Is premarital sex a good, a bad, or a nuetral event in terms of ethics and of effect?

[Herr Heinrich]

My mother-- wise woman that she is-- always advised me, "Never marry someone you haven't slept with," and "Never marry someone you haven't lived with for at least six months first."

That is some sound advice.

 

[MSizer]

... There is a difference between having sex and making love and unfortunately when you give yourself out casually you loose the conviction of the difference.

I know from experience that this is false. Sex with my wife and sex with other people is a completely different engagement. Sex with my wife usually involves emotions, while sex with other people is always just for fun. I never loose track of that. If you can't differentiate between physical activities which heighten emotional connections and physical activities that are purely recreational, you've got some maturing to do. That's not to say that I think any specific lifestyle should fit all people, certainly we all make our own sexual choices, and that's how it should be, To make blanket statements about sex like that is simply inaccurate.

 

[Walkntune]

I know from experience that this is false. Sex with my wife and sex with other people is a completely different engagement. Sex with my wife usually involves emotions, while sex with other people is always just for fun. I never loose track of that. If you can't differentiate between physical activities which heighten emotional connections and physical activities that are purely recreational, you've got some maturing to do. That's not to say that I think any specific lifestyle should fit all people, certainly we all make our own sexual choices, and that's how it should be, To make blanket statements about sex like that is simply inaccurate.

I will give you your opinion but at least call it what it is. If you are married and having sex with others than its for your own selfish lust! If that's your form of recreation than I'm afraid i am not the one who needs maturing!
How can you give yourself to the person you love completely yet give yourself to someone else? You can't.
There is always an exchange of energy between people this is why there is a difference between taking from someone selfishly and given yourself to someone?Making love and having sex.

 

[Comicaze247]

It's not pre-marital sex if you never get married.

 

[MSizer]

I will give you your opinion but at least call it what it is. If you are married and having sex with others than its for your own selfish lust! If that's your form of recreation than I'm afraid i am not the one who needs maturing!

You have no idea what you're talking about. The trust in our relationship is absolute and complete, and if that's not a mature relationship then I don't think one exists.

 

[Walkntune]

You have no idea what you're talking about. The trust in our relationship is absolute and complete, and if that's not a mature relationship then I don't think one exists.

Well I am not going to dig into your personal life. It is scary though when people think lust can be moral.Morality comes from surrendering the ego of wants and desires. It is found in selflessness.

 

[MSizer]

...Morality comes from surrendering the ego of wants and desires. It is found in selflessness...

Really? Dood, did you get your moral wisdom from the bible? I hope not, because if so, it's emptier than I thought.

If morality came from surrendering the ego of wants and desires, then every single time you satisfied your craving for pancakes on a sunday morning, you'd be acting immorally. That's nonsense. In fact, every time you "make love to your wife" you'd be acting immorally. Hogwash.

 

[Walkntune]

Really? Dood, did you get your moral wisdom from the bible? I hope not, because if so, it's emptier than I thought.

If morality came from surrendering the ego of wants and desires, then every single time you satisfied your craving for pancakes on a sunday morning, you'd be acting immorally. That's nonsense. In fact, every time you "make love to your wife" you'd be acting immorally. Hogwash.

I said wants and desires , not needs. But sometimes when we choose to meet our needs with wants and desires, we choose the wrong foods(needs) and obviously and there is a price to pay with health etc...

 

[MSizer]

I said wants and desires , not needs. But sometimes when we choose to meet our needs with wants and desires, we choose the wrong foods(needs) and obviously and there is a price to pay with health etc...

That's a false analogy. First of all, you don't need sex period, much less with a specific individual, be it your spouse or nny other. Secondly, choosing the right foods and the consequences of failing to do so is a matter of prudence, not morality.

Please tell me, what is immoral about choosing to have sex with people other than my spouse?

 

[*Anne*]

First of all, you don't need sex...

That's not what I was told.

Sorry...carry on!

 

[enchanted_one1975]

I think it is good to get a sample of what you are buying into. If you had never tried a cheeseburger, would you be apt to invest in a lifetime supply?

