What are your views on sex and marriage?

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]

So you can't have a couple who don't want to marry and who don't have sex with other people? :?

Genetic_Code

Huh? Well, they can't be forced to be with other people if they don't want to be, if that's what you're saying.

That's not what I'm saying. :x

Besides which, people aren't somehow morally obliged to commit to a person.

Funky_Llama

They are when they are married or when they have a child.

True, but this is sex in general we're talking about.

Plus... you still haven't provided any reason why casual sex is actually wrong...

Funky_Llama

Would you eat if you don't feel hunger? Would you drink alcohol when you are sober? Then why have sex if one can be satisfied being abstinent?

Um... that wouldn't mean that it's wrong. :? And plenty of people do drink alcohol when sober, otherwise no one would get drunk. >_>

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Funky_Llama

Given that this assumes that it is wrong, and that that it is wrong is the conclusion of your argument, this is begging the question.

See my previous points as to why it is wrong.

Meh. They didn't prove it.

True, but this is sex in general we're talking about.

Funky_Llama

What were you saying then?

Um... that wouldn't mean that it's wrong. :? And plenty of people do drink alcohol when sober, otherwise no one would get drunk. >_>

Funky_Llama

The point is over-indulgence. And yes, it is wrong because it is dangerous. As the case with binge eating, you are risking weight gain. With alcohol, you are risking getting drunk. Yes, like sex, there are "safer alternatives" but that only deals with the consequences of each act, or as you say the "ends", but I think the means are just as necessary.

Really GC this is quite a shocking train of thought, of course I respect your view, I still don't understand where your coming from.  An Atheist stay celibate?  Why on Earth? btaylor2404

I think it's merely a representation. Many view marriage as a threesome, in that it is between man, woman, and God. Why should atheists therefore marry if marriage implies such a religious indoctrination? If they can't marry, why should they have sex

I will contend that is not immoral for an atheist to marry, just inadvisable. To me, it's the equivilant of a couple of the same sex getting married in a state that legalizes marriage, even though by that as a whole, same-sex marriage is not accepted by the nation.

Atheists continue to say that marriage is too defined by religion; therefore I think they as a result, should not get married.

Maybe my beliefs are a bit extreme. I don't feel put off if you think that my views on atheists marrying are extreme. I do feel put off if you view the same with regards to premarital sex, but I will respect your opinion nevertheless.

My wife and I rented a place in a resort town, and had the Justice of the Peace come marry us, no real reason it just worked well in that small town.  Marriage is incredible, no religion or non-religion has a monopoly on it, and if your with the right person I cannot describe to you how important it is to know someone is there for me, and on my side 24/7.  Imagine your best friend in life, multiply it times at least 10+your attracted to him/her.

btaylor2404

I hate to say it, but religion does have a monopoly on it. Anyone who says it doesn't is just redefining it.

It's like an atheist wanting to go to church. It just doesn't make sense.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

If you're an atheist, there is no logical reason that you can find the act of sexual intercourse inherently disgusting or immoral.

Genetic_Code

You may disagree with me on morality if you want to, but taste is a different matter entirely that is dependent on the individual. I'm nitpicking however. ;)

The burden of proof may lie on me, but I want you to elaborate on why you think it is morally acceptable to engage in premarital intercourse if you haven't already. Thanks.

'Taste' isn't always a logical or reasoned thing.

The reason why I think premarital sex is morally acceptable, is because I see no reason why it is morally unacceptable. The act in an of itself does not lead to pain, suffering or the detriment of either party.

I agree for the most part on you with marriage, it does not recquire love and is merely a contract between people who pledge to each other. I don't however agree with homosexual marriage, that is between and man and woman. I'm all for civil unions, but marriage is something I don't support alongside of homosexuality.

I think sex should be done with the person you love, I don't have any opinion against those who have homosexual sex.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]

Really GC this is quite a shocking train of thought, of course I respect your view, I still don't understand where your coming from.  An Atheist stay celibate?  Why on Earth? Genetic_Code

I think it's merely a representation. Many view marriage as a threesome, in that it is between man, woman, and God. Why should atheists therefore marry if marriage implies such a religious indoctrination? If they can't marry, why should they have sex

I will contend that is not immoral for an atheist to marry, just inadvisable. To me, it's the equivilant of a couple of the same sex getting married in a state that legalizes marriage, even though by that as a whole, same-sex marriage is not accepted by the nation.

Atheists continue to say that marriage is too defined by religion; therefore I think they as a result, should not get married.

Maybe my beliefs are a bit extreme. I don't feel put off if you think that my views on atheists marrying are extreme. I do feel put off if you view the same with regards to premarital sex, but I will respect your opinion nevertheless.

My wife and I rented a place in a resort town, and had the Justice of the Peace come marry us, no real reason it just worked well in that small town.  Marriage is incredible, no religion or non-religion has a monopoly on it, and if your with the right person I cannot describe to you how important it is to know someone is there for me, and on my side 24/7.  Imagine your best friend in life, multiply it times at least 10+your attracted to him/her.

btaylor2404

I hate to say it, but religion does have a monopoly on it. Anyone who says it doesn't is just redefining it.

It's like an atheist wanting to go to church. It just doesn't make sense.

But marriage in the US is a committed contract between two people, nothing more.  If it weren't so you couldn't be married without a church.  To get your licence you go to City Hall, not First Baptist Church.  You may choose to have it in a church and have God in that "twosome" but that's up to the couple.  Your views don't put me off at all, their just yours and different.  I think I've made a good case as to why someone should have sex with their respective wife/husband before marriage but again, to each his own. On the Atheist going to church, I'm guilty, I'm just curious about everything in the world, plus it makes my wife happy. :)

'Taste' isn't always a logical or reasoned thing.

