2007-04-15 14:10:19 · 39 answers · asked by Julia Peculiar 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Pretty much. The only real reason to wait at this point is for emotional maturity. But people figure that out eventually either way.
2007-04-15 14:13:14 · answer #1 · answered by eri 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Looking at it from a worldly perspective, yes...
Looking at it from a Spiritual perspective, no.
sex is meant to be a sacred thing between husband and wife. It's what actually makes the marriage official ---> a blood covenant (literally) when the woman is a virgin.
Blood covenants are pretty important throughout the Bible, and if you just consider for a second the significance of that, than you'd understand why pre-marital sex isn't condoned by Biblical teaching.
God bless.
2007-04-15 14:17:40 · answer #2 · answered by redglory 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No - because that's not really the point. Yes, it was frowned on because sex before marriage could result in a pregnancy. But there is a whole other side to it. The belief that sex is sacred and should only happen between a husband and wife.
I regret all the men I was with before my husband (it wasn't a lot but I still regret all of them). I was taught in college that women should practice 'free sexuality' and called abnormal because I was a virgin.
Honestly - sex should be between two people who commit themselves to each other for a life time. There is no such thing as sex without strings attached. Trust me, I've tried that.
2007-04-15 14:16:13 · answer #3 · answered by noncrazed 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Like they work 100%, right! Only abstinence is 100% guaranteed from anything. The whole "sex after marriage" thing is even more important now with AIDS and other STDs.
2007-04-15 14:19:12 · answer #4 · answered by Coool 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the majority is made up of hipocrits
real people however should experience some romance in their life ....
....sex on his own, has very little meaning
after the first explorations
what makes it beautiful are the many ingredients added to it .
....a little waiting could be one of them ....
not necessarily in 'marriage ' as in legal unions
but a sharing of more then just the physical 'facilities ' seems sensible to me
2007-04-15 14:30:12 · answer #5 · answered by angelica 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Uh, no. Firstly, it's the act of sex outside of marriage that's a sin not just getting pregnant.
Secondly, why are there STILL so many unwed births with all this birth control?
2007-04-15 14:16:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Definitely. Get out there and fornicate until your heart is content.
And it this means you get sent to hell then at least that's where all the good time girls will be too :) Sounds much more fun than sitting up in heaven knitting and watching Songs of Praise.
2007-04-15 23:15:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
And what if your mother had indulged in condoms, pills, and abortions, when your conception took place? Think deeply about this!.....You might have been a could have been!
2007-04-15 16:29:36 · answer #8 · answered by WillRogerswannabe 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is making you say that sex is irrelevant after marriage darlin!
2007-04-15 14:15:37 · answer #9 · answered by U-98 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, condoms break, pills are not 100% effective and abortions are a poor excuse as a means of birth control.
So, the better choice is to wait for a permanent relationship. That way, if a pregnancy occurs the father and mother are committed to one another.
2007-04-15 14:14:02 · answer #10 · answered by Searcher 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Nice one gary, by the way, how's Spongebob keeping?
Yes, thank god. If it wasn't for all that sex before marriage crap I wouldn't have got stuck with the bi*ch in the first place.
2007-04-15 14:30:32 · answer #11 · answered by Shakespeare 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