Should couples have sex before marriage or not?

[The_Fisher_King]

Salaam,

Does that mean it's okay to make an act for the sole purpose of lustful body pleasure knowing that we could be doing one of the gravest sins in Islam while we are already married and can have that pleasure already?

Nothing inherently wrong with lust (in fact, it is generally a very good thing). What are you referring to as 'one of the gravest sins in Islam'?

Hmm... the Quran says that it is forbidden to have sex outside marriage, and if one cannot get married, they are to abstain from sexual relationships until they can get married. Are you aware of the verses saying that (70:30, 23:6 and 24:33)?

I didn't say it was a good thing. I was just answering your questions about what qualifies as adultery and what not.

Then if something bad happens to the child if it came to this world as a result of that premarital sex because of something the contracts fails to protect because it does not exist in the first place, the child will have to suffer from something it has nothing to do with.

What kinds of bad things as a result of premarital sex are you referring to?

Does that mean there are no default stipulations in the marriage contract (there must be at least one to call it a marriage contract)? So if there were no stipulations, there would be a blank contract or no contract at all, meaning there is no marriage?

No default stipulations - it is up to the parties to the contract to decide what they would like to see stipulated in the contract. And yes, if there is nothing in the contract, it wouldn't be much of a contract!

In your views, is it okay for who's not married to go and have sex with whom ever not married they can? Is Islam okay with this in your views?

If people want to act in this way, they should be free to do so (as long as the relationship is a consensual one). But I think it is better to only have sexual relations within the context of a contracted relationship. As I have said already, all of my opinions stem from my take on Islaam.

Sorry for the many questions. I too am interested to know where you are coming from. I'd like to know more of the Islamic view you follow.

No problem! Ask away!

Wassalaam

 

[Demonslayer]

If people want to act in this way, they should be free to do so (as long as the relationship is a consensual one).

I'm not religious and I agree with this statement.

But I think it is better to only have sexual relations within the context of a contracted relationship.

Curious about this though, since it followed immediately after the first thing you said. Why are sexual relations "better" within the context of a contracted relationship? It is only related to your faith/religion? Or do you see some other reason that sex outside of a contracted relationship is somehow bad, or at least less good in some way, than sex between two people who have not drawn up a contract?

 

[Smart_Guy]

Nothing inherently wrong with lust (in fact, it is generally a very good thing). What are you referring to as 'one of the gravest sins in Islam'?

Yes, agree with you that lust is not wrong. I'm meant that it is not something critical or life threatening; something we don't need to do, risking making a sin. I think staying away from what's doubtful is a teaching in Islam. But that's just my belief. I called adultery a grave sin because the Quran says it is so.

I didn't say it was a good thing. I was just answering your questions about what qualifies as adultery and what not.

Those verses mention the only ways allowed to have sex in Islam, and the consent of the spouse to have sex with a stranger is not one of them. At that I was just pointing out that they are a proof that the consent of the spouse is not one legally Islamic way to have sex; i,e, with a stranger. Adultery is the illegally religious sex, so accordingly this means even with the spouse's consent, having sex with a stranger is adultery. May I ask what is your Islamic source for the conclusion that the spouse's consent to have sex with a stranger is okay in Islam?

What kinds of bad things as a result of premarital sex are you referring to?

It's the examples I already mentioned before in more than one reply in the previous page. Here is one:
http://www.religiousforums.com/thre...re-marriage-or-not.188760/page-3#post-4809517
In my Islamic views, sex outside marriage like premarital sex is forbidden specifically for the sake of the children or the possible ones to come as a result of that relationship. I know there are modern precautions, but they are not 100% safe. Facts I mentioned before are my proof.

No default stipulations - it is up to the parties to the contract to decide what they would like to see stipulated in the contract. And yes, if there is nothing in the contract, it wouldn't be much of a contract!

Does that mean if there are no stipulations and they want to get married, they can't get married because there won't be a contract due to lack of stipulations?

