Chastity or Promiscuity? Which is best and why?

[Guitar's Cry]

Well, it is clear you can't explain it from an evolutionary perspective, so the Biblical perspective seems to be the only alternative explanation, and correct one.

Except when it isn't.

I would suspect marriage from a psychological stems from innate response mechanisms dealing with mating rituals that were eventually bred out as humans evolved year round mating and showed up in culture as it developed with our technology.

 

[nPeace]

Oh, I am certain there are other alternatives than the Biblical one. The Islamic one, the Hindu one, the Shinto one, etc.

The only relevant one is the one that fits the evidence. And the Biblical one doesn't do that. But, if you want to debate that, go to Science&Religion, not here.

You can't admit that you don't know, and then you say no to one or the other, and then say you are sure about others. Come on Polymath257. You are committing a logical fallacy.

 

[Polymath257]

Why do you keep adjusting what you say?
Let me ask you this. Suppose that a couple has been married and one becomes convinced that God does not approve of that marriage. Would you expect them to renounce the marriage even if they otherwise love and care for each other?
A person can only respond to what you say, you know. They can't respond to what you are thinking, or what you had in mind to say..

Note... but one becomes convinced that God does not approve of that marriage...
That's the part I responded to. Okay?

I get that. And, under those circumstances, to expect them to renounce the marriage is, as I said, heartless and cruel. And any deity that would expect such is evil.

As I said the relationship works and is happy otherwise. It is only the conclusion of one of those involved that God doesn't approve of it.

 

[nPeace]

Except when it isn't.

I would suspect marriage from a psychological stems from innate response mechanisms dealing with mating rituals that were eventually bred out as humans evolved year round mating and showed up in culture as it developed with our technology.

I understand why you have to guess, but you know what a guess is right?

 

[Polymath257]

You can't admit that you don't know, and then you say no to one or the other, and then say you are sure about others. Come on Polymath257. You are committing a logical fallacy.

No, I said that I am unfamiliar with the archeological evidence pertaining to this topic. I am, however, sure that the Biblical treatment isn't valid since it is invalid for most other things related to evolution.

 

[Polymath257]

I understand why you have to guess, but you know what a guess is right?

Are we supposed to know all the archeology appropriate to this? Why?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

It always amazes me how people want to deny the validity of someone else's marriage.

It just seems rude to me. I don't deny the validity of theirs.

Right?! Life is harsh enough without questioning who folks wish to bond with and how they choose to do so (consensually).

 

[ChristineM]

In an effort to save time and summarize everything i previously said. You are free to wordplay all you want, none of my business and live your life as you wish but, that is still not a marriage.

Certainly not your marriage, but it is not your prerogative to dictate another person's marriage. If both @Guitar's Cry and his wife are happy with their relationship whst business is it of yours to dictate their relationship is not a marriage?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I understand why you have to guess, but you know what a guess is right?

Actually, an educated guess is better than an innacurate source. We know that at some point in evolution a species we adapted from had a mating season. We also know that certain innate response mechanisms (ethologists have a different term for it now, but I don't recall what it is) continue to influence long past their practical use in a species. We also know that human culture adapts with new technologies--fire, farming, industry. Especially as humans become more numerous and are forced to live closer and less mobile.

My suspicion that all this results in the concept of marriage is at least more logical than the Bible saying God decreed it when there is no evidence of God and that the Bible is the Penultimate Word of this God.

 

[nPeace]

I get that. And, under those circumstances, to expect them to renounce the marriage is, as I said, heartless and cruel. And any deity that would expect such is evil.

As I said the relationship works and is happy otherwise. It is only the conclusion of one of those involved that God doesn't approve of it.

You didn't say the first part. Don't let me ask you.
I didn't ask what you thought about the deity. I'm not volunteering any information either... although I could.

I'll respond to your complaint though.
If a deity decides what marriage is, and Polymath257 decides that he wants marriage to be what he wants it to be, why would Polymath257 want the deity to accept Polymath257's marriage... and Polymath257 don't want to accept the deity's marriage?
Why should the deity accept Polymath257 marriage?

Seems like Polymath257 wants to be King of kings and Lord of lords.

If God is the one that instituted marriage, it would be unreasonable for a puny human to demand that God accept anything that man calls marriage.
It would be like a man saying, "I should be able to marry a dog if I want. If I want to marry a tree, a truck... whatever, I should be able to do it."

In fact. That is exactly what is going on here, people are gritting their teeth, and raising their fist, and screaming, "*#%^ I can do what ever the #%^ I like."
It's like the famous words of AC.

Go ahead. Do what thou wilt.

 

[stvdv]

Wouldn’t all women be safer in a world that practised chastity before marriage?

Yes, definitely they would be safer. If it's their free choice they even might be happier. If "practised" means "sadhana" (religious hard work) we might end up with a scenario what we have seen in Catholic Church with the nuns and priests. To me earth seems like a school, with not just 1 class.

 

[ChristineM]

Marriage is a late comer to humanity, not until the late 1200s did people get married. Before that there were family agreements which first developed at the start of farming when a more stable arrangement helped secure prosperity.

Marriage : the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship.

No religion required. No dictating that that personal relationship can not include agreement to include a 3rd or more into their marriage.

Of course religion likes to get it paws on this and dictate their view of what it means. Their view is not everyone's view.

So whats all this insult that a married couple are not married?

I married my husband in 1995, we were unable to have children. Because of this my life was falling apart as was our marriage. It turned out hubby was infertile. He arranged it that a 3rd person step an and do the deed which turned in to a 4 year liaison with a beautiful man who we now consider to be close family.
We now have 3 children, who each are very happy to have 2 fathers. Our marriage is secure, far stronger than before my affair with several extra dimensions that those who have never tried it could not even understand.

