Premarital sex-- any logical arguments against it?

[Noirhaired]

Are there any substantial, logical, and non-religious related arguments against having sex outside of marriage? Arguments that DO NOT involve having children out of wedlock, STDs, and abortions, which I believe are the products of either irresponsibility, lack of birth control use and access, unsafe sex, and lack of resources, but not necessarily marriage.

If someone can give me a logical argument that doesn't involve the Bible or any religious text against it, I'll rethink my views on it.

 

[Sunstone]

What are the "logical, substantial" arguments for it? Just curious.

 

[!Fluffy!]

Are there any substantial, logical, and non-religious related arguments against having sex outside of marriage? Arguments that DO NOT involve having children out of wedlock, STDs, and abortions, which I believe are the products of either irresponsibility, lack of birth control use and access, unsafe sex, and lack of resources, but not necessarily marriage.

If someone can give me a logical argument that doesn't involve the Bible or any religious text against it, I'll rethink my views on it.

Having unfortunately experienced both, I would have to say fornication is to full on married sexuality what comic books are to great literature.

Fun maybe, but not really in the same league (and at its worst, devastating for those involved in unequally-vulnerable type couplings of which there are too many).

 

[Noirhaired]

So um, what does that mean?


I said substantial and reasonable because I hate fluff arguments that only appeal to emotion.

 

[Sunstone]

When we have sex, our bodies release certain neurochemicals that cause us to bond with the person we have sex with. For instance, our bodies release oxytocin. Oxytocin is a neurochemical that does a number of things in humans, but it should be noted here that it is addictive. That is, oxytocin is as much of an addictive substance as is alcohol or nicotine.

Most people readily describe the emotional effects of oxytocin as having "a warm and fuzzy feeling towards someone". If you gave someone a shot of pure oxytocin, they would experience a rush of warm and fuzzy feelings, among other things.

So what does all this mean? It means that when you have sex with a person, your body releases an addictive chemical that you come to associate with that person. If you cease having sex with that person, you will be able to go a few days with no problem. Then the withdrawl symptoms will set in and you will yearn for him or her (you are really yearning for more oxytocin, but your mind doesn't know that).

This pattern is why so many couples break up, are happy with their break up for a few days, and then plummet into yearnings for each other. Not realizing that they are chemically addicted to each other, they think their yearnings mean they are in love with each other. So, they get back together again. Only to face the same problems that caused them to break up in the first place.

The moral of the story, if there is one, is this: Be careful who you sleep with. If you sleep with them often enough, whether inside marriage or outside of marriage, you will become addicted to them.

I am not making an argument here for restricting sex to marriage, but rather am merely saying that sex has consequences we don't always think about, but should. Sex, after all, is something that evolved in us not just for procreation, but (at least in humans) also for bonding us to each other.

 

[!Fluffy!]

So um, what does that mean?


I said substantial and reasonable because I hate fluff arguments that only appeal to emotion.

I'm sorry, I thought I was being quite clear. There was not one ounce of "fluff" nor emotionalism in my post. I meant every word I said.

If you can't take it seriously, perhaps we have a comprehension gap.

Extramarital sex (fornication) is an incomplete act by its very nature, something done outside the confines of its intended context which is within a committed lifelong relationship. It is therefore doomed to be less than satisfying.

It's a big turnoff for the healthy and completely honest woman, IMO.

If I eat expensive Belgian chocolate wafers for dinner, I will experience the same kind of hunger one will experience who has sex outside of (a healthy loving) marriage. I love chocolate but it's not meant to be a meal, it is incomplete, it is unsatisfying. If I eat it inappropriately I'll get sick.

If a sexual relationship is not full and complete emotionally and psychologically, it's comparatively empty and devoid of meaning, thus, unfulfilling.

Not everyone's needs are the same, but we are all constructed pretty much the same chemically and neurologically. Close enough anyway, just like with the digestive 'chocolate' example I just used. We are created to bond through sex, and lifelong loving commitment (comfort/mutual vulnerability/nurturing/trust) encourages freedom of expression, freedom opens the door to and enhances true passion, which is the key to sexual fulfillment.

 

[Sunstone]

I don't see sex with and without committment as a matter of one being superior to the other, but just as a matter of their being different.

For instance, it seems true enough to me that for many people sex without committment is more passionate, in its way, than is sex within the context of a long term committment. Does that make it superior or inferior to the deep connectedness that many people in a long term committment feel? I don't think so. I just think it's different.

 

[Ðanisty]

Having unfortunately experienced both, I would have to say fornication is to full on married sexuality what comic books are to great literature.

Fun maybe, but not really in the same league (and at its worst, devastating for those involved in unequally-vulnerable type couplings of which there are too many).

Exactly what are you trying to say about comic books??? Some of them are very thought-provoking. There are comic book authors out there that are as good, if not better, than some classical authors.