If people want to act in this way, they should be free to do so (as long as the relationship is a consensual one). But I think it is better to only have sexual relations within the context of a contracted relationship. As I have said already, all of my opinions stem from my take on Islaam.

I don't agree that just because people want to do something they should be free to do everything they ever want, since it could affect others, unless its default position is that by nature it has 0% potential to do that. But that's just my belief which I wanted to share with you. Thank you for sharing yours.

No problem! Ask away!

Great! This really helps.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Why are sexual relations "better" within the context of a contracted relationship?

For the same reason one makes contracts in a variety of other situations.

 

[suncowiam]

Sex is between two people some times 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7... Why is it other people's business?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Sex is between two people some times 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7... Why is it other people's business?

I don't think we are even talking about that, but there are issues with child custody. Also, polygamy easily becomes a slavery issue if its left to itself.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Salaam,

First things first, Eid Mubarak!

I'm meant that it is not something critical or life threatening; something we don't need to do, risking making a sin.

Right, but I don't see what the sin is here.

I think staying away from what's doubtful is a teaching in Islam.

Right, but I am not in any doubt about what I am saying.

May I ask what is your Islamic source for the conclusion that the spouse's consent to have sex with a stranger is okay in Islam?

Allaah (I converse with Allaah daily).

In my Islamic views, sex outside marriage like premarital sex is forbidden specifically for the sake of the children or the possible ones to come as a result of that relationship.

So if it is impossible for two people to have children as a result of having sexual intercourse with each other, premarital sex is fine with you?

What makes an inheritance 'rightful'?

Lost parental love is equally possible after marriage.

What exactly do you mean by 'missed living costs'?

And what kinds of 'mental problems' are you referring to?

Does that mean if there are no stipulations and they want to get married, they can't get married because there won't be a contract due to lack of stipulations?

Insofar as I define marriage as a contract (and nothing more), if they have no contract (due to a lack of stipulations), then they are not married. 'Wanting to get married' would equate to 'wanting to have a marriage contract'. If they really want such a thing, then they should stipulate something in it!

I don't agree that just because people want to do something they should be free to do everything they ever want, since it could affect others, unless its default position is that by nature it has 0% potential to do that.

But there are a great many things which could affect others in some way, but we don't prevent others from doing it. For example, denying that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah may well deeply affect those who believe that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah. Should that prevent us from denying that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah?

Wassalaam

 

[Scott C.]

Hey everyone. This is a subject I am interested in. Should couples have sex before marriage or not? People of various religions such as Christianity or Islam would say that couples should not have sex before marriage because it is a sin. However, there is another side to the story which says that couples should have sex before marriage. One of the reasons to have sex before marriage is to know whether or not you are sexually compatible with your significant other or not. Also, you may not know about different sexual issues such as premature ejaculation before you have sex with your significant other. Here are a couple of articles which argue why couples should have sex before marriage.

http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/why-sex-marriage-moral-thing-do

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/26/sex-before-marriage_n_3333073.html

So, what do you think? Should couples have sex before marriage? Why or why not?

I'm opposed on religious grounds. The couple should discuss sex before marriage to see if there are any show stoppers such as perhaps "I only want sex once a year." But I can't imagine a loving spouse regretting marriage or rejecting a spouse on the basis of pre-mature ejaculation or sexual technique. That strikes me as superficial. Marital love should be far more profound. Also, I can tell if I'm sexually attracted to someone when they are fully clothed with no sex involved. If both partners feel the attraction, love each other, want a happy and healthy sex life, and are unselfish, they will be able to work out the details and make adjustments once married.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm opposed on religious grounds. The couple should discuss sex before marriage to see if there are any show stoppers such as perhaps "I only want sex once a year." But I can't imagine a loving spouse regretting marriage or rejecting a spouse on the basis of pre-mature ejaculation or sexual technique. That strikes me as superficial. Marital love should be far more profound. Also, I can tell if I'm sexually attracted to someone when they are fully clothed with no sex involved. If both partners feel the attraction, love each other, want a happy and healthy sex life, and are unselfish, they will be able to work out the details and make adjustments once married.

