do know about birth control, but don't use it, because that would mean they planned to have sex in addition to having the sex. Sort of adding a venial sin to a mortal sin (to use Catholic definitions). In my own experience, I thank the gods that be that I had pre-marital sex! There are some sexual partners you might click with emotionally but not sexually. How horrible to find this out after you are married! IMHO, that's too high a price to pay.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 5:25 pm

Originally posted by VoodooDali

The majority of schools in the US do teach abstinence as opposed to methods of birth control. There's sort of an attitude here that "teaching sex education is letting the fox in the henhouse." As a result, we have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the developed world. There's another side to that issue, as well. I think that a lot of teenagers do know about birth control, but don't use it, because that would mean they planned to have sex in addition to having the sex. Sort of adding a venial sin to a mortal sin (to use Catholic definitions). In my own experience, I thank the gods that be that I had pre-marital sex! There are some sexual partners you might click with emotionally but not sexually. How horrible to find this out after you are married! IMHO, that's too high a price to pay.

Yes !
In British Columbia, those areas where the teaching of abstinence is favoured have a higher teen pregnancy and abortion rate than those in which contraceptive education forms a significant part of the curriculum.....

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 5:27 pm

Originally posted by VoodooDali

There are some sexual partners you might click with emotionally but not sexually. How horrible to find this out after you are married! IMHO, that's too high a price to pay.

Yes!

And if you place the institute of marriage on a pedastel - then where do you go?...better you know beforehand IMHO...

Sailor Saturn · Post by **Sailor Saturn** » Wed Mar 13, 2002 5:59 pm

Originally posted by Yshania
My own opinion. I believe that there is a difference between making love and having sex, but let us call it sex for ease of reference In my opinion, sex is an important ingredient in a relationship, whether you are married or not. It is an opportunity to meet on a different physical and emotional level...now, consider you marry and the sex does not satsify...do you (intended as a general address) continue to live a celibate life? I would hope that my children were happy in all areas of their relationships before they committed...

I don't like the term "making love" when applied to sex because that implies that sex is necessary for there to be love. Sex is not nearly that important.

I would rather be celibate and spend the rest of my life with the one I love than to have great sex with someone I don't really love.

I just stumbled across what I posted in the topic Pre-marital Sex - right or wrong?, except there I was posting about marriage.

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn
I think Robert A. Heinlein explained best the difference between love, sex, and marriage, though I don't remember if it was in Time Enough For Love or I Will Fear No Evil. The main character stated that marriage is not about eros. Eros is readily available just about anywhere. If you want to experience eros badly enough, it can be done someway, somehow, somewhere. Thus, it is ridiculous to get into a "contract" that legally bonds you financially with your spouse, among other things, just to experience eros. Marriage is about agape. You marry someone because you love them and want to spend your entire life with them. Agape is what continues to keep a couple(or group?) together long after eros is impossible. Agape is the cake. Eros is the icing on the cake. A cake does not require the icing in order to be good, but the icing can make it "better."

The word marriage means to take two(or more) materials and merge them into one material. i.e., a copper/lead alloy is a marriage of copper and lead. *doesn't know if that is done with copper and lead, merely picked out two metals for an example* A marriage between two(or more?) humans means that they are becoming one.