 

[PureX]

For a lot of people, there is a dangerous level of immaturity involved in their having sex prior to marriage. Marriage requires partners to learn how to deal with each other in all kinds of ways that many unmarried folks will not have experience of - especially younger unmarried folks. And the result is that the sexual intimacy will tend to create conditions and situations that are difficult enough for a committed couple to handle, and that can become unhealthy and dangerous for inexperienced and uncommitted couples to handle.

Just this week, in my town, the body of a young woman was found in a shallow grave in the woods. She was nine months pregnant and expecting to have a baby girl within the week. Her and the baby had been murdered by the father, who is not married to the mother, but who was instead described by the girl's friends as a "casual fling". The girl was happy to be pregnant, but was not interested in the father of the baby, and apparently the father felt somehow used and humiliated or something, and flipped out and killed her and the baby. He has confessed to the crime, but has said nothing about why he did it.

So now a young woman is dead, her baby is dead just days before being born, and a young man will go to prison for life, or worse, for committing a double homicide. And why? Obviously he and the girl had engaged in a sexually intimate relationship that one or both of them were not mentally and emotionally mature enough to handle. And the sad result was that one of them flipped out and killed the other.

This is an extreme case, but if you asked a hundred people who had sexual relationships when they were young, and were not yet married, many of them will tell you that they regret having done so, and that they were hurt by them, and that they had hurt others as a result of such behavior. The truth is that in hindsight, many of these folks will admit that they just weren't mentally and emotionally ready even though they were convinced at the time that they were.

 

[Ody]

To be fair Danisty, I think he was using the stereotypical and commone held perception of comic books vs. award winning novels. He's not trying to say that comic books are necessarily bad, he's just trying to make a basic comparision.

*She..

 

[robtex]

If someone can give me a logical argument that doesn't involve the Bible or any religious text against it, I'll rethink my views on it.

I don't think this applies to you specifically because you seem to want a secular outlook on life but it applies to some so here it goes:

I have one but it doesn't apply uniformally to society but rather specifically to people who are either themselves pro-creation sex believers or intricatly involved and part of an organization that strongly or overtly promotes pro-creation sex only.

I think if you are either pro-creation sex in thought or belong to an organzation that overtly condones pro-creation sex as the expense of recreation sex, for instance the catholic church, any baptist organization, penticostal, Islam (sunni, ****ie), ect ect that if you engage socially in recreational sex which would include out of wedlock sex or open marriage sex you are creating an undue burdon on the rest of society by your promotion of a practice that is morally disheartening to you. Maybe undue could also include unjustly and further articulated to be unjustly burdoning society with your social and philosophical dilemmas.

What I mean is that people who have strong views on pro-creation only sex, and or belong intimatly to an organization that does (which creates the socialization) than they are apt to have negative social consequences over recreational sex that is pushed, against the recreational sex societies will.

They are more apt to push their pro-creation agenda harder to "remove temptation" creating societal friction in response to their lack of will-power. They are more apt to need conciling (like church conciling) over the issue. They, over their guilt bring it into the work place, the pta meetings the sporting events they attend with a hostile attitude towards society for the tempation, the forbidden fruit, in their terms, existing. This creates a burdon on society for their moral dilima.

I am ok with people who want to practice pro-creation sex only. What I, personally, am not ok with, is dealing with their guilt trips and projected socialization of pro-creation sex as a noble social agenda. I think if they feel strongly about pro-creation sex, that that segment of the population by engaging in recreational sex, if they do do such, is pro-creation/pre-martial sex that they shouldn't morally be permitted to create an envirorment that makes it justifable to them, to remove it from society at large.

 

[Faint]

Exactly what are you trying to say about comic books??? Some of them are very thought-provoking. There are comic book authors out there that are as good, if not better, than some classical authors.

This is true. Read Sandman.

Extramarital sex (fornication) is an incomplete act by its very nature, something done outside the confines of its intended context which is within a committed lifelong relationship. It is therefore doomed to be less than satisfying.

Since you mention nature, I assume you must be implying that not only is marriage a natural concept, but also that premarital sex is not? No doubt you can back this up with some studies? However, I doubt this is possible...you may want to consider researching a little anthropology and evolutionary psychology before making these outlandish comments. So let me correct you here...women are "naturally" wired to seek a partner who demonstrates his commitment...which does not necessarily include marriage. Marriage may come later, or it may not. But by "nature" has developed certain "cues" that women look for to determine whether or not she will spread her legs for a potential mate. This is not isolated to humans of course.

And when you say "intended context", well, that's kind of going against the criteria of the OP...no doubt the "intent" you speak of is a supernatural orgin?

It's a big turnoff for the healthy and completely honest woman, IMO.

Does this imply that women who have premarital sex are less honest than those who wait? OR are they in fact being shrewder for understanding that not everyone is sexually compatible...and it's better to "test" a partner prior to commiting one's life to him/her.

If I eat expensive Belgian chocolate wafers for dinner, I will experience the same kind of hunger one will experience who has sex outside of (a healthy loving) marriage. I love chocolate but it's not meant to be a meal, it is incomplete, it is unsatisfying. If I eat it inappropriately I'll get sick.