The reason why I think premarital sex is morally acceptable, is because I see no reason why it is morally unacceptable. The act in an of itself does not lead to pain, suffering or the detriment of either party.

MetalGear_Ninty

That's fine, but I think people are looking too much of an "ends" and not a "means" matter.

But marriage in the US is a committed contract between two people, nothing more.  If it weren't so you couldn't be married without a church.  To get your licence you go to City Hall, not First Baptist Church.  You may choose to have it in a church and have God in that "twosome" but that's up to the couple.  Your views don't put me off at all, their just yours and different.  I think I've made a good case as to why someone should have sex with their respective wife/husband before marriage but again, to each his own. On the Atheist going to church, I'm guilty, I'm just curious about everything in the world, plus it makes my wife happy. :)

btaylor2404

I should've remembered who I was talking to. :P

I made a question before and I will ask again: As atheists or anti-religious people, since we believe that in order to be moral we don't need religion because we can do it for ourselves because a) the motivation behind morality would be honest and not fear-driven b) religious morality is not compatible any more with society, shouldn't we not need a typicality to grant us the freedom to have sex because a) faithfulness would be driven by honesty and pure desire for the person we love, b) marriage does not hinder anyone to cheat?

When we look at those subjects we shouldn't see only the wrong side (as religion does) and thus foretelling disastrous repercussions before they even come (or ever will) out of such things as sex, because hey you know what, then we might need religion to be moral, because a) as religion might profess not being religious leads you to immorality and innacountability, b) with no reason it's wrong anyway.

I guess we don't need religion to me moral, thus we do not need marriage to be faithful, respectful and caring. That simple.

The statistics and examples I've seen mean nothing to me. I would ignore the bad examples and make sex something actualy good and I would not let them affect my views on something I can keep sacred without the unnecessary typicality called marriage.

Sorry Teenaged. I was off last night and I didn't see your post stick out when I was skimming the other responses.

I made a question before and I will ask again: As atheists or anti-religious people, since we believe that in order to be moral we don't need religion because we can do it for ourselves because a) the motivation behind morality would be honest and not fear-driven b) religious morality is not compatible any more with society, shouldn't we not need a typicality to grant us the freedom to have sex because a) faithfulness would be driven by honesty and pure desire for the person we love, b) marriage does not hinder anyone to cheat?

When we look at those subjects we shouldn't see only the wrong side (as religion does) and thus foretelling disastrous repercussions before they even come (or ever will) out of such things as sex, because hey you know what, then we might need religion to be moral, because a) as religion might profess not being religious leads you to immorality and innacountability, b) with no reason it's wrong anyway.

I guess we don't need religion to me moral, thus we do not need marriage to be faithful, respectful and caring. That simple.

The statistics and examples I've seen mean nothing to me. I would ignore the bad examples and make sex something actualy good and I would not let them affect my views on something I can keep sacred without the unnecessary typicality called marriage.

Teenaged

First off, just because an atheist rejects a claim made by a religion doesn't mean they should abandon everything else. I don't agree with the Bible on everything and I personally think Paul is a bit lax on this issue.

"So I say to those who aren't married and to widows—it's better to stay unmarried, just as I am. But if they can't control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It's better to marry than to burn with lust." -1 Corinthians 7:8-9

Obviously, I reject Paul's message. I don't think people should marry just because they can't control their desire to have sex, because that might supersede their thirst for love, which may yield to a divorce which may as well just be fornication.

In other words, don't think I'm drawing everything from the Bible, just what I agree with. Perhaps I'm misreading what you wrote.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]

My wife and I rented a place in a resort town, and had the Justice of the Peace come marry us, no real reason it just worked well in that small town.  Marriage is incredible, no religion or non-religion has a monopoly on it, and if your with the right person I cannot describe to you how important it is to know someone is there for me, and on my side 24/7.  Imagine your best friend in life, multiply it times at least 10+your attracted to him/her.

Genetic_Code

I hate to say it, but religion does have a monopoly on it. Anyone who says it doesn't is just redefining it.

It's like an atheist wanting to go to church. It just doesn't make sense.

Believe me , I wouldn't reject marriage simply because it's religious and because I want to be rebelling against it as much as possible. I don't do that at all. And I understood that your views are not so much religious driven.

All I'm saying is that I find it unjust, for you too, to create an opinion about something by seeing what other people CHOOSE to do with it. I'm referring to the morality vs. religious morality issue because I find the analogy very fitting with this one. I didn't bring it up to revive anyone's anti-religious feelings. That's one.

[EDIT: Unless you believe that since everybody else is acting like that or only show such examples then that's the only way. If that were true then it would also be true that since common sense (not mine and yours) says that atheists are immoral then the only way to be moral is to be religious (that's where the analogy works).]

I respect marriage, because it is an act of commitment and it's a way to proove one's love. BUT we should not have illusions: 1) Marriage does not solve such things as it did 100 years ago (I once heard a quote "marriage helps solve problems within a couple which wouldn't arise at all if  they weren't married" which is partialy true for me). 2) I reject the idea that before marriage a woman that had sex is to be called a whore or a relationship to be considered dirty, which can only be explained with misinformation and biased views from the part of the accuser of such things.