 

[Walkntune]

That's a false analogy. First of all, you don't need sex period, much less with a specific individual, be it your spouse or nny other. Secondly, choosing the right foods and the consequences of failing to do so is a matter of prudence, not morality.

Please tell me, what is immoral about choosing to have sex with people other than my spouse?

Well actually to be loved and touched is a need and is good for health but thats another discussion so quit with the false analogy lies.

To share yourself with another person is as close as you get in becoming one with that person(or bringing a new life into the world that you are both apart of.)
You can only be loved as much as you share this part of yourself with another person and share the most intimate part of your self. The part of you that is hidden behind all of the fears and thoughts and doubts.Making this connection with someone is where real love is found and making love is an expression of this trust and willingness to share your beingness with someone else.
Everyone you sleep with you are actually taking to bed with the one you love and have shared this intimate connection with.
It hurts when people cheat on each other. From where does this pain come from? When people find a true love they start releasing there insecurities of the shame they feel from those they might have slept with. Any skeletons in the closet is a part of you that cannot be loved. It is a part of you hiding behind guilt and shame.
I am sensing from you that you have no guilt and shame or conviction in this subject.
If you don't live it and experience it then you will not sense the conviction.
We are frogs in boiling water.
I will say there is no greater gift then to find a selfless love. A love so great you would not just sacrifice sexual urges to be intimate with only each other, but that you loved each other so much you would lay down your very lives for each other.

 

[MSizer]

Well actually to be loved and touched is a need and is good for health but thats another discussion so quit with the false analogy lies. To share yourself with another person is as close as you get in becoming one with that person(or bringing a new life into the world that you are both apart of.).

Substantiation for this claim please. Your analogy was indeed false. Have you never heard of nuns? Besides, the false analogy was in your saying that there are consequences to eating bad food. Of course there are. That doesn't make it a moral issue.

You can only be loved as much as you share this part of yourself with another person and share the most intimate part of your self. .

While this sounds plausible, I still see no strong evidence for it.

The part of you that is hidden behind all of the fears and thoughts and doubts.Making this connection with someone is where real love is found and making love is an expression of this trust and willingness to share your beingness with someone else..

Yes, I agree with this statement.

Everyone you sleep with you are actually taking to bed with the one you love and have shared this intimate connection with..

Wrong. I don't see how you can even make this claim figuratively, since you can't read the minds of other people.

It hurts when people cheat on each other. .

Of course it does. What does cheating have to do with this?

From where does this pain come from? When people find a true love they start releasing there insecurities of the shame they feel from those they might have slept with. .

More (false) mind reading.

Any skeletons in the closet is a part of you that cannot be loved. It is a part of you hiding behind guilt and shame..

More (false) mind reading.

I am sensing from you that you have no guilt and shame or conviction in this subject..

False. Conviction I certainly have. Guilt or shame, no I do not, since my actions are in harmony with my conviction.

If you don't live it and experience it then you will not sense the conviction..

What does that mean?

We are frogs in boiling water..

What in the heck does that mean?

I will say there is no greater gift then to find a selfless love. .

Next to self esteem, I would agree, but if you don't have self esteem first, you're almost surely incapable of receiving selfless love from someone else.

A love so great you would not just sacrifice sexual urges to be intimate with only each other, .

Sexual monogamy has nothing to do with it.

but that you loved each other so much you would lay down your very lives for each other.

Yes, both my wife and I would die for the other's sake without a shred of hesitation.

Now, please answer my question. How is it immoral for me to sleep with individuals other than my wife? So far you've hinted at asceticism being the root of morality, which it is uncategorically not (since morality is the respect for the suffering and happiness of other sentient creatures) and some apparent espousal of monogamy being a part of morality, which you have not substantiated.

 

[Walkntune]

Besides, the false analogy was in your saying that there are consequences to eating bad food. Of course there are. That doesn't make it a moral issue.[/quote]The morality doesn't fall on the choice but the reasoning behind the choice. Choosing to eat bad food to not deal with emotions or reality would be a bad moral choice. Everything is not interpreted on the surface.

