Is Sex before marriage bad?

Every other living creature has sex whenever the hell they want. Why should it be any different for us? It's a natural and beautiful thing and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it unless you're afraid of going to hell (pssst, it's not real ;))

Now go out and have some freakin' sex!

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Aldouz"]Its Bad... If you cannot control your desire, how can you control your life...K0PaSk4

Oh, so I suppose that eating and sleeping are bad too, for that same reason.

"I have the desire to pee!" U write it wrong... it should be "I have the need to pee!" Use the keyboard wisely...

[QUOTE="K0PaSk4"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Aldouz"]Its Bad... If you cannot control your desire, how can you control your life...Aldouz

Oh, so I suppose that eating and sleeping are bad too, for that same reason.

"I have the desire to pee!" U write it wrong... it should be "I have the need to pee!" Use the keyboard wisely...

I think it's still wrong, it kind of pollutes the value of sex becuz it's supposed to be a part of marriage. I know lots of people admit that they wished they waited till they were married. I think in general sex has lost it's real meaning and has caused many griefs and suffering due to it's wrong use. You may disagree with me but i am still keeping my opinion. The whole reason why religion is against premarital sex is not to keep you from the pleasure, but to prevent that bad stuff that may come with premarital sex, such as spreading STD's, unplanned pregnancy, dumping, scandal, regret so on so.The_Nintendawg

[QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]I think it's still wrong, it kind of pollutes the value of sex becuz it's supposed to be a part of marriage. I know lots of people admit that they wished they waited till they were married. I think in general sex has lost it's real meaning and has caused many griefs and suffering due to it's wrong use. You may disagree with me but i am still keeping my opinion. The whole reason why religion is against premarital sex is not to keep you from the pleasure, but to prevent that bad stuff that may come with premarital sex, such as spreading STD's, unplanned pregnancy, dumping, scandal, regret so on so.Zaeryn

It's sacred in Roman Catholicism which the OP is, but anyway i think sex and marriage should be together becuz it really makes marriage more special and sex more special too, you saving it. Kind of like instead of going to a greasy cheap mcdonalds, you can save and go to an expensive dinner at a exquisite restaurant. (Ya i know weird logic but get the point).

[QUOTE="K0PaSk4"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Aldouz"]Its Bad... If you cannot control your desire, how can you control your life...Aldouz

Oh, so I suppose that eating and sleeping are bad too, for that same reason.

"I have the desire to pee!" U write it wrong... it should be "I have the need to pee!" Use the keyboard wisely...

Humans have desires to eat, and sleep, and enjoy themselves... to say that giving in to one's desires is ridiculous. If you're religious, which is likely given your puritanical attitude, it's even more so since God, through creating is, would have given us the very desires you seek to repress.

It's sacred in Roman Catholicism which the OP is, but anyway i think sex and marriage should be together becuz it really makes marriage more special and sex more special too, you saving it. Kind of like instead of going to a greasy cheap mcdonalds, you can save and go to an expensive dinner at a exquisite restaurant. (Ya i know weird logic but get the point).

The_Nintendawg

I do respect people for saving themselves, it must take a lot of dedication to your beliefs

[QUOTE="Zaeryn"][QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]I think it's still wrong, it kind of pollutes the value of sex becuz it's supposed to be a part of marriage. I know lots of people admit that they wished they waited till they were married. I think in general sex has lost it's real meaning and has caused many griefs and suffering due to it's wrong use. You may disagree with me but i am still keeping my opinion. The whole reason why religion is against premarital sex is not to keep you from the pleasure, but to prevent that bad stuff that may come with premarital sex, such as spreading STD's, unplanned pregnancy, dumping, scandal, regret so on so.The_Nintendawg

It's sacred in Roman Catholicism which the OP is, but anyway i think sex and marriage should be together becuz it really makes marriage more special and sex more special too, you saving it. Kind of like instead of going to a greasy cheap mcdonalds, you can save and go to an expensive dinner at a exquisite restaurant. (Ya i know weird logic but get the point).

Humans have desires to eat, and sleep, and enjoy themselves... to say that giving in to one's desires is ridiculous. If you're religious, which is likely given your puritanical attitude, it's even more so since God, through creating is, would have given us the very desires you seek to repress.