[EDIT 2: And when someone is digusted by sex, or finds it humiliating then the only advice I can give is 1) to leave room for a change of mind and 2) to set his/her own rules on that subject that would make him/her feel in control (not in restriction, I mean more like psychological readiness) of this intricate function of the human body and never feel overwhelmed or appaled by it]

Damn, I sound like a sex maniac! :P

The problem i have with your view is that you make sex out to be an immoral act  that can only be done for one reason and only under certain conditions. In reality though sex is very different. Its natural to want to have sex and even have sex before marriage, why on earth should an athiest abstain from sex untill marriage? Animals have been known to masturbate and have sex (even with the same gender) for fun. What is your problem with sex anyways? You might cheat on someone? You might accidentally have a baby and have an abortion?

Having sex with multiple partners isnt immoral unless youre already in a monogomous relationship. And as for the abortion, wrong thread wont go into it.

Believe me , I wouldn't reject marriage simply because it's religious and because I want to be rebelling against it as much as possible. I don't do that at all. And I understood that your views are not so much religious driven.

All I'm saying is that I find it unjust, for you too, to create an opinion about something by seeing what other people CHOOSE to do with it. I'm referring to the morality vs. religious morality issue because I find the analogy very fitting with this one. I didn't bring it up to revive anyone's anti-religious feelings. That's one.

[EDIT: Unless you believe that since everybody else is acting like that or only show such examples then that's the only way. If that were true then it would also be true that since common sense (not mine and yours) says that atheists are immoral then the only way to be moral is to be religious (that's where the analogy works).]

Teenaged

It may seem like I'm treating the subject through a manner similar to a morally absolute degree. That's probably because I am, but I contend that if you are an ethical subjectivist, you are in no way obligated to be judged by this degree nevertheless. I can't judge you anymore than I can judge myself. If you a moral absolutist and you disagree, then you disagre. I have no problem with disagreement.

I respect marriage, because it is an act of commitment and it's a way to proove one's love. BUT we should not have illusions: 1) Marriage does not solve such things as it did 100 years ago (I once heard a quote "marriage helps solve problems within a couple which wouldn't arise at all if  they weren't married" which is partialy true for me). 2) I reject the idea that before marriage a woman that had sex is to be called a whore or a relationship to be considered dirty, which can only be explained with misinformation and biased views from the part of the accuser of such things.

[EDIT 2: And when someone is digusted by sex, or finds it humiliating then the only advice I can give is 1) to leave room for a change of mind and 2) to set his/her own rules on that subject that would make him/her feel in control (not in restriction, I mean more like psychological readiness) of this intricate function of the human body and never feel overwhelmed or appaled by it]

Damn, I sound like a sex maniac! :P

Teenaged

I do agree that women should not be called whores. It's very inappopiate. As for your advice, I somewhat agree, but regardless, the perception that someone formulates in point 2 can dictate how they can judge the actions of others.

The problem i have with your view is that you make sex out to be an immoral act  that can only be done for one reason and only under certain conditions. In reality though sex is very different. Its natural to want to have sex and even have sex before marriage, why on earth should an athiest abstain from sex untill marriage? Animals have been known to masturbate and have sex (even with the same gender) for fun. What is your problem with sex anyways? You might cheat on someone? You might accidentally have a baby and have an abortion?

Having sex with multiple partners isnt immoral unless youre already in a monogomous relationship. And as for the abortion, wrong thread wont go into it.

Thessassin

We are animals, but all animals are different. Yes, there are similarities, but for the sake of morality, a feature that although seems present throughout many animals, is very unique when applied to humans.

Cheating is bad and even if you think abortion should be permissible (which I won't argue; different thread and I don't need it to make my point), that still doesn't rule out that the act of sex is a mistake of itself, hence the marketing efforts of Planned Parenthood. It is therefore self-defeating whenever conception is brought into the forefront.

We are animals, but all animals are different. Yes, there are similarities, but for the sake of morality, a feature that although seems present throughout many animals, is very unique when applied to humans.

Cheating is bad and even if you think abortion should be permissible (which I won't argue; different thread and I don't need it to make my point), that still doesn't rule out that the act of sex is a mistake of itself, hence the marketing efforts of Planned Parenthood. It is therefore self-defeating whenever conception is brought into the forefront.

Genetic_Code

 not exactly sure about what youre saying, the wording is a bit distracting

Sex before marriage is not immoral in my opinion, its perfectly fine. Nothing wrong with getting it on and immersing yourself within your own carnal nature. Sex for me dosen't always have to be about "bonding" and such but I find nothing wrong with that. Marriage on the other hand is something I haven't thought about much, for me its just two people who choose to love each other with the upmost caring and tenderness of love for one another and stay together until they die.

not exactly sure about what youre saying, the wording is a bit distracting

Thessassin

Sorry, but I'm trying to distinguish between what is naturally accepted and what "should" be.

Thanks for answering G_C, although I did not quite understand answer no1 and sorry if I was abrupt. About the second though, the point 2 is not to dictate how to judge other people's actions. All I'm saying is that the world is full of messed up people, people who have misenterpreted what they heard and thus distort the true(?) meaning of many concepts and things through their actions. Being the majority they formulate ideas and new concepts to other people. My idea is that we should let them be, not judge them or change them, and don't even consider how they have made sex seem like or feel like. As individuals I think that's what we can do.

And sorry if it seemed that I was trying to brainwash you, I know you must have your reasons and the way you defend your ideas makes me respect them, I just couldn't put it otherwise in words.

I haven't had as much time here lately with extra work and currently an extra buzz but I find this topic deeply saddening.  As is the case I haven't read all the responses but am responding to only the first page. 