It may seem superficial, but it's one of the biggest reasons for break up, along with incompatible financial spending. The truth, I think, is that just because you love someone doesn't mean that person can make you happy. There are real-life needs in multiple aspects of life you may not even realize is an issue (even with communication) until after cohabitation (in more ways than one.) But I agree that frank discussions and regular communication is an important part of any relationship, and setting and testing boundaries is really something that should be done before any kind of serious commitment. I just don't put any obligatory emphasis on 'marriage' and the only thing I think you should wait and do after marriage is filing taxes jointly.

 

[Acim]

So, assuming marriage is the bastardized, secular, popular version - then I see little reason why not. I do see some reason, such as it would be possibly more exciting to wait. But it could also be a huge let down, so there's that.

The topic, for me, is so convoluted I'm not sure how to address it without having wall of text. Like I believe in open marriage, multiple spouses. Would this then mean I'd wait until whomever is the last spouse I marry before I have sex? Probably not (relevant) as topic, I think is presuming (as usual) that only monogamous marriage is the righteous form.

But for me, that's just scratching the surface. I honestly think of couples that are at any level of 'getting to know each other' in a type of marriage. Having sex before external marriage is arranged, strikes me as already deepening the visible type of marriage that is visibly occurring.

I also do, honestly think of all humans as intrinsically married. What God has joined together, let no one separate. I'm pretty sure this doesn't mean God has joined flesh, which technically can't join, or even if it appears to (i.e. via progeny), it still, appears to, come out as separate being from either. Thus even less joined, in a physical sense. But going back to what started this paragraph, it would be impossible to have sex before the marriage that occurred long before physical existence was ever imagined.

Admittedly, this post (below) from p.1 though has intrigued me, as I wasn't aware of different types of marriage in Vedic scriptures. Perhaps is saying what I'm kind of getting at in another way. Also possible I find out what the 8 types are and find disagreement with them. Just nice to read about more than one type as if monogamous isn't the only righteous version.

In Vedic scriptures, there are many types of marriage (8 types actually). The first 4 (Brahma, Daiva, Arsha and Prajapate) are considered to be in accordance with religious principles. The next two (Gandharva and Asura) are considered to be not in accordance with religious principles, yet still acceptable in society in general . The last two (Rakshasa and Paishacha) are considered to be not in accordance with religious principles, and are forbidden.

The marriage in question here is Gandharva Marriage. In this type of marriage, a couple live together out of love and mutual consent and then decide to consummate their relationship. Even if there is no official ritual, ceremony or witness's it is still a form of marriage. So in response to your question, living and having sex with someone ( that arises from mutual consent) is actually a form of marriage. The concept of premarital sex is a highly western concept.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I don't think we are even talking about that, but there are issues with child custody. Also, polygamy easily becomes a slavery issue if its left to itself.

it's something we don't notice much, unfortunately. We humans tend to notice we want to fill our desires first before we care of any possible consequences even if those have high potential to cause harm to others.

 

[Smart_Guy]

First things first, Eid Mubarak!

Blessed Eid to you too brother, hoping it comes over and over again with happiness and blessings.

Right, but I don't see what the sin is here.

Islam does not make sins just for the sake of it. Sex in itself is not a sin, and it is good, fun and healthy thing to do. I believe it is a sin because of the reasons I mentioned in my posts before several times. Those reasons are actual occurring facts as I mentioned before.

Right, but I am not in any doubt about what I am saying.

It's not you that I'm saying in doubt, I mean that premarital sex is a doubtful act with potential harmful outcomes. The outcomes I mentioned before, which are actual happening facts, are what make it doubtful; people say it's okay and they can control those bad things from happening, yet they still happen at large.

Allaah (I converse with Allaah daily).

I highly respect that, as it seems to imply, but I don't really understand how come. Could you please elaborate?

So if it is impossible for two people to have children as a result of having sexual intercourse with each other, premarital sex is fine with you?

What makes an inheritance 'rightful'?

Lost parental love is equally possible after marriage.

What exactly do you mean by 'missed living costs'?

