Thread: Sex before Marriage.

Originally Posted by Tiamat10

How do you know you and the one you love are sexually compatible unless you do it first? Say he likes giving anal, but she doesn't getting it. Say she likes doggy-style, but he can only get off in the missionary position. Say she's one of the many women that can't climax during sex and he thinks it's his fault (and so does she, because she's not experienced enough to know). Suppose his penis is only an inch long, or say her vagina is too tight to fit it in. There's way too many variations in people's likes and dislikes to dive into marriage and try sex later.

I say live together, fornicate frequently, and then, if you're still compatible after you've really gotten to know your significant other, then get hitched.

I agree with this to a point. I will say, prior to my wife, I was in relationships where there was a higher degree of compatibility, so I can compare. My wife and I have our differences -- but we work around them. I don't think it's made any difference in our relationship. There are maybe extreme physical differences that would present problems for some people, but none of the other stuff would come close to being a deal-breaker for me. Marriage often involves compromise, and sex is no different, as far as I'm concerned. All the other positives in our relationship far outweigh any compatibility issues. Otherwise, I think the biggest problem for most couples is usually about how often -- as opposed to exactly how.

Just for some clarity:

I see people using the term "marriage" and apparently that term is meaning different things to different people. Like the term "white" in Brazil vs the United States. Mariah Carey and Reverend Wright (Obama's former black pastor) being morenoes and "white" in Brazil but "black" in the United States.

Similarily, the term "marriage" is not merely a paper contract to Catholicism as it is among secular, pagan, and probably Muslim people.

Marriage in Catholicism is a sacrament. The term "sacrament" can be understood as visible sign that reveals greater invisible truths.

Marriage within Catholicism is between a man and woman, and monogamous, and formed not by a priest or piece of paper but by the man and woman themselves making vows (marital) to God. And that vow and covenant with God is only fulfilled by the marital act of sex between the couple. Sex is therefore the defacto "signature" of the contract.

The priest and community merely act as witnesses to the vows - the process of contractual or covenant making - between the couple. The priest also presides over the ceremonial aspect of marriage making.

It's also worthwhile to note that vowing celibacy as a monk, friar, nun, or lay person like Opus Dei members (often made up of educated professionals like medical doctors and lawyers), is not sacramental. At least, it's not one of the official 7 sacraments of the Church. However, marriage is a sacrament of the Church like taking Holy Order (priestly vows) vows.

Knights Templars and Knights Hospitalars that fought in the Crusades for example, took vows of celibacy, and were something of warrior monks or friars. But their ceibacy was not sacramental like the marital sex of Catholic married couples and the multitudes of children they produce.

Originally Posted by Tiamat10

Personally, I'm strongly in favor sex before marriage. I don't go for casual sex, but if you're in love and you wanna fool around, I say go for it. Waiting till you get a piece of paper that somehow proves that you love each other strikes me as a bit odd. Sex may not be everything in a relationship, but it most certainly is something. And apparently an important something, since there are so many sexually unfulfilled people in the world. (Takes Catholic priests, for example, but that's another debate all its own.)

How do you know you and the one you love are sexually compatible unless you do it first? Say he likes giving anal, but she doesn't getting it. Say she likes doggy-style, but he can only get off in the missionary position. Say she's one of the many women that can't climax during sex and he thinks it's his fault (and so does she, because she's not experienced enough to know). Suppose his penis is only an inch long, or say her vagina is too tight to fit it in. There's way too many variations in people's likes and dislikes to dive into marriage and try sex later.

I say live together, fornicate frequently, and then, if you're still compatible after you've really gotten to know your significant other, then get hitched.

I think this more of a "porn mentality", to be honest, which I personally find a bit disgusting. It's true that people like different things but while all relationships require some level of mutual compromise, surely it's healthier to simply realise your needs and desires are not the only ones in existence? If relationships are based on maximal sexual pleasure, then we should probably all just be polygamous (which a lot of people already are, of course).

Originally Posted by Patrick

I think this more of a "porn mentality", to be honest, which I personally find a bit disgusting. It's true that people like different things but while all relationships require some level of mutual compromise, surely it's healthier to simply realise your needs and desires are not the only ones in existence? If relationships are based on maximal sexual pleasure, then we should probably all just be polygamous (which a lot of people already are, of course).

I certainly have a "porn mentality." I'm very corrupted. Though, some of that seems to be changing.

But as you know, Patrick, sex has consequences. Some of those consequences can be physical and come in the form of sexually transmitted diseases. Pregnancy can be another.

But it is interesting you are male and promote some self restraint. The media frequently depicts it as males gone wild whereas females are the epitome of near-virgins that shun premarital sex or casual sex. Hardly the reality.

The manager of my building told me the previous tenant of my apartment was a young woman (almost certainly black due to more than one factor including location) that was going to nursing school. Her boyfriend sat in her apartment everyday smoking blunts while she was off working on building a career.

But that is not an uncommon story around these parts. It's especially prevalent among professional [black] women when it comes to low-level drug dealers. Teachers, law school students, and medical school school students dating these guys with little to no future but prison or death. Sex are apart of these relationships of course.

And [black] women that are not professionals or have never been to college... all the more date and have sex with young men that do nothing at all. Not even sell drugs. Or they might off and on.

At any rate... the popular notion is that all the men these women previously past up, should be willing to marry them in their mid to late 30's, or 40's, when these women become more serious about life choices in men, and these formerly past up men should take care of other mens' children.

Why?

Personally, especially if a woman passes a third or fourth child, I'm not raising some other guy or guys (in the not uncommon case of women that have children by mother than one man) children.

My married [black] cousin tells me it's impossible to find a single woman our age in the United States that doesn't have children. He meant that to mean I should settle. My response to him? I have choices. I can get them younger (18, 20, 23 whatever). Or I can find someone outside the United States.

A dude that is a nurses aid, drives an ice cream truck during the summer, bragging to some woman in her 30's, "Shorty I do it all." Meaning he does every or most jobs in the world. He'll almost certainly be having sex with her by the end of the night. She takes that to mean the dude has what it takes to become a NBA player, famous rap star, or mechanical engineer. This is the mentality of the people I have to deal with.

Fast forward South of the U.S. boarder and you'll find young women keeping their legs closed (some not many). More discriminating about character (not looks, "game," ghetto social status). And enrolled in university while speaking two or three languages.