There is no dispute that a healthy sex life is beneficial both physically and mentally.  Why could it possibly be wrong?  I see that some have an aversion to it, and can only think you don't know what you are missing.  It is one of the best bonding experiences a person can have. It breaks down a lot of personal barriers letting people find who they really are and what makes them happy.  After satisfying a lover you are much more likely to feel free to let your less (perceivably) likable personal traits come forth and manifest your true self in a social setting.  Additionally, why not do something that makes you happy and hurts no one else?  This is nonsense to me.  You have a chance to raise the collective happy/unhappy bar and you deny it for..........something ineffable.   If it is the will of an individual to either truly be abstinent or at least convince themselves they want to be, I suppose so be it.  But these "unique" or deluded individuals have no business passing judgement on others and claiming it wrong.  Those others are raises the bar of total human experience, and doing so in a way that doesn't hurt you in the slightest.

Well i dont see how premarital sex is a bad thing.We are driven by our hormones to have sex as often and with as many other people as we can, if it were otherwise why would anybody cheat on anybody else? Typically mammals dont keep a life partner. Its primal instinct, while marriage on the other hand was originally created as a religious ceremony to bind 2 people to each other for life. I guess the hardest thing to grasp is why an athiest of all people believes its disgusting to carry out your primal urges. It dosent make sense to push aside my instincts for a religious ceremony.Thessassin

Regardless of religion, what if people just wanted to keep it special? Specifically for between two people who had committed to each other by marrying? It reinforces the principle of Love and True commitment, sacrificing their prematiral sex lives for each other. :)

What we are discussing here is not some subject like atheism, utilitarian, naturalism and etc. We are talking about sex and marriage. These two subjects are very different because they both involve a personal relationship to another person and this adds a whole new dimension to them.

What I'm saying is these codes and ideas won't be intact beyond this debate and we can have all our pre-conceived ideas we want but they will change for all of us in the "moment"! Whether it is by an inch or a mile, redefining of these ideas will occur when you apply them on a personal level... Because the other person is will also have his or her own set of codes in which case both of you are going to have to find a common ground to be compatible with each other... What I'm saying is that in sex and marriage one person's ideas are only 50% of the whole(that sounded too technical, didn't it?). That's why the boundaries between right and wrong, moral and immoral are very thin depending on the couple.

________

You also said Atheists shouldn't marry... Like many others I disagree. You say marriage is based on religion, but at the very core of it is unionship between two person. It happens when you love someone enough that it seems like that person is the closest family you have(DAMN! I never thought I would say this kind of cheesy things on GS ). Marriage just makes it official! People can think of marriage as threesome between the partners and God but a marriage can be just as complete without god... This is my definition of marriage and if I ever marry, this is the kind of marriage it will be. God and society may try to influence but will not have any say in my decission regarding who I want to make my family or how I do it... Religion may have introduced the idea of marriage in the society but I don't think one can say without god marriage is empty. God is not prerequisite to marriage... I think of god to a marriage is like an addon to the firefox browser, which the browser can easily make do without... It's up to the user to decide whether to include it or not...

________

From this point of view, I guess a Christian could say hindus shouldn't marry because it's invalid! :roll: (just a random unrefined thought) 

________

G_C,I'm sorry if it sounded too condescending. It's just my opinion after all. 

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]Well i dont see how premarital sex is a bad thing.We are driven by our hormones to have sex as often and with as many other people as we can, if it were otherwise why would anybody cheat on anybody else? Typically mammals dont keep a life partner. Its primal instinct, while marriage on the other hand was originally created as a religious ceremony to bind 2 people to each other for life. I guess the hardest thing to grasp is why an athiest of all people believes its disgusting to carry out your primal urges. It dosent make sense to push aside my instincts for a religious ceremony.Lansdowne5

Regardless of religion, what if people just wanted to keep it special? Specifically for between two people who had committed to each other by marrying? It reinforces the principle of Love and True commitment, sacrificing their prematiral sex lives for each other. :)

A relationship can be special and unique and wonderful and long-lasting without marriage as well. Marriage may be something I will want to go into to prove my soul-mate my love BUT I will not hang onto it to prove it. If people waited for marriage to feel secure about their relationship (καλα κρασια) then they should reconsider the importance of that relationship.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]Well i dont see how premarital sex is a bad thing.We are driven by our hormones to have sex as often and with as many other people as we can, if it were otherwise why would anybody cheat on anybody else? Typically mammals dont keep a life partner. Its primal instinct, while marriage on the other hand was originally created as a religious ceremony to bind 2 people to each other for life. I guess the hardest thing to grasp is why an athiest of all people believes its disgusting to carry out your primal urges. It dosent make sense to push aside my instincts for a religious ceremony.Teenaged

Regardless of religion, what if people just wanted to keep it special? Specifically for between two people who had committed to each other by marrying? It reinforces the principle of Love and True commitment, sacrificing their prematiral sex lives for each other. :)

A relationship can be special and unique and wonderful and long-lasting without marriage as well. Marriage may be something I will want to go into to prove my soul-mate my love BUT I will not hang onto it to prove it. If people waited for marriage to feel secure about their relationship (καλα κρασια) then they should reconsider the importance of that relationship.

I wouldn't actually say that at all. Generally, I think people get married in a church just because of the tradition. 