And what kinds of 'mental problems' are you referring to?

I don't think those questions are applicable here. I provided verses from the Quran clearly saying that sex outside marriage, at this specific point of our discussion, is forbidden. I recommend reading them if you haven't yet, and find in them if it says sex outside marriage is allowed. Those questions apply either if one of us is not Muslim arguing with what the Quran says (but we both are Muslims), or if my argument was based on my own claims, not that of the Quran.

Insofar as I define marriage as a contract (and nothing more), if they have no contract (due to a lack of stipulations), then they are not married. 'Wanting to get married' would equate to 'wanting to have a marriage contract'. If they really want such a thing, then they should stipulate something in it!

But many people just want to be married. They want to be husband and wife. If there are no stipulations, making no contract even tho they want to be married, they will be just together without a contract. If they have sex then, there would be no contract and they would be adulterers, won't they?

But there are a great many things which could affect others in some way, but we don't prevent others from doing it. For example, denying that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah may well deeply affect those who believe that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah. Should that prevent us from denying that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah?

Is he really the son of God? The Quran says he's not, and Jesus himself says never said he is (when bring to my mind, do you believe in the Quran?). But anyway, I think you skipped the point I said that it has to be something that by nature has 0% potential to cause harm by itself. Believing or disbelieving that Jesus is the son of God is a belief, not something that has high potential in causing harm like sex outside of marriage. The Quran already says "you have your own religion and I have my own".

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Salaam,

Blessed Eid to you too brother, hoping it comes over and over again with happiness and blessings.

Thank you! Insha-Allaah aameen!

I believe it is a sin because of the reasons I mentioned in my posts before several times.

If you are referring to premarital sex here, I am saying that I do not believe it is (inherently) a sin (in some cases it might be, but not simply by virtue of it being premarital).

It's not you that I'm saying in doubt, I mean that premarital sex is a doubtful act with potential harmful outcomes. The outcomes I mentioned before, which are actual happening facts, are what make it doubtful

But I am saying I do not believe premarital sex is a doubtful act.

I highly respect that, as it seems to imply, but I don't really understand how come. Could you please elaborate?

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. I talk with Allaah as I would talk with you.

I don't think those questions are applicable here.

I think they are. These came up in your earlier list of examples of the harms of premarital sex, so I want to know a little more about what you mean by these things, in order for us to discuss whether they count as harms/of premarital sex.

I provided verses from the Quran clearly saying that sex outside marriage, at this specific point of our discussion, is forbidden. I recommend reading them if you haven't yet, and find in them if it says sex outside marriage is allowed.

I read the Holy Qur'aan all the time.

But many people just want to be married. They want to be husband and wife. If there are no stipulations, making no contract even tho they want to be married, they will be just together without a contract.

If people want to call themselves husband and wife, fine by me. But since (as far as I am concerned) being married simply means having a marriage contract, if they don't have a marriage contract, they are not married. The term 'married' has no greater importance than that in my books.

If they have sex then, there would be no contract and they would be adulterers, won't they?

No.

Is he really the son of God?

No.

when bring to my mind, do you believe in the Quran?

Yes.

But anyway, I think you skipped the point I said that it has to be something that by nature has 0% potential to cause harm by itself. Believing or disbelieving that Jesus is the son of God is a belief, not something that has high potential in causing harm like sex outside of marriage

I wasn't talking about belief, I was talking about denying that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah. If I am having a conversation with a Christian who believes very strongly that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah, and I say to them that he is not, that will quite possibly have a significant effect on them. They will quite possibly be deeply affronted at the suggestion. That is arguably a kind of harm.

Wassalaam

 

[Smart_Guy]

If you are referring to premarital sex here, I am saying that I do not believe it is (inherently) a sin (in some cases it might be, but not simply by virtue of it being premarital).

But you are Muslim and the verses I provided say it is forbidden. Doing what's forbidden is a sin.

But I am saying I do not believe premarital sex is a doubtful act.