Funky_Llama

Eat, don't hoard. Sleep, don't laze. Moderation and conservation are the point here.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Humans have desires to eat, and sleep, and enjoy themselves... to say that giving in to one's desires is ridiculous. If you're religious, which is likely given your puritanical attitude, it's even more so since God, through creating is, would have given us the very desires you seek to repress.

Theokhoth

Eat, don't hoard. Sleep, don't laze. Moderation and conservation are the point here.

Why is moderation nessecarily right? And who are you to decide what constitutes 'moderation'? The term is both relative and subjective.

[QUOTE="Zaeryn"][QUOTE="The_Nintendawg"]I think it's still wrong, it kind of pollutes the value of sex becuz it's supposed to be a part of marriage. I know lots of people admit that they wished they waited till they were married. I think in general sex has lost it's real meaning and has caused many griefs and suffering due to it's wrong use. You may disagree with me but i am still keeping my opinion. The whole reason why religion is against premarital sex is not to keep you from the pleasure, but to prevent that bad stuff that may come with premarital sex, such as spreading STD's, unplanned pregnancy, dumping, scandal, regret so on so.The_Nintendawg

It's sacred in Roman Catholicism which the OP is, but anyway i think sex and marriage should be together becuz it really makes marriage more special and sex more special too, you saving it. Kind of like instead of going to a greasy cheap mcdonalds, you can save and go to an expensive dinner at a exquisite restaurant. (Ya i know weird logic but get the point).

Whether you think it makes marriage better or not, the topic is whether it's bad, ie immoral.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Humans have desires to eat, and sleep, and enjoy themselves... to say that giving in to one's desires is ridiculous. If you're religious, which is likely given your puritanical attitude, it's even more so since God, through creating is, would have given us the very desires you seek to repress.

Funky_Llama

Eat, don't hoard. Sleep, don't laze. Moderation and conservation are the point here.

Why is moderation nessecarily right? And who are you to decide what constitutes 'moderation'? The term is both relative and subjective.

Eat too much, you get fat, or you starve other people around you, or whatever. Laze about, and don't get your jobs done, other people along with yourself could get hurt.

Playing the postmodernist card isn't going to help.

not if you use protectionmistervengeance

I think you worded that badly :?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Humans have desires to eat, and sleep, and enjoy themselves... to say that giving in to one's desires is ridiculous. If you're religious, which is likely given your puritanical attitude, it's even more so since God, through creating is, would have given us the very desires you seek to repress.

Theokhoth

Eat, don't hoard. Sleep, don't laze. Moderation and conservation are the point here.

Why is moderation nessecarily right? And who are you to decide what constitutes 'moderation'? The term is both relative and subjective.

Eat too much, you get fat, or you starve other people around you, or whatever. Laze about, and don't get your jobs done, other people along with yourself could get hurt.

Playing the postmodernist card isn't going to help.

Ah, well, there, you're giving examples that are clearly immoral. But the problem is, having a lot of sex doesn't harm those around you.

Ah, well, there, you're giving examples that are clearly immoral. But the problem is, having a lot of sex doesn't harm those around you.

Funky_Llama

The more sex you have, the more likely you are to catch an STD. Then you can easily give it to someone else. Unless you do it with a single partner.

And you tell me not to define "moderation," but you want to define "immoral"?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Ah, well, there, you're giving examples that are clearly immoral. But the problem is, having a lot of sex doesn't harm those around you.

Theokhoth

The more sex you have, the more likely you are to catch an STD. Then you can easily give it to someone else. Unless you do it with a single partner.

And you tell me not to define "moderation," but you want to define "immoral"?

So, use contraception.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Ah, well, there, you're giving examples that are clearly immoral. But the problem is, having a lot of sex doesn't harm those around you.

Funky_Llama

The more sex you have, the more likely you are to catch an STD. Then you can easily give it to someone else. Unless you do it with a single partner.

And you tell me not to define "moderation," but you want to define "immoral"?

So, use contraception.

STDS can be spread by more than just the genitals. . . .unless you want me to use contraception on my tongue as well.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

Ah, well, there, you're giving examples that are clearly immoral. But the problem is, having a lot of sex doesn't harm those around you.