Anyway, no, if they waited for marriage they'd be showing 'importance' to each other, not 'unimportance'. ;) 

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]Well i dont see how premarital sex is a bad thing.We are driven by our hormones to have sex as often and with as many other people as we can, if it were otherwise why would anybody cheat on anybody else? Typically mammals dont keep a life partner. Its primal instinct, while marriage on the other hand was originally created as a religious ceremony to bind 2 people to each other for life. I guess the hardest thing to grasp is why an athiest of all people believes its disgusting to carry out your primal urges. It dosent make sense to push aside my instincts for a religious ceremony.Lansdowne5

Regardless of religion, what if people just wanted to keep it special? Specifically for between two people who had committed to each other by marrying? It reinforces the principle of Love and True commitment, sacrificing their prematiral sex lives for each other. :)

A relationship can be special and unique and wonderful and long-lasting without marriage as well. Marriage may be something I will want to go into to prove my soul-mate my love BUT I will not hang onto it to prove it. If people waited for marriage to feel secure about their relationship (καλα κρασια) then they should reconsider the importance of that relationship.

Anyway, no, if they waited for marriage they'd be showing 'importance' to each other, not 'unimportance'. ;) 

But since you mentioned it, yes holding on for the wedding night to have sex with your partner is caused by a mixture of wanting to keep it special but also being convinced that otherwise it's sinful (on most occasions, not all). That being said, premarital sex does not necessarily erase the good intentions and care or love of the people who do it. If we believed that, then it would be very stereotypical and unfair to people who have a wonderful relationship that evolves sex and make it special anyway. Also, it would mean that we have no will to make a (positive) difference in this world.

I haven't had as much time here lately with extra work and currently an extra buzz but I find this topic deeply saddening.  As is the case I haven't read all the responses but am responding to only the first page. 

There is no dispute that a healthy sex life is beneficial both physically and mentally.  Why could it possibly be wrong?  I see that some have an aversion to it, and can only think you don't know what you are missing.  It is one of the best bonding experiences a person can have. It breaks down a lot of personal barriers letting people find who they really are and what makes them happy.  After satisfying a lover you are much more likely to feel free to let your less (perceivably) likable personal traits come forth and manifest your true self in a social setting.  Additionally, why not do something that makes you happy and hurts no one else?  This is nonsense to me.  You have a chance to raise the collective happy/unhappy bar and you deny it for..........something ineffable.   If it is the will of an individual to either truly be abstinent or at least convince themselves they want to be, I suppose so be it.  But these "unique" or deluded individuals have no business passing judgement on others and claiming it wrong.  Those others are raises the bar of total human experience, and doing so in a way that doesn't hurt you in the slightest.

Sitri_

[QUOTE="Sitri_"]

I haven't had as much time here lately with extra work and currently an extra buzz but I find this topic deeply saddening.  As is the case I haven't read all the responses but am responding to only the first page. 

There is no dispute that a healthy sex life is beneficial both physically and mentally.  Why could it possibly be wrong?  I see that some have an aversion to it, and can only think you don't know what you are missing.  It is one of the best bonding experiences a person can have. It breaks down a lot of personal barriers letting people find who they really are and what makes them happy.  After satisfying a lover you are much more likely to feel free to let your less (perceivably) likable personal traits come forth and manifest your true self in a social setting.  Additionally, why not do something that makes you happy and hurts no one else?  This is nonsense to me.  You have a chance to raise the collective happy/unhappy bar and you deny it for..........something ineffable.   If it is the will of an individual to either truly be abstinent or at least convince themselves they want to be, I suppose so be it.  But these "unique" or deluded individuals have no business passing judgement on others and claiming it wrong.  Those others are raises the bar of total human experience, and doing so in a way that doesn't hurt you in the slightest.

helium_flash

Indeed.

Well i dont see how premarital sex is a bad thing.We are driven by our hormones to have sex as often and with as many other people as we can, if it were otherwise why would anybody cheat on anybody else? Typically mammals dont keep a life partner. Its primal instinct, while marriage on the other hand was originally created as a religious ceremony to bind 2 people to each other for life. I guess the hardest thing to grasp is why an athiest of all people believes its disgusting to carry out your primal urges. It dosent make sense to push aside my instincts for a religious ceremony.Thessassin

There are other ethical reasons to avoid having sex, such as birth control. Suggesting that other animals do it invokes a naturalistic fallacy.

I haven't had as much time here lately with extra work and currently an extra buzz but I find this topic deeply saddening.  As is the case I haven't read all the responses but am responding to only the first page. 

There is no dispute that a healthy sex life is beneficial both physically and mentally.  Why could it possibly be wrong?  I see that some have an aversion to it, and can only think you don't know what you are missing.  It is one of the best bonding experiences a person can have. It breaks down a lot of personal barriers letting people find who they really are and what makes them happy.  After satisfying a lover you are much more likely to feel free to let your less (perceivably) likable personal traits come forth and manifest your true self in a social setting.  Additionally, why not do something that makes you happy and hurts no one else?  This is nonsense to me.  You have a chance to raise the collective happy/unhappy bar and you deny it for..........something ineffable.   If it is the will of an individual to either truly be abstinent or at least convince themselves they want to be, I suppose so be it.  But these "unique" or deluded individuals have no business passing judgement on others and claiming it wrong.  Those others are raises the bar of total human experience, and doing so in a way that doesn't hurt you in the slightest.

Sitri_

Judging others is a different matter altogether, but at the very least, judging an action should be permissible.

What we are discussing here is not some subject like atheism, utilitarian, naturalism and etc. We are talking about sex and marriage. These two subjects are very different because they both involve a personal relationship to another person and this adds a whole new dimension to them.