Hmm... well as long as you're saying it is just your belief, and not that it factually is, then I guess I have to respect that. By doubtful act I mean in being potentially harmful, although facts do say it is harmful.

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. I talk with Allaah as I would talk with you.

But God is not a human being to talk to Him like you talk to me. You also originally said you "converse" with God, not just talk to Him. This means He talks to you too. I don't understand, if God used angel Gabriel to communicate with the Prophet Muhammad, why would He converse with you and not with him?

I think they are. These came up in your earlier list of examples of the harms of premarital sex, so I want to know a little more about what you mean by these things, in order for us to discuss whether they count as harms/of premarital sex.

But that would just be beating around the bushes, and going one step behind instead of forward. This is distructive, not constructive in discussion. This specific part is about the verses in the Quran I mentioned, and I used them to support that premarital sex is harmful because the Quran say it is forbidden. Maybe if you don't believe in the Quran, answering your questions would be applicable. Unless you are arguing that the Quran is wrong. Besides, I already talked about how harmful it is. It was my original post here at least, and I did link you to it before too. The previous page has many posts of mine talking about it.

To be honest with you, once I provided those verses, this whole conversation should be void. Both you and I are Muslims and once the main topic is settled with evidence from the Quran, everything said further, regarding the main topic about premarital sex, would be a waste of time and effort.

I read the Holy Qur'aan all the time.

Did you read it in full already?

If people want to call themselves husband and wife, fine by me. But since (as far as I am concerned) being married simply means having a marriage contract, if they don't have a marriage contract, they are not married. The term 'married' has no greater importance than that in my books.

You're saying if they have no marriage contract they are not married, and before you said if there are no stipulations, there cannot be a contract. This means if they have not stipulations, they can never get married, ever. Or are we suppose to force those who dream of getting married to invent a stipulation or impose one on them so they can get married and get over with? Accordingly, how can two call themselves husband and wife if you say being married means having a marriage contract? How can they be husband and wife if they are not married?

No.

Above you say being married simply means having a marriage contract. If they don't have a marriage contract it means they are not married then. If so, how come it is no, if they have sex they are not adulterers?

Yes.

Good. Then, with the verses from the Quran I provided that say sex outside marriage is not allowed, why are you debating with me that premarital sex is okay, and you're a Muslim believing in the Quran?

I wasn't talking about belief, I was talking about denying that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah. If I am having a conversation with a Christian who believes very strongly that 'Iesa is the son of Allaah, and I say to them that he is not, that will quite possibly have a significant effect on them. They will quite possibly be deeply affronted at the suggestion. That is arguably a kind of harm.

Kind of harm to the radicals; i.e. the imaginary Christian in your example if they complain, but it is not a harm. You're Muslim and I'm Muslim and the Quran says to each their own religion and who wants to believe they can and who wants to disbelieve they can (it's in the Cave chapter, you should know it if you read the Quran in full and read it every day). The Quran says that example you gave is not harmful and you're a Muslim believing in the Quran. That conflicts with your comment that it is kind of harm.

Please don't get me wrong. You're debating in a point the Quran clearly say it's not allowed; debating with me in why it is not allowed. I find this intriguing having both you and me Muslims so I want to know.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I suppose that would depend on one's religious beliefs. A person who believes premarital sex is a sin is going to believe that premarital sex is inferior to sex that takes place after the wedding, which is what I interpret postmarital sex to be.

Does masturbation before marriage become more holy after marriage?

If so, why?

Sex is just a bodily function shared with another person.

Sure, there are a few more emotional markers involved than, say, taking a crap. But orgasm, and pleasure sharing, are just things that mature bodies do.

Religion has made something that's very very regular and common into such a taboo thing and I don't understand why...

 

[Ingledsva]

I believe marriage is God's arrangement, and therefore Jehovah rightly determines what is good and bad in relation to marriage. His standard is: "Let marriage be honorable among all, and let the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge sexually immoral people and adulterers." (Hebrews 13:4) Consider just some bad effects from premarital sex:

- Unwanted pregnancies. Who is to care for the unexpected results of experimental immorality?
- STDs
- emotional pain of jilted sex partners who fail to meet expectations

But all three of those can happen to newlyweds too.