Theokhoth

The more sex you have, the more likely you are to catch an STD. Then you can easily give it to someone else. Unless you do it with a single partner.

And you tell me not to define "moderation," but you want to define "immoral"?

So, use contraception.

STDS can be spread by more than just the genitals. . . .unless you want me to use contraception on my tongue as well.

But giving someone an STD is not an intrinsic part of pre-marital sex - nor is it not a risk in post-marital sex - and thus should not be lumped together with pre-marital sex.

But giving someone an STD is not an intrinsic part of pre-marital sex - nor is it not a risk in post-marital sex - and thus should not be lumped together with pre-marital sex.

Funky_Llama

No, but it is an intrinsic part of having "lots of sex," which is the subject we were on. Moderation?

As for premarital sex, it's just a philosophy that you conserve yourself for someone you love and plan to be with for the rest of your life.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

But giving someone an STD is not an intrinsic part of pre-marital sex - nor is it not a risk in post-marital sex - and thus should not be lumped together with pre-marital sex.

Theokhoth

No, but it is an intrinsic part of having "lots of sex," which is the subject we were on. Moderation?

As for premarital sex, it's just a philosophy that you conserve yourself for someone you love and plan to be with for the rest of your life.

What? No, it is not! You are honestly suggesting that having a lot of sex will nessecarily give someone an STD? Eugh. I despair.

And if a couple marry, only to find that they don't 'gel' (no pun intended) sexually, what then?

Sex should be saved until you're ready, period. For some people that means marriage, for some it doesn't.famicommander

I'm afraid when I start looking for some one again, their gonna temp into sex before marriage... so is it bad?Simsfreak14

It depends whether you're religious as to whether you consider it a sin or not. But, I think for a relationship to really work out, you should save yourself for marriage, that way it is really special when you do make love.

And if a couple marry, only to find that they don't 'gel' (no pun intended) sexually, what then?

Funky_Llama

-nods-

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

But giving someone an STD is not an intrinsic part of pre-marital sex - nor is it not a risk in post-marital sex - and thus should not be lumped together with pre-marital sex.

Funky_Llama

No, but it is an intrinsic part of having "lots of sex," which is the subject we were on. Moderation?

As for premarital sex, it's just a philosophy that you conserve yourself for someone you love and plan to be with for the rest of your life.

What? No, it is not! You are honestly suggesting that having a lot of sex will nessecarily give someone an STD? Eugh. I despair.

And if a couple marry, only to find that they don't 'gel' (no pun intended) sexually, what then?

Having lots of sex with lots of partners will almost inevitably result in contracting an STD.

And if that happens, then there's more to marriage than sex. If you get married just for the sex, then you're pretty disgusting.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

But giving someone an STD is not an intrinsic part of pre-marital sex - nor is it not a risk in post-marital sex - and thus should not be lumped together with pre-marital sex.

Theokhoth

No, but it is an intrinsic part of having "lots of sex," which is the subject we were on. Moderation?

As for premarital sex, it's just a philosophy that you conserve yourself for someone you love and plan to be with for the rest of your life.

What? No, it is not! You are honestly suggesting that having a lot of sex will nessecarily give someone an STD? Eugh. I despair.

And if a couple marry, only to find that they don't 'gel' (no pun intended) sexually, what then?

Having lots of sex with lots of partners will almost inevitably result in contracting an STD.

And if that happens, then there's more to marriage than sex. If you get married just for the sex, then you're pretty disgusting.

No, it will not almost inevitably result in contracting an STD, and if you do, that's not immoral; it's immoral to give someone an STD, but not to get one.

I never suggested getting married just for the sex. But a lack of a sex life can be a problem for married couples, and that problem can not be anticipated if you're not having sex before marriage.

No, it will not almost inevitably result in contracting an STD, and if you do, that's not immoral; it's immoral to give someone an STD, but not to get one.

I never suggested getting married just for the sex. But a lack of a sex life can be a problem for married couples, and that problem can not be anticipated if you're not having sex before marriage.

Funky_Llama

It was pretty immoral for the other guy to give you one. And yes it does, by simple statistics, increase your chances of contracting an STD at some point.

