sow the wild oats of youth
2007-01-02 17:30:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
"So, would it be safe to say that it is no longer realistic to expect adolescents to wait 16 years, or would it be safer to give them the education they will need to make responsible choices about their sexual health?"
It's not realistic whatsoever. That's not to say you should tell young people to have premarital sex. Telling them honestly about the consequences of sex is the best thing you can do for them. It's quite true that in the past, people married much younger than they do today. It's also human nature to do the deed. Arming kids with all the knowledge they can handle will help them more than anything.
I always read much more than my girlfriends when I was young. I also was the last of them to have sex, in my LATE teens. I was just as pretty and had just as many boyfriends as they did. I also better understood the consequences and I waited until I could handle them. Had I waited until marriage for sex, I would have been a 25 year old virgin.
Also, you test drive cars before you buy them. And you won't be sexually compatible with everyone. Better to try it out first and make sure it's pleasing to you. It would really suck to marry someone and find out they are lame in bed.
I'm not knocking what others do. Do what's best for you. But making young people feel sinful for natural feelings and impulses is just backwards and ignorant. Haven't you noticed that stupid people breed more than the educated ones????????
2007-01-02 17:39:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by buffy s 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Therefore, isn't it safe to say that God intended for us to enjoy sexual intercourse?
-- Yes! Thank you! Thank you! I'm glad to see someone else making the same point I've been making for years!
So, would it be safe to say that it is no longer realistic to expect adolescents to wait 16 years, or would it be safer to give them the education they will need to make responsible choices about their sexual health?
-- Again, yes! Thank you! As a very personal example, I was 9 when I hit puberty. I'm 28 now, and I'm still not married. So, I would have been waiting almost 20 years to have sex. And I wouldn't know anything about protecting myself or the practical side of sex. I wouldn't know how my own body reacts to sex.
Thank you so much for your question! I'm so happy to see someone else thinking this! Wonderful progressive thinking! :)
EDIT: There's nothing wrong with waiting until you're older, but it's unrealistic to expect every person to do that. I waited until I was 19 because I was more worried about getting into college. It was the perfect age for me. And it's not like I've slept with every guy I could since then. I was picky about who I shared my bed with. It's not like sex before marriage makes you promiscuous.
Also, there's something called sexual compatibility. Had my future husband and I not had sex before marriage, we would have discovered our sexual incompatibility issues WHILE we were married. I'd rather find out sooner and work on them sooner rather than later!
2007-01-02 17:33:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I have four three main points;
1.
It was just in the news the other day that people have been having sex before marriage (even people our grandparents age) at about the same rate as today. Although today it does happen sooner than before.
2.
Another thing is that having sex before marriage is only a sin if you believe it is. If do not accept any believe system that it is wrong, than its not.
3. Most of the people I knew in college who remained virgins. Were promiscuous in every other way. So to me it seems to make no sense. To refrain from having sex means to show respect for your body and purity. If you do all sorts of other things, your virginity has no meaning.
4. In places like Texas where they teach abstinence only in schools the teen pregnancy rate and STD rate is the highest. People don't use birth control or condoms because they don't believe they will work, but it doesn't seem like the stop having sex.
2007-01-02 17:39:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sophia75 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think God works on a sliding scale. He didn't say something like... no sex before marriage till the year 1935 then after that, sex before marriage is OK. The commandments aren't to be compromised. Just as you display in your comment.there is more pre-marital sex now than there was several decades ago. But, there are more murders today than there were several decades ago too. Has God said murder was sinful & wrong up till 1935 then after that murder is OK? Haardly ! Sex before marriage comes under the sin of adultry. Adultry was a sin then, is today, and will be forever. Mankind has changed. God hasen't.
2007-01-02 17:46:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well , from a religious point of view, some may opt to wait and fight off the urge till marriage, or close to it. Coming from a strong catholic family that is what I choose! But as I advance in science the biological aspect of us all being sexual beings puts things in a new light. I may have choose a different and more fun path-LOL / all jokes aside I can definitely see your point of view. These days we do need to educate ''responsible choices". With many people holding off on marriage till later in life, nobody is going to fight it anymore.
2007-01-02 17:43:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by Aces 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The average age of puberty is getting younger and younger with every generation. A theory is that the main cause may be all the hormones that are used to grow livestock faster (and more profitably) is also being ingested by humans and accelerating puberty.
The average age of marriage (and having children), at least in developed countries, might be explained by the fact that we no longer live in a high-death-rate society; low-death-rate societies tend to live longer, and reproduce at older ages with fewer kids.
Two (seemingly) unrelated trends.
What you do with the trends is up to you.
2007-01-02 17:37:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by DavID 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sex is marriage. You can hardly think that the ceremony and piece of paper that we call 'marriage' today means much to God.
When someone 'lays' with another is when God recognises the marriage. So.. it is impossible to have sex before marriage. As sex = marriage.
Now.. understanding that means we can step down to a human level now and ask is it 'wise' to have sex before the man made ceremony.
I don't think it is as the cost, trouble and impact of the man made ceremony shows the dedication and commitment a couple have for one another. It is an outward showing of what is inside. Evidence of love that is in the heart. As love without works is nothing.
BUT please don't go down a road implying that a marraige ceremony has anything to do with God as it doesn't. It can't.. he did not design it. We did!
2007-01-02 17:34:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Again the PRAYNOGRAPHER must speak to enlighten your elementary child like mind. Humans were having sex before anyone ever thought of marriage. Marriage was just a way someone could make money from sex.The PRAYNOGRAPHER the All knowing.....
2007-01-02 17:39:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by Praynographer ! 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
All Human beings have Primal urges. The need to multiply as quickly as possible, with as many mates as possible. Being monogamous is completely unnatural in every sense of the word. That is why our sexual urges are so intense. The answer to your question is yes.
2007-01-02 17:34:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by pierceplatinum 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
The moment sex occurs you are married.
If you have multipe parterns you are an adulterer or fornicator. An animal.
Someone who thinks ONE vagina is better than another or someone who can't pick a good person, but takes the vagina because it's convient.
Premarital sex is dehumanizing.
Are you PROUD your HUSBAND or WIFE had a dozen people inside them before YOU came along!
Does that fullfill you!
2007-01-02 17:58:41
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