Most men don't wait for marriage to have sex, - and the double standards are ridiculous.

We need campaigns for perfect contraceptives, and ending STD's, like they have for eradicating cancer.

*

 

[Demonslayer]

Religion has made something that's very very regular and common into such a taboo thing and I don't understand why...

IMO it's one of the worst parts about religion. So many religious people I know have serious hang ups about sex...view it as "dirty" and aren't comfortable expressing any sexual thoughts or feelings.

It's too bad, sex should be one of the great joys of life.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Salaam,

But you are Muslim and the verses I provided say it is forbidden. Doing what's forbidden is a sin.

Not everything in the Qur'aan is for all time and every place. Some things that were unlawful in the time and society of the Prophet (saws) are not necessarily unlawful now.

By doubtful act I mean in being potentially harmful, although facts do say it is harmful.

This is what I want to discuss/debate, the 'facts' here - what harms are you referring to, in what way are they harms (that are specific to premarital sex, as distinct from post-marital sex), and (if they are harms) in what way are they harms that are best addressed through a prohibition against premarital sex? This is why I asked you what you mean by 'rightful' inheritance, 'missed living costs', 'mental problems', etc.

But God is not a human being to talk to Him like you talk to me. You also originally said you "converse" with God, not just talk to Him. This means He talks to you too. I don't understand, if God used angel Gabriel to communicate with the Prophet Muhammad, why would He converse with you and not with him?

Just because Allaah is not a human being, does not mean that we cannot talk to each other. Allaah speaks with many Voices inside my head, and I speak back. Also, Allaah conversed with the Holy Prophet (saws) in just the same way (as well as by sending Jibra'eel (as)).

But that would just be beating around the bushes, and going one step behind instead of forward. This is distructive, not constructive in discussion. This specific part is about the verses in the Quran I mentioned, and I used them to support that premarital sex is harmful because the Quran say it is forbidden. Maybe if you don't believe in the Quran, answering your questions would be applicable. Unless you are arguing that the Quran is wrong. Besides, I already talked about how harmful it is. It was my original post here at least, and I did link you to it before too. The previous page has many posts of mine talking about it.

See my above comment about wanting to discuss the 'facts' of these harms. How is that not a constructive discussion? Or are you simply saying, the Qur'aan says this, if you believe in the Qur'aan, you just have to accept it, end of story? If that is the bottom line, what's the point in us discussing anything?

To be honest with you, once I provided those verses, this whole conversation should be void. Both you and I are Muslims and once the main topic is settled with evidence from the Quran, everything said further, regarding the main topic about premarital sex, would be a waste of time and effort.

Ah, so it appears you are saying that. Well, I disagree. Everything is up for discussion (since everything is ultimately open to interpretation, including apparently straightforward verses in the Qur'aan). As I have said above, not everything in the Qur'aan is for all time and every place. That is how it is possible to both believe in the Qur'aan (as the Perfect Word of Allaah) and still say things that are contrary to what the Qur'aan says.

Did you read it in full already?

Oh, believe me, many, many times indeed.

You're saying if they have no marriage contract they are not married

Correct.

and before you said if there are no stipulations, there cannot be a contract.

Correct.

This means if they have not stipulations, they can never get married, ever.

Correct.

Or are we suppose to force those who dream of getting married to invent a stipulation or impose one on them so they can get married and get over with?

Certainly not.

Accordingly, how can two call themselves husband and wife if you say being married means having a marriage contract? How can they be husband and wife if they are not married?

'Husband and wife' are just words. If people really want to call themselves 'husband and wife', let them.

Above you say being married simply means having a marriage contract. If they don't have a marriage contract it means they are not married then. If so, how come it is no, if they have sex they are not adulterers?

Because, as I have said previously, premarital sex is not adultery.

Good. Then, with the verses from the Quran I provided that say sex outside marriage is not allowed, why are you debating with me that premarital sex is okay, and you're a Muslim believing in the Quran?