What I'm saying is these codes and ideas won't be intact beyond this debate and we can have all our pre-conceived ideas we want but they will change for all of us in the "moment"! Whether it is by an inch or a mile, redefining of these ideas will occur when you apply them on a personal level... Because the other person is will also have his or her own set of codes in which case both of you are going to have to find a common ground to be compatible with each other... What I'm saying is that in sex and marriage one person's ideas are only 50% of the whole(that sounded too technical, didn't it?). That's why the boundaries between right and wrong, moral and immoral are very thin depending on the couple.

________

You also said Atheists shouldn't marry... Like many others I disagree. You say marriage is based on religion, but at the very core of it is unionship between two person. It happens when you love someone enough that it seems like that person is the closest family you have(DAMN! I never thought I would say this kind of cheesy things on GS ). Marriage just makes it official! People can think of marriage as threesome between the partners and God but a marriage can be just as complete without god... This is my definition of marriage and if I ever marry, this is the kind of marriage it will be. God and society may try to influence but will not have any say in my decission regarding who I want to make my family or how I do it... Religion may have introduced the idea of marriage in the society but I don't think one can say without god marriage is empty. God is not prerequisite to marriage... I think of god to a marriage is like an addon to the firefox browser, which the browser can easily make do without... It's up to the user to decide whether to include it or not...

________

From this point of view, I guess a Christian could say hindus shouldn't marry because it's invalid! :roll: (just a random unrefined thought) 

________

G_C,I'm sorry if it sounded too condescending. It's just my opinion after all. 

7guns

The bolded sentence is exactly why it's more ethical not to have sex. Should someone have dessert before dinner? No, she would spoil her appetite. Admittedly, it was a mistake to pass judgement as though atheists shouldn't marry. It was intended as a personal belief.

For the record, I have not had sex.

@ Genetic Code

First off, I didn't mean to say that you were brainwashed.  I just wanted to say you sounded brainwashed.  I would have said that a couple days ago,... but a damn 2.5 day suspension got me >(

Second off, this has probably been said but I don't want to read the entire thread again, where did you develop your ideas based on protecting the foetus, how sex should be avoided unless for reproduction, that masterbation is disgusting?

@ Genetic Code

First off, I didn't mean to say that you were brainwashed.  I just wanted to say you sounded brainwashed.  I would have said that a couple days ago,... but a damn 2.5 day suspension got me >(

Second off, this has probably been said but I don't want to read the entire thread again, where did you develop your ideas based on protecting the foetus, how sex should be avoided unless for reproduction, that masterbation is disgusting?

helium_flash

Abstinence is the best birth control. Masturbation just attempts to put sex into practice in a non-cognitive sense. Thoughts lead to obsessions which lead to actions. The moment someone lets a thought entertain them, the moment that opens the actual act for it to occur.

Judging others is a different matter altogether, but at the very least, judging an action should be permissible.

Genetic_Code

Sex existed long before it had an option to be premarital.  Just because the religious have highjacked the action doesn't make it worthy of a negative judgement.

Abstinence is the best birth control. Masturbation just attempts to put sex into practice in a non-cognitive sense. Thoughts lead to obsessions which lead to actions. The moment someone lets a thought entertain them, the moment that opens the actual act for it to occur.

Genetic_Code

I would argue with your statement abstinence is the best for of birth control.  Had you said most effective it would be more believable.  I honestly can't imagine being a fulfilled individual without sex.  It is human nature, every single one of your ancestors had this common bond, they all had sex and most likely enjoyed it.

Sex existed long before it had an option to be premarital.  Just because the religious have highjacked the action doesn't make it worthy of a negative judgement.

Sitri_

That's a very good point that I never really thought about before.

[QUOTE="7guns"]

What we are discussing here is not some subject like atheism, utilitarian, naturalism and etc. We are talking about sex and marriage. These two subjects are very different because they both involve a personal relationship to another person and this adds a whole new dimension to them.

What I'm saying is these codes and ideas won't be intact beyond this debate and we can have all our pre-conceived ideas we want but they will change for all of us in the "moment"! Whether it is by an inch or a mile, redefining of these ideas will occur when you apply them on a personal level... Because the other person is will also have his or her own set of codes in which case both of you are going to have to find a common ground to be compatible with each other... What I'm saying is that in sex and marriage one person's ideas are only 50% of the whole(that sounded too technical, didn't it?). That's why the boundaries between right and wrong, moral and immoral are very thin depending on the couple.

________

You also said Atheists shouldn't marry... Like many others I disagree. You say marriage is based on religion, but at the very core of it is unionship between two person. It happens when you love someone enough that it seems like that person is the closest family you have(DAMN! I never thought I would say this kind of cheesy things on GS ). Marriage just makes it official! People can think of marriage as threesome between the partners and God but a marriage can be just as complete without god... This is my definition of marriage and if I ever marry, this is the kind of marriage it will be. God and society may try to influence but will not have any say in my decission regarding who I want to make my family or how I do it... Religion may have introduced the idea of marriage in the society but I don't think one can say without god marriage is empty. God is not prerequisite to marriage... I think of god to a marriage is like an addon to the firefox browser, which the browser can easily make do without... It's up to the user to decide whether to include it or not...

Genetic_Code

The bolded sentence is exactly why it's more ethical not to have sex. Should someone have dessert before dinner? No, she would spoil her appetite. Admittedly, it was a mistake to pass judgement as though atheists shouldn't marry. It was intended as a personal belief.

For the record, I have not had sex.

I'll give up now saying that life is really hard to live by rules all the time

and the one (No marriage!:D No sex!:x) you are talking about is very strict!