A lack of sex life doesn't destroy an entire marriage, whatever problems it may cause, unless one or both of the people involved have seriously messed up ideas in the first place.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

No, it will not almost inevitably result in contracting an STD, and if you do, that's not immoral; it's immoral to give someone an STD, but not to get one.

I never suggested getting married just for the sex. But a lack of a sex life can be a problem for married couples, and that problem can not be anticipated if you're not having sex before marriage.

Theokhoth

It was pretty immoral for the other guy to give you one. And yes it does, by simple statistics, increase your chances of contracting an STD at some point.

A lack of sex life doesn't destroy an entire marriage, whatever problems it may cause, unless one or both of the people involved have seriously messed up ideas in the first place.

You're wiggling out of 'almost inevitably' getting an STD, I see. And as I said, giving someone an STD is not a part of having sex outside of marriage. It can be, but not nessecarily.

It can destroy marriages; my point still stands.

Nowadays, No.

as long as your dating the person then i wouldnt call it BAD, just going against most religions, but im not religious so i dont really follow those rules

pregnancy before marriage on the other hand...

as long as your dating the person then i wouldnt call it BAD, just going against most religions, but im not religious so i dont really follow those rules

pregnancy before marriage on the other hand...

tripplebrow

Except that marriage is a religious institution, so you're suggesting that no nonbeliever should ever have a child.

Nowadays, No.

69ANT69

Your Avatar gave me nightmares!!

[QUOTE="tripplebrow"]

as long as your dating the person then i wouldnt call it BAD, just going against most religions, but im not religious so i dont really follow those rules

pregnancy before marriage on the other hand...

Funky_Llama

Except that marriage is a religious institution, so you're suggesting that no nonbeliever should ever have a child.

thats not what the topic is and i was just throwing in my 2 cents. so back the hell off

you believe what you want, and i believe what i want. cant we live like that instead of trying to start these stupid arguments that nobody is going to win

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="tripplebrow"]

as long as your dating the person then i wouldnt call it BAD, just going against most religions, but im not religious so i dont really follow those rules

pregnancy before marriage on the other hand...

tripplebrow

Except that marriage is a religious institution, so you're suggesting that no nonbeliever should ever have a child.

thats not what the topic is and i was just throwing in my 2 cents. so back the hell off

you believe what you want, and i believe what i want. cant we live like that instead of trying to start these stupid arguments that nobody is going to win

:lol: You can't wander into a debate topic, post your opinion (which was just as off-topic as my response), and expect not to be challenged. It doesn't work like that. You don't get to declare yourself to be immune from criticism. If you don't like that, don't post in a debate topic.

So what should I do when the moment gets all quiet and she starts doing "stuff" to me?Simsfreak14

[QUOTE="tripplebrow"][QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="tripplebrow"]

as long as your dating the person then i wouldnt call it BAD, just going against most religions, but im not religious so i dont really follow those rules

pregnancy before marriage on the other hand...

Funky_Llama

Except that marriage is a religious institution, so you're suggesting that no nonbeliever should ever have a child.

thats not what the topic is and i was just throwing in my 2 cents. so back the hell off

you believe what you want, and i believe what i want. cant we live like that instead of trying to start these stupid arguments that nobody is going to win

:lol: You can't wander into a debate topic, post your opinion (which was just as off-topic as my response), and expect not to be challenged. It doesn't work like that. You don't get to declare yourself to be immune from criticism. If you don't like that, don't post in a debate topic.

your right, whatever. who the hell cares? im going to go move on with my life because i really dont feel like starting a stupid argument about something as stupid as religion

um....no :|

/thread

[QUOTE="Simsfreak14"]So what should I do when the moment gets all quiet and she starts doing "stuff" to me?Burnsmiesta

Why England?

[QUOTE="Burnsmiesta"][QUOTE="Simsfreak14"]So what should I do when the moment gets all quiet and she starts doing "stuff" to me?Simsfreak14

Why England?

[QUOTE="Simsfreak14"]

[QUOTE="Burnsmiesta"][QUOTE="Simsfreak14"]So what should I do when the moment gets all quiet and she starts doing "stuff" to me?Burnsmiesta

Why England?

That amused me.