Poll: Should people wait until they're married to have sex?

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I'd say nope. It's an incredibly important part of the relationship, and you really should figure out whether you're sexually compatible before you tie the knot.

I was once dating a girl who it seemed like we were absolutely perfect for each other, but then when it came to our first time in the bedroom, there was nothing. No spark, no interest, nada. And we had been the sort of couple that people had always said 'aw you're so cute you shoulg get together yada yada yada.'

We were so serious we did actually wonder about marriage, now can you imagine how bad it would have been to get all the way to the honeymoon sweet and find there was no spark?

 

[Lazy Kitty]

No, in fact, I think marriage is just a big scam made up by religions and politicians.

 

[Arkvoodle]

IF a couple feels that waiting until marriage is right, that's respectable.

If they marry just to have sex, that's idiotic.

 

[Odbarc]

I've been reading all these posts and none of them seem to be very effective arguments for either side of their opinions. (Page 1 only)

Marriage is a completely human and artificial concept.

What isn't? Style, make-up, vehicles, money, rank, ect. are all artificial concepts which affect peoples influences in choosing mates.



I think the only real reason people wait for marriage is because there are so many people out there that have no intention of dedicating their lives to their current relationship. How many women out there would still want to have sex with their partner if they know, for sure, that they would never support them in the long run, financially if they got pregnant, emotionally or any other such things you'd expect from a developed relationship?
How often do relationships last when you say, "I don't love you. I'll never love you. You're my booty-call until I find someone better. You're my practice-girl."? While it may not be intentionally your feelings or motivations, these are your actions.


Marriage fails so often because people are getting married out of obligation to unplanned pregnancies, pregnancies to 'fix' marriages which end in greater problems, knowledge that you can always ditch and find someone better, and some people just aren't capable of doing difficult things like compromise and actually working hard when it's so readily available to take the easy road which they've done so often.



My reason for waiting for marriage; because I can. I have no religious motivation despite being Christian. It's just the harder path to take and I've always been one to choose the hard roads in life.
Most guys; How many of you accepted the first offer of sex you had? Were you even capable of saying no?
Most girls; How long did your relationships last after you first started having sex? Would you have made the same decision if you had known when it was going to end?

 

[Laurents van Cauwenberghe]

No, they should wait until they're sex until they have married.

erm... what?

 

[BOOM headshot65]

yes, yes, yes, yes, YES! this can not be overstated. However, this all has to do with location. While I hold no stigma against people who do, the rest of my community would skin said person alive (the guy, not the girl). Well, Where I ACTUALLY live. The nearest "real" town is a collage town, so that mentality is out the window.

 

[Robert Ewing]

No.
Marriage is a bonding of two people through love and and mutual obligation.
Sex is a bonding of two people through love or pleasure.

Therefore a male should be able to lay any other woman that may let him, likewise with a woman.

Marriages perk is to be a form of guaranteeing all future sexual relationships with the person you love, so's that he/she isn't out every other day having guilt free sex with everyone else.

I've never agreed in sex after marriage, it seem's like an incredibly pointless chore of abstinence. What's stopping you from having the greatest moment of your life? The promise that your wife or husband will be completely perfect and sexually fulfilling after you tie the knot? Surely the promise of sex would rush you into a marriage, thus not having a good relationship when you are married. There's just so much compromise when you go into a marriage. And I actually think that you don't truly know a lover until you have sex with them, if you have sex with them, and you hated it, or they show their true colors or something, it would be a complete bummer to find that out when married. And I think sex before marriage is the make or break point. If you have sex with your partner and continue on with the same loving relationship you've always had, then it's a good thing!

It just seems like abstaining for marriage is pointless. It's purely a religious thing as well, because back in ye olde times there was a massive dealio about sexual abstinence because of the female evils, and STD's like syphilis.

Now don't get me wrong, If you wanna have sex after you're married, then go for it. But I don't think there should be a rule or anything that you have to have sex after you're married, it should be up to the person.

 

[Nickolai77]

It depends purely on what sex means to you. If sex to you is just fun and doesn't have any emotive connections then you can have sex as often as you like, if sex to you is something that should occur only within marriage then fine that's your choice, it would make the marriage all the more special i suppose.

Me personally i'm somewhere in between, i wouldn't sleep with random strangers but i would have sex within a committed relationship.

Of course, now that we live in a world of cheap contraception, we have the freedom to have sex how we want. If we didn't have contraception then obviously you'd want to limit sex and keep it within marriage so to avoid unwanted pregnancy and STD's.

This is why religions in the past decreed that sex should be within marrage, in an era before contraception, not sleeping around was obviously undesirable behaviour. Now of course, that's all moot, so i think it's fairly pointless people not having sex for religious reasons.

 

[OriginalLadders]

People should do whatever the hell they want with their bodies so long as they don't harm anyone else in doing so. Although I would argue that having sex before marriage is the better choice. So I voted "nope".

 

[gazumped]

Discuss. And dont hate on me for being religious, Im not trying to convert you or rub it in your face or anything, I just think this topic would make for a good discussion. You're free to believe what you want to believe.

Actually... the other way round. I believe you shouldn't get married until you have sex.

You can't commit yourself to a bond with someone until you're as close to 100% as you can be sure that you're fully compatible, surely that's just good sense. And for most relationships (except for those where both people happen to have very low sex drives anyway so it's no big deal to them) sex is very important, the intimacy has a great effect of strengthening your emotional bonds as well as reassuring both of you that the other is attracted to you and interested in your comfort and pleasure.

