Sex before marriage is it OK?

That's a wildly unfounded and nonsensical statement. Contraception makes relationships fail? What about unwanted pregnancies? How many men pump and dump, leaving behind single mothers, for every relationship that "fails" due to contraception? And what is wrong with promiscuity?

On one hand you condemn contraception for being unnatural, and then in the very next breath you advocate for people letting things progress "naturally." Now we have to go full circle - I can easily argue that people naturally want to have sex. Your arguments are inconsistent.

This is completely false. Because someone does not use something in the proper way, does not mean that it doesn't work. If I get in my car and drive the wrong way down the interstate, is the car defective? No, it just means that I'm irresponsible. If I try to use the dull end of the knife every time I want to cut something, and it never works, does that mean that the "success rate" of the knife's cutting is effectively 0%, factoring in human error? No. The knife still works. You don't understand what errors are and how to use them. You don't understand how to use statistics or numbers. Stop putting numbers in your posts.

Finally, you made a false comparison when you equivocated contraception failure with deadly road accidents. In the first case, someone gets a little bit of semen inside them which may or may not result in fertilization. In the second case, someone loses their life.

 

Yeah I'm not saying to run around and have tons of unsafe promiscuous sex.

But if your in a relationship with someone, or if your careful when it comes to sex, either using protection or knowing the person really well that you're going to have sex with. Then I honestly don't see why you would need to go through the made up process of marriage before you're allowed to engage in this very natural thing.

Not having sex until after marriage happens in a lot religions, and I think it is a thing people do for moral reasons.

But the reality is marriage is a made up thing created by man, and sex is a natural instinct in nature.

 

I don't understand why people bother with dealing with this "nature/natural" vs "unnatural" argument to begin with. There feels like an underlying implication in most conversations in which people want to attribute whatever falls under the "natural" category as good and if it's "Unnatural" whatever that means, then it's bad. Obviously that's not the case since things like rape and murder can be found in nature. And one has to sit and wonder, a lot of things that fall under an unnatural scope is very much driven by the natural biological process of further growth and humans adapting to their environments. So what exactly is the point of natural vs unnatural. as if humans somehow exist outside the scope of nature itself?

I'd argue that morality and ethics are also products of natural human processes in order to better suit one or the collectives state of living.

 

Two people who are in a relationship, who really like each other, even love each other, but being in a situation they're sitting there thinking we can't have sex because we're not married yet is ludicrous.

 

It kind of sounds like you are trying to say that masturbation is somehow artificial, or that porn and masturbation are inherently wrong. Can you please elaborate? In all of your posts thus far, you have failed to demonstrate why people should avoid sex and masturbation.

Also, am I on your ignore list? That would be pretty funny because you haven't responded to anything I have said.

 

I'm not saying sex addiction or masturbation addiction don't exist, because they do. But like FellatiousD said these things are actually natural acts. High speed internet porn/artificial sexual stimulation is not a natural act, it is artificial, it is a supernormal stimulus. So please don't put these natural things that can potentially become addictions in to the same category as high speed internet porn, which is artificial, which is a supernormal stimulus.

 

Why is that ludicrous? There needs to be more context to that scenario than just that. If the family has passed down morals in which they want their children to be in wedlock before sex in order to (hopefully) produce the greatest amount of stability in the chance that an heir comes about, I don't find anything wrong with that whatsoever. (Of course this doesn't always lead to the greatest scenario, but the alternatives could be dangerous too.) I know you don't HAVE to be married for that stability to exist in the first place , but the implications of marriage do add an extra layer in theory.

 

So two people are sitting there, deeply in love with each other, all their natural instincts are pulling them towards each other, all their natural instincts are doing everything in their power to get them to have sex. But they're supposed to sit there and think well were not married yet, so we will just need to ignore these natural powerful urges, these natural powerful feelings. We might be madly in love with each other, and everything inside of us right now wants us to have sex with each other right now. But no we'll ignore all of that, because we haven't went through the made up process of marriage yet.

 

Your putting sex and masturbation in to the same category as high speed internet porn.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're presupposing that impulsivity is correct on the that basis powerful urges are natural, I won't try and argue for the "natural" or "unnatural" of marriage even though I believe it is a natural process, for the sake of argument even if we assume you were right in your line of thought that anything human's create outside of themselves that doesn't have to do with eating, sex, breathing, etc , then you would be adhering to something called "naturalistic" fallacy, this can be used to support murder, rape, pillaging etc. I'm not so much against your beliefs, moreso your line of reasoning. Though I do think you're being harsh by devaluing marriage as worthless

 

no

loads of bs can be avoided if everyone just waited till they were married
there are a shitloads of abortions that happen because of irresponsible sex every year. something ridiculous like 50 million each year

 

Yeah powerful sexual urges are natural. So when a male and female mate in nature, these powerful sexual urges are one of the most natural things there is.

 

You don't know what your talking about.

 

They are not the same instant gratification category as high speed internet porn. Far from it.

 

Why do they even need to get married to have sex in the first place?

Why do they need to go through a made up process to engage in one of the most natural things there is?

 

So you need to be married to be in love with someone? Do you think two people can't truly be in love if they don't get married? Some people don't believe in marriage. Some people don't think you need to be married to be allowed to have sex.

Look your literally saying why don't they rush off and get married just so they can have sex, and your saying I'm ludicrous?

Why don't they just have sex anyway? Why do they need to go through a made up thing created by man to engage in one of the most natural things there is?

 

So it's impossible for two people to be sensible until they're married? They can't use contraception before marriage? They can't bring the child in to a stable loving environment before marriage?

Are children never brought in to unstable homes, unstable environments when their parents are married?

There's plenty of married couples who are unstable, who have had children and brought them in to an unhealthy, unstable environment.

Then there is also couples, even people who have had one night stands, who have brought children in to a healthy stable environment.

 

Very good points. Every argument @StarRider has made that I've seen is based on unfounded assumptions and gross generalizations. He's not a logical person but wants to direct other people to act a certain way without any justification.

Don't try to shame and disrespect @skaterdrew by dismissing his argument on the basis of his porn consumption. We are all in the same boat here, and that is a very disgusting and manipulative thing for you to do.

 

Because vehicles on the road can be deadly if they're not operated correctly. So we can't have a system where people are allowed to drive vehicles on the road who don't fully understand how to operate them correctly.

Your arguments are stupid. Where are you learning all of this stuff? In church I bet.

 

I think his point with the driving question is to show that the certification/license lessens the risk of accidents occurring, and that marriage in the same vain *should* lead to a more stable unit than people that don't. Personally, I've seen arguments for and against marriage, both have their pros and cons, it highly depends on the situation and people involved. I understand why some people wouldn't want to get married, it's very risky, especially for the man, to be legally bounded to the woman. But if you have such a large amount of faith in your SO, and are "madly in love with that person, I don't see why you would be against getting married before sex.