is this right that Pre-marital sex is ok

Originally posted by TacDavey
You provided an argument supporting your side, and when I pointed out a flaw in it, you tried to suggest that I needed to supply my own argument and support it, if I remember correctly. You produced the argument, so it's up to you to defend it.

What was the flaw? I may not have seen it as one. Because, like, causality...it's gravity, electromagnetism, biology, etc. What exactly is the flaw in "everything is a unified system that works together in accord with the laws of physics"? We may only know those laws imperfectly, but to suggest otherwise is literally to say that we can defy the universe that we are created from and a part of.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
In my personal experience, there have been women that I've had horrible chemistry with and some that I had incredible chemistry with (my current gf is one of them). All I gotta say that I'm glad I found out before I did something as major as marraige as I would have HATED to be tied down to the women that made sex almost a chore.

Who has the best sex is the LEAST important aspect to consider when picking a spouse. 😆

Out of curiosity, did you love any of those women enough to even be considering marriage in the first place? Or were these just little flings?

Love should always be above lust, without exception.

Even if I could never have sex with my wife again, I'd still be very happy with her. That's the way, imo, a marriage is supposed to be. It's built on love, respect and honesty. Sex is the icing on the cake of marriage, not the batter it was made out of.

Waiting until you're married doesn't make you "stuck with someone", it makes the first time you do it all the more special. Like I said, if you truly love each other (like a marriage should be), you'll adapt and be happy with each other either way.

So, again, sexual "likes" and "dislikes" are just an excuse to have sex before marriage.

Disagree. Sex, at least for me, is an integral part of any romantic relationship. Is it the most important thing? No, but it is important.

Sexual chemistry is a wonderful thing, imo.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Disagree. Sex, at least for me, is an integral part of any romantic relationship. Is it the most important thing? No, but it is important.

Sexual chemistry is a wonderful thing, imo.

Originally posted by Peach
Except that it doesn't.

Sex and having sexual chemistry is a vastly huge and important part of any romantic relationship, anyone who says otherwise is likely naive or well into their twilight years were they're not interested in sex so much anymore.

Originally posted by Peach
Except that it doesn't.

Not according to the study posted earlier in the thread.

Originally posted by Digi
What was the flaw? I may not have seen it as one. Because, like, causality...it's gravity, electromagnetism, biology, etc. What exactly is the flaw in "everything is a unified system that works together in accord with the laws of physics"? We may only know those laws imperfectly, but to suggest otherwise is literally to say that we can defy the universe that we are created from and a part of.

The flaw was in the creation of logical theories and ideas and how ideas and theories built based off of predetermined stimuli of which the individual has no control over cannot be trusted to create logically sound ideas.

Originally posted by Bardock42
And even if it did, which it doesn't, who cares. Relationships start, relationships end, that's how it. A relationship ending is not an inherently terrible thing, it can be good, it can be bad, it can be neutral

The situation becomes less harmless when children and family are involved, however.

What's wrong with divorce?

Originally posted by TacDavey

The situation becomes less harmless when children and family are involved, however.

No. A separation can still be a positive thing. Children of divorce aren't screwed up or worse off. In many ways it can be more harmful for children to grow up with parents who don't want to be with each other. So, no, I don't buy your bullshit argument.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
What's wrong with divorce?

It can be emotionally harmful to children especially.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No. A separation can still be a positive thing. Children of divorce aren't screwed up or worse off. In many ways it can be more harmful for children to grow up with parents who don't want to be with each other. So, no, I don't buy your bullshit argument.

Not every divorce is a bad thing. I never said it was. But to claim it has absolutely no effect on the children involved is ridiculous. Not every divorce will hurt the children, but many do.

Originally posted by TacDavey

Not every divorce is a bad thing. I never said it was. But to claim it has absolutely no effect on the children involved is ridiculous. Not every divorce will hurt the children, but many do.

And you know that it hurts the children more than their parents continuing being in a loveless marriage how?

Before we get into a debate about the long term harm of divorce, would it not be prudent to first substantiate how pre-marital sex propagates it?

As I see it, the only reason pre-marital sex would cause divorce would be if one of the partners had a serious prejudice against it (i.e. someone like Tac), for me it would never figure in, unless of course I got an STD from my wife, but then I wouldn't call her a whore and say she should have saved herself, I'd only be enraged because she didn't warn me/didn't get herself tested.

This is not any kind of argument for why pre-marital sex is bad, just as you couldn't point to lynchings as examples of why it's bad to be black--you would only be pointing to prejudice and human irrationality in action.

Well, like Lana said, correlation is not causation. I assume if there is any link it could be explained by the vast majority of people who wait for marriage being Religious. And as Religious people, being part of a community that stigmatizes or even rejects divorced people, as well as believing that marriage has to be a life time thing, they may be more willing to stay with a partner they don't love anymore or don't want to live with (thereby hurting their children in the process)

That would be my theory about any correlation (if there is any).

Oh, one point I should have added:

I realize that being black and having pre-marital sex are dissimilar in that one is a choice and one isn't, but I'm not trying to say the things are the same, only that blaming them for the actions of people with prejudice is misguided.

And I agree with Bardock, I don't see divorce as a bad thing if it prevents two people (and possibly more if they have kids) from living in internecine hatred or coldness for all their lives.

Originally posted by Bardock42
And you know that it hurts the children more than their parents continuing being in a loveless marriage how?

This isn't debate about when we should or shouldn't get divorced. In regards to the debate about premarital sex this point is irrelevant. The point is divorce can be harmful to children and premarital sex increases this risk.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Before we get into a debate about the long term harm of divorce, would it not be prudent to first substantiate how pre-marital sex propagates it?

As I see it, the only reason pre-marital sex would cause divorce would be if one of the partners had a serious prejudice against it (i.e. someone like Tac), for me it would never figure in, unless of course I got an STD from my wife, but then I wouldn't call her a whore and say she should have saved herself, I'd only be enraged because she didn't warn me/didn't get herself tested.

This is not any kind of argument for why pre-marital sex is bad, just as you couldn't point to lynchings as examples of why it's bad to be black--you would only be pointing to prejudice and human irrationality in action.

There was a study posted earlier in the thread that said people who have premarital sex and live together before marriage are more likely to get divorced. I believe it's on page 2.

Originally posted by TacDavey
This isn't debate about when we should or shouldn't get divorced. In regards to the debate about premarital sex this point is irrelevant. The point is divorce can be harmful to children and premarital sex increases this risk.

Or, the point could be, that divorce can be a better alternative for the children and parents.

This obviously is a fundamental question to your claim. Is an increase in divorce a positive or negative thing. If it turns out to be positive (for the children), which I see no reason why it shouldn't, you'd have to be for pre-marital sex, by your logic (logic that I don't agree with, of course).

The only people who don't engage in premarital sex are those who are religious nuts or those who are bad at sex. Fact.

Originally posted by BackFire
The only people who don't engage in premarital sex are those who are religious nuts or those who are bad at sex. Fact.

Couldn't they also be both?

Yes they could, and usually are.

Originally posted by TacDavey

There was a study posted earlier in the thread that said people who have premarital sex and live together before marriage are more likely to get divorced. I believe it's on page 2.

Originally posted by BackFire
The only people who don't engage in premarital sex are those who are religious nuts or those who are bad at sex. Fact.