That's why we have this thing called "moderation", and in sexual matters it's called "acting responsibly".

If a sexual relationship is not full and complete emotionally and psychologically, it's comparatively empty and devoid of meaning, thus, unfulfilling.

If a marriage is not complete emotionally, psychologically, and physically...it too is empty and devoid of meaning. Hmmm...I wonder how we can determine whether a future husband/wife are physically/sexually compatible???

Not everyone's needs are the same, but we are all constructed pretty much the same chemically and neurologically. Close enough anyway, just like with the digestive 'chocolate' example I just used. We are created to bond through sex, and lifelong loving commitment (comfort/mutual vulnerability/nurturing/trust) encourages freedom of expression, freedom opens the door to and enhances true passion, which is the key to sexual fulfillment.

People find sexual fulfillment in different ways. If you have a marriage fetish, well, have fun with that.

Meanwhile, lifelong commitment is often a symptom of wishful thinking. "Naturally", the purpose of commitment is to combine resources/effort to raise offspring until they're old enough to make new offspring. Women can try to start a new relationship at any time if their spouse fails in his duties (as provider, protector, or if he becomes abusive, overly selfish, etc.) Similarly men are wired to seek multiple partners, and as many as possible. There are SO many studies on this matter which will back up what I'm saying. I recommend looking into it.

 

[michel]

For a lot of people, there is a dangerous level of immaturity involved in their having sex prior to marriage. Marriage requires partners to learn how to deal with each other in all kinds of ways that many unmarried folks will not have experience of - especially younger unmarried folks. And the result is that the sexual intimacy will tend to create conditions and situations that are difficult enough for a committed couple to handle, and that can become unhealthy and dangerous for inexperienced and uncommitted couples to handle.

Of course, you are right, BUT there are always two sides to an argument.

Your 'scenario' of pre-marital sex above could be used in exactly the 'opposite' way.
I think that, had I not indulged in pre-marital sex, I would have not had the experience that I did have when I became a husband, which I think, was essential.

I think most young men look upon sex as 'a pleasurable act'; unfortunately, young immature people (as I was) don't often think of pleasing their partner; they are so focussed on satisfying their own needs............

 

[robtex]

For a lot of people, there is a dangerous level of immaturity involved in their having sex prior to marriage.

By the whole post, maybe an easier answer is dating before marriage. Espcially if you equate maturity to experience.

 

[Ðanisty]

To be fair Danisty, I think he was using the stereotypical and commone held perception of comic books vs. award winning novels. He's not trying to say that comic books are necessarily bad, he's just trying to make a basic comparision.

You missed my point entirely. I'm furthering his basic comparison by showing that the stereotypical and commonly held perceptions are often false.

 

[d.]

And why? Obviously he and the girl had engaged in a sexually intimate relationship that one or both of them were not mentally and emotionally mature enough to handle.

if one of them would have used birth control of some kind, there would be no problem. but i guess not using a condom files under 'not mentally or emotionally mature enough'.

 

[Flappycat]

"Graphic novel" is the word, I believe.

Testosterone tends to work against oxytocin. Is it possible that this is part of the reason that gay men tend to have shorter term relationships outside of lifelong commitments? Oxytocin wouldn't directly be a producer of a life-long, intellectual relationship, which is more the role of vasopressin, but its role in short-term binding is apt to be important.

 

[Random]

Having unfortunately experienced both, I would have to say fornication is to full on married sexuality what comic books are to great literature.

You surprise me, Moon Woman, I had you pegged for a Libertine for sure. Your comic book anaolgy is way off, as many comics writers far surpass novelists in terms of intellect and storytelling artistry, but nonetheless, your stand on pre-marital sex is very brave. Few there are who would say what you have said and the way you said it, and even fewer would use the word "Fornication" doing it.

Personally, I can readily admit as a man and a former Catholic, that I have always inwardly desired extra-marital sex, sex devoid of commitment, selfish sex. It's difficult being a young fantasist, but I used this perception of my own wants to teach myself many valuable lessons as I abstained from sex altogether (and still do to this very day).

That said, I would deny no-one their "fun". I cannot say whether extra-marital sex is inferior to wedded union, as you claim...I doubt it, but moral relativity has made such fornication a symbol of freedom and consummation in its own right, so right or wrong, it can't be changed as an aspect of society now.

 

[Flappycat]

But it's true, in a sense, that premarital relationships are "less" than lifelong partnerships. Vasopressin plays a role in memory formation, and it also seems to play a large role in the formation of timeless relationships. I think that this part of the chemistry of relationships takes time to completely develop.

 

[Ðanisty]

But it's true, in a sense, that premarital relationships are "less" than lifelong partnerships. Vasopressin plays a role in memory formation, and it also seems to play a large role in the formation of timeless relationships. I think that this part of the chemistry of relationships takes time to completely develop.

The first guy I had sex with (nearly 13 years ago) is still one of my best friends. I would say that formed a pretty good bond...