By the way, I'm guessing you don't like condoms very much! After all, beside other vital uses, it encourages sex before marriage... Am I right?

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]

@ Genetic Code

First off, I didn't mean to say that you were brainwashed.  I just wanted to say you sounded brainwashed.  I would have said that a couple days ago,... but a damn 2.5 day suspension got me >(

Second off, this has probably been said but I don't want to read the entire thread again, where did you develop your ideas based on protecting the foetus, how sex should be avoided unless for reproduction, that masterbation is disgusting?

Genetic_Code

Abstinence is the best birth control. Masturbation just attempts to put sex into practice in a non-cognitive sense. Thoughts lead to obsessions which lead to actions. The moment someone lets a thought entertain them, the moment that opens the actual act for it to occur.

Sex existed long before it had an option to be premarital.  Just because the religious have highjacked the action doesn't make it worthy of a negative judgement.

Sitri_

This is an issue worth splitting a hair though. Religion has made people more civil and now it's evolved into common sense.

I would argue with your statement abstinence is the best for of birth control.  Had you said most effective it would be more believable.  I honestly can't imagine being a fulfilled individual without sex.  It is human nature, every single one of your ancestors had this common bond, they all had sex and most likely enjoyed it.

Sitri_

It's not ethical though. Humans are more adapted than animals though and they have moral codes of conduct that can't be ignored for the simple sake of a one night stand.

I'll give up now saying that life is really hard to live by rules all the time

and the one (No marriage!:D No sex!:x) you are talking about is very strict!

By the way, I'm guessing you don't like condoms very much! After all, beside other vital uses, it encourages sex before marriage... Am I right?

7guns

Correct, although it is preferable for someone to have protected sex, as opposed to marrying someone just for the sex, only to get a divorce later. They're both unethical.

There's nothing wrong with premarital sex at all. Your view is somewhat suprising GC, are you by any chance asexual?felixlynch777

I've wrapped my mind around this a few times, and I have come to the conclusion that although men and women can be visually appalling, there is nothing about sex that is appealling to me at least.

Well, how did you develop these ideas that sex is wrong outside of reproduction?

helium_flash

If an individual doesn't want children, then they shouldn't have sex. I'm stealing this analogy from foxhound_fox, but it's like being worried about the parachute not ejecting while skydiving, which could simply be avoided by not skydiving.

I have no plans to marry,might change in the future what do I know (but not the church thing marriage, just the formal one, since you get some legal benefits by being married), I am atm in the "just enjoying my youth" phase anyway :P

about sex before marriage, well I see no reasons why not. Sex has kinda lost the "only for reproduction" thing ages ago and iirc there are even some animals (dolphins I think, not sure read about this a long time ago, I'll try to find something on the internet) who do it just for fun, like humans.

This is an issue worth splitting a hair though. Religion has made people more civil and now it's evolved into common sense.

It's not ethical though. Humans are more adapted than animals though and they have moral codes of conduct that can't be ignored for the simple sake of a one night stand.

Correct, although it is preferable for someone to have protected sex, as opposed to marrying someone just for the sex, only to get a divorce later. They're both unethical.

I've wrapped my mind around this a few times, and I have come to the conclusion that although men and women can be visually appalling, there is nothing about sex that is appealling to me at least.

If an individual doesn't want children, then they shouldn't have sex. I'm stealing this analogy from foxhound_fox, but it's like being worried about the parachute not ejecting while skydiving, which could simply be avoided by not skydiving.

Genetic_Code

Par 4: I still can't understand how sex can be appaling.

I see nothing wrong ethically with sex before marriage.  Personally I want to wait until I have at least found someone I care about, not strictly needing to be married.

I don't see how it can be morally wrong to have sex.  Humans, intelligent as we like to think ourselves, are still strictly speaking, still animals and I don't see it can be seen as wrong to indulge in our more base instincts.

Par 2: We are still animals, and if being humans means more developed and civilised, still sex for me is not something non-civilized and not everything should be bound to a strict morality just for the sake of saying: we're better than animals. We ARE animals with logic that enables us to know when not to do something that hurts somebody else and to me sex can only be beneficial if done with respect.

Par 4: I still can't understand how sex can be appaling.

Teenaged

Fine, but I think sex isn't so logical and reverses the advances humans have made since our origin. Reducing ourselves to animals is a step backward, although bear in mind that I'm speaking in a non-biological sense.

I completely agree with the skydiving analogy Genetic_Code. It hits the nail right on the head. :DLansdowne5

Yeah, I liked it too.

Fine, but I think sex isn't so logical and reverses the advances humans have made since our origin. Reducing ourselves to animals is a step backward, although bear in mind that I'm speaking in a non-biological sense.

Genetic_Code

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]

Fine, but I think sex isn't so logical and reverses the advances humans have made since our origin. Reducing ourselves to animals is a step backward, although bear in mind that I'm speaking in a non-biological sense.

Teenaged

We don't...

Like I've said before it's really hard to live life by rules and codes. They will get broken one way or another and that's why I think it is a good thing we can usually make up for our mistakes.

NOTE: I am still in disagreement with G_C on this matter!

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

Par 2: We are still animals, and if being humans means more developed and civilised, still sex for me is not something non-civilized and not everything should be bound to a strict morality just for the sake of saying: we're better than animals. We ARE animals with logic that enables us to know when not to do something that hurts somebody else and to me sex can only be beneficial if done with respect.

Par 4: I still can't understand how sex can be appaling.

Genetic_Code

Fine, but I think sex isn't so logical and reverses the advances humans have made since our origin. Reducing ourselves to animals is a step backward, although bear in mind that I'm speaking in a non-biological sense.