Why on Earth would you get into a binding obligation with another person if you have no idea that you're compatible on a sexual level with them? What do you do if one of you likes it rough and the other likes it gentle? What do you do if one of you wants sex every day and the other is only up for it maybe once a month? Not only is it going to lead to frustration and disappointment to at least one side of the couple, it can make an individual feel straight-up unloved if their partner is interested in being intimate as often as they would expect.

Then explain why so many men don't have girlfriends even though they tried. Why so many men are getting close to forty and still have not been laid. Men having to do all the work puts the power in the females hand. The planet your living on is not earth so and putting up some numbers that you copy and pasted don't mean shit.

I'm guessing you're a male, with a lot of male friends, and a lot of the girls you hang out with are girlfriends of said male friends. Because let me tell you, 80 - 90 percent of the females I know are desperately looking for a boyfriend and failing. Going out to bars, clubs, dating websites, there's no one out there, they reckon, who likes them or who's not taken or just looking to get into their pants. (Hmm, perhaps this is why so many guys aren't getting laid, because they're only looking to get laid?) And these are fit girls, let me tell you. One gets a lot of dates but the guys keep 'laughing at her' because she's kind of over the top.
And men may statistically have to wait longer to get laid but women statistically stop getting laid at a younger age. Not many people want a 50 year old infertile woman with wrinkles, heck, if you pay attention to how the media portrays women of various ages, we're not screwable past the age of 35. Men, however, being fertile until they're ancient, are often still viewed as 'silver foxes' in their 60s.

Having said that, I would agree that a guy has to put more effort in to actually get laid. I guess partially because on a biological level it makes sense for a guy to spray his seed wherever he can whereas it makes sense for a woman to evaluate how worthy a mate he is before incubating his seed for nine months and rearing his brood for another twelve years or so.
Also, having something stuck in you is more invasive than sticking something in someone else, so part of the reason may also be that women are more apprehensive about their role in the act.

 

[LordFisheh]

Whatever our own preferences, I can't see any justification for telling others how to live. To do so would be to act as if our opinion somehow determines what is 'right' for everyone, and devalues the free choice of everyone who disagrees.

 

[phylline]

It's a personal choice, I don't look down on those who do wait until marriage.

But IMO, in the days when religion was more or less undisputed (religion seems to be where a lot of the 'wait until marriage' ethics come from), contraception didn't exist, so waiting until marriage was a good way of preventing so many STDs and unwanted children. Now we have contraception, I don't see the need.

 

[VanityGirl]

Perhaps I look at too many flaws with free sex. Also I guess it's because my state has a very high teen pregnancy rate. We also have a high rate of single moms.
I don't think you truly need to be married, but you at least need to think it through. And it also seems much easier for men to want to have sex with every woman since they don't really have to worry about getting pregnant themselves. Don't want to deal with the kid? Leave. At least, that's been the mentality by a bunch of men here.

I am very careful with whom I engage in acts with. I pick my partner and get into a relationship so if someone were to happen, they would be there to support me.

 

[Zantos]

I wouldn't want to shag a random lass, but as long as you both feel ready and willing a fancy ceremony and a bit of paper make no difference on the emotional and physical connection between you.

Also, the maths earlier in the thread is beautiful, could have only been better if it included a positive epsilon much smaller than 1.

 

[RagTagBand]

No and it's a stupid belief centered around a stupid custom.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

yes, yes, yes, yes, YES! this can not be overstated. However, this all has to do with location. While I hold no stigma against people who do, the rest of my community would skin said person alive (the guy, not the girl). Well, Where I ACTUALLY live. The nearest "real" town is a collage town, so that mentality is out the window.

...all I got from that was that you agree with it because everyone else does.

I agree because I think it is the right thing to do. I HATE that our society has made sex outside of marriage to be a good thing. The only point of sex is to have children, and having children outside of marriage can cause serious problems, in terms of trying to raise said child.

 

[Substitute Troll]

yes, yes, yes, yes, YES! this can not be overstated. However, this all has to do with location. While I hold no stigma against people who do, the rest of my community would skin said person alive (the guy, not the girl). Well, Where I ACTUALLY live. The nearest "real" town is a collage town, so that mentality is out the window.

...all I got from that was that you agree with it because everyone else does.

having children outside of marriage can cause serious problems, in terms of trying to raise said child.

That is simply not true. How would being married at all affect the way you raise your child?

 

[BOOM headshot65]

having children outside of marriage can cause serious problems

That's not marriage, that's relationship. What about a single ceremonial day makes two people more responsible? If you mean they should be in a proper relationship before they have children, then that's partly correct, but that's just an ideal - I have many friends with single parents through one of them dying who have turned out just fine. Honestly, I think the correlation between failed relationships and child upbringing lies more in the fact that if someone is irresponsible enough to have an unwanted child (not to offend anyone, I am aware that a lot of the time unwanted children occur ENTIRELY by accident) then they're not responsible enough to bring one up.

It's a matter of responsibility rather than outright banning.

Where I am from, this is simply not the case. As I said, its all about location, and my location, you would be hard pressed to find somebody in their 2+ marriage and/or havent been married 20+ years. So call me old fashion. I am. And I love it that way. Me and my girlfriend BOTH think this way:

No sex before marriage. Once married, you stay married except in extreme cases. You raise your children on these same principals, just as we were.

And pretty much the only way to GUAREENTE no unwanted children is just to abstain from sex until you want them.