We are coming up to our 25th anniversary next year. 25 years of happy, successful marriage. That would not have held together and become stronger than many people can imagine without inviting a 3rd person into our lives.

Now who wants to tell me i am not married?

 

[nPeace]

Actually, an educated guess is better than an innacurate source.

Really? No it's on the same level actually. They share the same boat.

We know that at some point in evolution a species we adapted from had a mating season. We also know that certain innate response mechanisms (ethologists have a different term for it now, but I don't recall what it is) continue to influence long past their practical use in a species. We also know that human culture adapts with new technologies--fire, farming, industry. Especially as humans become more numerous and are forced to live closer and less mobile.

We do? No we don't.

My suspicion that all this results in the concept of marriage is at least more logical than the Bible saying God decreed it when there is no evidence of God and that the Bible is the Penultimate Word of this God.

You may not agree that there is evidence for God, just as I don't agree there is evidence of LUCA, but disagreement never killed no one.

 

[Baroodi]

Promiscuity is all evil. many problems in our world stem from it
- family instability
- diseases (STD) and genetic diseases
- society dis-integrity
- all sorts of corruption (political/ethical/social/economical/ scientific and even religious)
- dwindling populations

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, definitely they would be safer. If it's their free choice they even might be happier. If "practised" means "sadhana" (religious hard work) we might end up with a scenario what we have seen in Catholic Church with the nuns and priests. To me earth seems like a school, with not just 1 class.

Not necessarily safer. Marriages can be incredibly abusive. Rape is rape, whether within a marriage, or not. Just because one marries as a virgin does not in any way mean the person they marry will be a saint, or even be able to pull their weight in a marriage.

It's complicated in my view, and making generalisations isn't particularly helpful.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

OK, I've compared them. I still don't see anything obvious. Please give some details.

/E: I just looked up the definition of promiscuous. It merely involves having more than one sexual partner. So, I take back my previous statement. I think promiscuity wins out over chastity hands down.

And what about the children born from such selfish unions?
It's not good for society...it leads to unloved children, who then grow up selfish themselves and uncaring, one step from petty criminal behavior.
It explains a lot in this world.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Chastity in this age of promiscuity is generally frowned upon but I wish to explore its benefits both psychological and medical so any doctors in the House please contribute.

Researchers have found that chastity before marriage offers many benefits, including a decreased chance of psychological damage from expressing intimacy without commitment, freedom from sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and unwanted pregnancies, and an increase in marital stability and satisfaction.

A Christian view on chastity : The Benefits of Chastity Before Marriage

Promiscuity is so rampant, that people think it is okay to sleep around with every Tom, Dick, and Harry, and then go home to their mate and children. I find it sickening and disgusting.

I guess I'd argue that since promiscuity seems so natural and so prominent in today's times, (at least in western culture) my conclusion is why fight it? I often wonder how this can possibly be a christian culture where people act and dress as they do, they are clearly more and more carnally blatant, so it must be such a jarring uphill argument for those with your views. I let this stuff go a long time ago

I don't think Christianity ever really took this kind of thing seriously for long anyway.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

A very odd topic, in my view. Such a wide range of sexual behaviours on this planet, yet it's condensed into two choices. It's essentially being judgemental. Your sexuality is your business. Other peoples sexuality is their business, not yours. In most places on this planet, education about all options is available, and folks are free to do what they do. Why anyone thinks it's their business what others do is beyond me.

Ultimately, yeah. And so to sink one's mind into trying to understand someone else's behavior is to enter a blackhole. Let the chaste be chaste and the promiscuous be promiscuous, I guess.

But I do tend to wonder about the relationships some people get into. Like why would my old friend get with a guy (who I also know) who has kids by like 3 other women who he left behind. That kind of thing bothers me a little bit if I think too much about it. But they both are promiscuous, so hey, why not right. I think it most likely won't last, but these people probably have hearts of steel that can no longer broken in a sense. Perhaps chastity saves you from morphing into a certain kind of person that you might not want to become, as the promiscuous risk becoming essentially bored from love.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Second, if a person does not intend to marry, having sex outside of marriage is going to be a good thing. It forms bonds between people that are positive and healthy.

The whole problem though, is that this comes with the risk of kids. That's a big part of why marriage was always traditionally so essential, so I guess these people doing it outside marriage better have a solid plan for that possibility. Do they both agree 100% to abort, or will they marry if it happens. So the bonding is not free from some very serious risk assessment. So long as they have it figured out, they can do what they want

 

[Vinayaka]

Ultimately, yeah. And so to sink one's mind into trying to understand someone else's behavior is to enter a blackhole. Let the chaste be chaste and the promiscuous be promiscuous, I guess.

But I do tend to wonder about the relationships some people get into. Like why would my old friend get with a guy (who I also know) who has kids by like 3 other women who he left behind. That kind of thing bothers me a little bit if I think too much about it. But they both are promiscuous, so hey, why not right. I think it most likely won't last, but these people probably have hearts of steel that can no longer broken in a sense. Perhaps chastity saves you from morphing into a certain kind of person that you might not want to become, as the promiscuous risk becoming essentially bored from love.

Yes, I too have acquaintances whose behaviour I question ... privately. And acquaintances who questioned mine. We all do I suppose. But honestly I don't find it that hard to keep my nose out of other peoples businesses and act according to my own conscience. Seems that is quite the challenge for some.