As I have said a couple of times now, not everything in the Qur'aan is for all time and every place.

You're Muslim and I'm Muslim and the Quran says to each their own religion and who wants to believe they can and who wants to disbelieve they can (it's in the Cave chapter, you should know it if you read the Quran in full and read it every day). The Quran says that example you gave is not harmful and you're a Muslim believing in the Quran.

Where does the Qur'aan say this is not harmful?

Wassalaam

 

[Smart_Guy]

Not everything in the Qur'aan is for all time and every place. Some things that were unlawful in the time and society of the Prophet (saws) are not necessarily unlawful now.

That's true, but those have their explanations as well. The subject verses are clear in what they say and there is no general rule changing them. If everything the Quran is as you said, then anyone can just claim the whole Quran is void.
But if this is what you believe in, I guess I'll have to respect it.

This is what I want to discuss/debate, the 'facts' here - what harms are you referring to, in what way are they harms (that are specific to premarital sex, as distinct from post-marital sex), and (if they are harms) in what way are they harms that are best addressed through a prohibition against premarital sex? This is why I asked you what you mean by 'rightful' inheritance, 'missed living costs', 'mental problems', etc.

Hmm... I really wanna elaborate, but what I mentioned so far is really my limit in how I can say about it. Perhaps if I gain more knowledge and skill I'd do that. Really sorry, brother.

Just because Allaah is not a human being, does not mean that we cannot talk to each other. Allaah speaks with many Voices inside my head, and I speak back. Also, Allaah conversed with the Holy Prophet (saws) in just the same way (as well as by sending Jibra'eel (as)).

I still don't get it. The Prophet and the other Prophets and Messengers, along with the books, wouldn't have been sent by God then. If we can just converse with God, we could have just took what was needed and got over with instead of everything sent in the last generations. But If you believe this, I guess I have to respect it. Sorry for sounding imposing in this, I didn't mean to.

See my above comment about wanting to discuss the 'facts' of these harms. How is that not a constructive discussion? Or are you simply saying, the Qur'aan says this, if you believe in the Qur'aan, you just have to accept it, end of story? If that is the bottom line, what's the point in us discussing anything?

Yes, I commented up there too. But I can't believe you said in red above. The answer any Muslim should have for this is yes. When we discuss things, we don't come up religious laws, we discuss how and why they were formed. But then again, that's your belief and I gotta respect that.

Ah, so it appears you are saying that. Well, I disagree. Everything is up for discussion (since everything is ultimately open to interpretation, including apparently straightforward verses in the Qur'aan). As I have said above, not everything in the Qur'aan is for all time and every place. That is how it is possible to both believe in the Qur'aan (as the Perfect Word of Allaah) and still say things that are contrary to what the Qur'aan says.

Sorry, I shouldn't have said that the way I did. If you disagree with it, I welcome and respect that.

Oh, believe me, many, many times indeed.

Understood.

Correct.

Correct.

Correct.

Certainly not.

I see. Then you do not blame those who commit adultery just because they cannot get married, and that allows something something forbidden.

'Husband and wife' are just words. If people really want to call themselves 'husband and wife', let them.

Understood. Thank you for sharing your beliefs, opinion and views.

Because, as I have said previously, premarital sex is not adultery.

Understood... Thank you for sharing what you believe in this.

As I have said a couple of times now, not everything in the Qur'aan is for all time and every place.

On what can we base that? As I said before, just saying it like this, means anyone can just deny everything in the Quran.

Where does the Qur'aan say this is not harmful?

The answer is in the quote it self. This: "to each their own religion and who wants to believe they can and who wants to disbelieve they can (it's in the Cave chapter, you should know it if you read the Quran in full and read it every day)". Just in case, the first one is the Disbelievers chapter.

 

[Spideymon77]

Let's say you marry someone and you haven't had sex yet. Then, you're in bed with them, ready to do the do then, suddenly! BOOM! Premature ejaculation.

What I am saying is, you don't want someone who is bad in bed. I don't think it would be a very long lasting marriage if that be the case.