I completely agree with the skydiving analogy Genetic_Code. It hits the nail right on the head. :DLansdowne5

Yeah, I liked it too.

[QUOTE="Sitri_"]

Sex existed long before it had an option to be premarital.  Just because the religious have highjacked the action doesn't make it worthy of a negative judgement.

Genetic_Code

This is an issue worth splitting a hair though. Religion has made people more civil and now it's evolved into common sense.

Has it now?  I can list you many an uncivilised act done solely in the service of religion.  This arresting of a persons basic needs as a tool of exploitation in their attempt to create a problem for you to have to come to them to solve is just one example.

[QUOTE="Sitri_"]

I would argue with your statement abstinence is the best for of birth control.  Had you said most effective it would be more believable.  I honestly can't imagine being a fulfilled individual without sex.  It is human nature, every single one of your ancestors had this common bond, they all had sex and most likely enjoyed it.

Genetic_Code

It's not ethical though. Humans are more adapted than animals though and they have moral codes of conduct that can't be ignored for the simple sake of a one night stand.

Why is it not ethical?  Because someone says it isn't?  That doesn't sound like a very good reason to me.  If I were to say eating lettuce was unethical, would you say "Humans are more adapted than animals though and they have moral codes of conduct that can't be ignored for the simple sake of eating a sandwich"?  My moral code of conduct which is firmly in tack has nothing to do with non-harmful sex.

 

[QUOTE="7guns"]

I'll give up now saying that life is really hard to live by rules all the time

and the one (No marriage!:D No sex!:x) you are talking about is very strict!

By the way, I'm guessing you don't like condoms very much! After all, beside other vital uses, it encourages sex before marriage... Am I right?

Genetic_Code

Correct, although it is preferable for someone to have protected sex, as opposed to marrying someone just for the sex, only to get a divorce later. They're both unethical.

On what grounds?

[QUOTE="felixlynch777"]There's nothing wrong with premarital sex at all. Your view is somewhat suprising GC, are you by any chance asexual?Genetic_Code

I've wrapped my mind around this a few times, and I have come to the conclusion that although men and women can be visually appalling, there is nothing about sex that is appealling to me at least.

There is a big difference between saying that you don't find sex arousing and that it is unethical.  There are a great number of things that don't turn me on or may even repel me, but I don't place moral judgements on them for that reason.

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]

Well, how did you develop these ideas that sex is wrong outside of reproduction?

Genetic_Code

If an individual doesn't want children, then they shouldn't have sex. I'm stealing this analogy from foxhound_fox, but it's like being worried about the parachute not ejecting while skydiving, which could simply be avoided by not skydiving.

And if you don't want to get in a car crash you shouldn't ride in a car, and if you don't want to get food poisoning you shouldn't eat food you haven't grown and prepared yourself, and if you don't want to fail you should never try...........some things in life are not only worth the risk, our basic quality of life requires it of us.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]

Fine, but I think sex isn't so logical and reverses the advances humans have made since our origin. Reducing ourselves to animals is a step backward, although bear in mind that I'm speaking in a non-biological sense.

7guns

We don't...

Like I've said before it's really hard to live life by rules and codes. They will get broken one way or another and that's why I think it is a good thing we can usually make up for our mistakes.

NOTE: I am still in disagreement with G_C on this matter!

And I personaly find nothing insulting in saying that we are animals. We are and if you like it we are not wild but domesticated - by god, lansdowne5 might say and he might be right. But the point is that I can't imagine a human being functioning properly without inner emotions, lusts, needs and impulse behaviour. If we hadn't these then there would be no social behavior, no need to define relationships (if there would be at all), no bonding with others, NOTHING.

I don't want to be unfair because I guess G_C has nothing against those things in general, but finds sex unethical before marriage and generaly not appealing. I would like first to know in what moral principals is it unethical: Christian morality, common sense? And why?

And here I will agree with Sitri. If something is so overwhelming and unknown we ought to prepare ourselves to enjoy it, rather than not bother at all, because we're afraid.

No disagreement with you, 7guns. I just had to repeat myself for some reason. :P

I don't want to be unfair because I guess G_C has nothing against those things in general, but finds sex unethical before marriage and generaly not appealing. I would like first to know in what moral principals is it unethical: Christian morality, common sense? And why?

Teenaged

Ok! I know I said "I give up" in one of my previous posts BUT NOW, 8) I would like to emphasize on this question. This is probably the most commonly asked question in this thread and is still coming around one way or another.

Genetic_Code, may be you could elaborate on this point a bit more thoroughly?:roll: 

Why does everything humans do have to be completely logical? Should we suppress every impulsiveness we have just to claim we are not animals? Emotions aren't (most of the times) logical, yet we feel them. And how does sex reverse the advances of humanity?

Teenaged

Humans don't have to be logical. They have no obligation to be logical, whether there is a Supreme Ruler or not, we have the free will, or at least the appearance of free will, to not confine within logic. I would imagine suppressing impulsiveness would equate to good behavior. Emotions aren't logical, but there's a logical way to approach them. Sex reverse the advances of humanity because we've made safeguards to prevent from having too much sex. No animal species that I know of has a specific code of conduct that disables them from having sex, although it wouldn't surprise me if there isn't any.

It could be argued that animals have better morals than us as animals do not kill based on emotions such as greed, jealously, vengeance etc.

THUMPTABLE

That's because humans don't study animals' emotions as much as we do humans. That's up to debate. Animals do kill.