Originally Posted by Walkntune
The part of you that is hidden behind all of the fears and thoughts and doubts.Making this connection with someone is where real love is found and making love is an expression of this trust and willingness to share your beingness with someone else..

Yes, I agree with this statement.

Lets see you agree with this.
[/quote] Originally Posted by Walkntune
Any skeletons in the closet is a part of you that cannot be loved. It is a part of you hiding behind guilt and shame..

More (false) mind reading.

[/quote]But yet,disagree with this.It doesn't take mind reading to know that if someone has a wall up and keeps you out and doesn't share that part of themselves with you, then that is a part of them you are not connected with?

Next to self esteem, I would agree, but if you don't have self esteem first, you're almost surely incapable of receiving selfless love from someone else.

The gift of love is that ability to give selflessly.Is it always about receiving with you?

Now, please answer my question. How is it immoral for me to sleep with individuals other than my wife? So far you've hinted at asceticism being the root of morality, which it is uncategorically not (since morality is the respect for the suffering and happiness of other sentient creatures) and some apparent espousal of monogamy being a part of morality, which you have not substantiated.

I think I summed it up with the statement above. If you are always looking for what you can get instead of the gifts you can give, than our values of morality will just have to differ. We are on two different sides of the coin!

 

[MSizer]

...I think I summed it up with the statement above. If you are always looking for what you can get instead of the gifts you can give, than our values of morality will just have to differ. We are on two different sides of the coin!

What the hell are you talking about? What makes you think I'm "always looking for what I can get instead of the gifts I can give"? Dood, I'm a faithful married man, I volunteer at a soup kitchen, I visit homeless people in another city and bring them clothing on a regular basis, I write moral philosophy articles for a magazine, I refuse to eat meat on ethical grounds (I don't kill sentient beings just because they taste good), I teach French speaking classes to children for no fee - what the hell esle to I have to do to not be considered "always looking for what I can get"?

 

[Walkntune]

What the hell are you talking about? What makes you think I'm "always looking for what I can get instead of the gifts I can give"? Dood, I'm a faithful married man, I volunteer at a soup kitchen, I visit homeless people in another city and bring them clothing on a regular basis, I write moral philosophy articles for a magazine, I refuse to eat meat on ethical grounds (I don't kill sentient beings just because they taste good), I teach French speaking classes to children for no fee - what the hell esle to I have to do to not be considered "always looking for what I can get"?

Can only go by what you are writing and you are writing from a receiving point of view.I phrased it as a question.
Of course its not the actions you take but the reasoning behind them that determines whether they are moral. On that note I do not know you or your intentions.

 

[MSizer]

Can only go by what you are writing and you are writing from a receiving point of view.I phrased it as a question.
Of course its not the actions you take but the reasoning behind them that determines whether they are moral. On that note I do not know you or your intentions.

Oh, so "of course" deonteology is correct and consequetialism is not? Well then in that case I guess the christian dogma of double effect theory is "of course" incorrect. Well, thank you for clearing up that for 1100 years the catholic church got it wrong about morality. I'll let the rest of the christians know for you. Oh, and I guess we'd better cull Mill, Bentham and Hume from philosophy books, because "of course" they're wrong too.

I guess you're right, this doesn't seem to be progressing.

 

[LuisDantas]

In answer to the OP:

It depends entirely on personal, social and cultural circunstances, of course.

Generally speaking, if I must choose then I would say that it is a good thing, for it helps in making people more aware of their possibilities in life and therefore less likely to take marriages that won't make them happy.

 

[Walkntune]

Oh, so "of course" deonteology is correct and consequetialism is not? Well then in that case I guess the christian dogma of double effect theory is "of course" incorrect. Well, thank you for clearing up that for 1100 years the catholic church got it wrong about morality. I'll let the rest of the christians know for you. Oh, and I guess we'd better cull Mill, Bentham and Hume from philosophy books, because "of course" they're wrong too.

I guess you're right, this doesn't seem to be progressing.

It's OK! I am not a catholic.
And remember , intentions also separate having sex from making love!:yes:
I'm outa here!

 

[McBell]

I'm outa here!

Well...

There goes the entertainment...


It was fun watching you have your arse handed to you and you not even realize it.