I meant “conscience”…reading through my post before I press “submit” would probably be a good thing.
This thread wasn’t nearly as prurient as its title would have me believe it was going to be, though “pleasurable shove in the end” had some promise. Alas, it, too, disappointed.
That is all.
[sub]Hee. Ear sex.[/sub]
[sub]Aural sex[/sub]
Faithful Christian here, but not Catholic. Waited until marriage, grateful for it every day.
I believe that God created sex; our sex drive is utterly natural. But our Father wants us to learn to control that drive and use it well–just like any other. Sex is great stuff; it’s very powerful and thus has potential for enormous good and enormous evil. Also, we currently live in a society that constantly perverts the sexual drive for commercial purposes, so it’s difficult to separate what our environment is telling us from the truth.
God gives us rules not to oppress us, but because He knows best how the human being works. I don’t know if you’ve read the Lewis essay in which he compares a person to a machine, and the commandments to the instructions. If you are a VCR, then casual sex (or other sin) is like jamming a jelly sandwich into the video slot.
I think you’ve gotten some good comments above, actually. I can’t write more just now as my kids are going to eat each other soon if I don’t feed them. But I’d like to say that while it wasn’t easy to wait, it was absolutely worth it. Patience and self-control aren’t highly valued these days when it comes to sex, and sometimes it’s hard to understand the reward until you’re there. My husband commented the other day after teaching a group of teens at church that if he could just show them how it feels, it would be so much easier for them to understand why waiting is good. Well that was convuluted wasn’t it…
Most of the guys I had premarital sex with were Catholic.
I hope that helps.
To those of you taking issue with the OP’s spelling of “ladle,” give him a break: keep in mind that he’s usually reading the handle upside down.
:eek:
No, no, I know exactly what you meant. Just needlin’ ya. 
As far as I’m concerned (and this thread hasn’t changed my mind), it all boils down to: early Christians didn’t have very good birth control, so preventing single parenthood and STD’s was best done by abstinence. Preventing internal discord by making girls wait until marriage so Daddy wouldn’t lose his bride-price was likely a second reason. The rest is all retcon - convoluted spiritual reasoning done to support the Ideal.
Yes, I think sex can be a spiritual union. It can also be cardio-vascular exercise. Do I prefer the former? Vastly so! But having the second does not in any way preclude the first.
I’m probably the last person who should be giving you advice in this thread, being neither Christian nor averse to pre-martial sex (although that in itself has changed over the course of my adolescence and adulthood) but some things that you mention struck me, and I thought I’d give my response, such as it is.
Perhaps this isn’t quite in line with your beliefs, but it seems to be that there is always the certainty, and not merely the possibility, of future separation. One may or may not move away from one’s friends, family and lovers, but every last one of us is going to die. I realise this isn’t terribly comforting, but pardon me if I say I’m not trying to be. I’m trying to state things as I see them. To me it seems that the intensity of a relationship (no matter which) should not depend on some mythical absolute certainty in what will happen in the future. The future is inherently uncertain; and to seek comfort in certainty there merely invites the possibility that those hopes will not be fulfilled. Relationships are here and now, and may or may not continue - that depends on several factors, some of them beyond my control. I think honesty, integrity and enjoyment in the relationship *now *matter much more than analysing what may or may not be. Loving completely is nothing to do with the length of a relationship, IMHO.
My girlfriend is Christian (although not Catholic), and happily engages in pre-marital sex without seeming to have any soul-searching. I’m not sure if she would have any useful advice for you, but I could ask, if you’d like.
I’ve typed and deleted this several times, and I’m still not sure how to say this, so I’ll give it my best shot. It’s not meant as a personal insult, so if it seems insulting that’s not the intention. I just wonder if perhaps some of the problem you are having while trying to reconcile your views with that of the church that you belong to results from the fact that the church expects you to accept an externally imposed set of beliefs, that you must accept wholesale without any space for personal reflection. I’ve thought long and hard about my views about relationships, tested them, modified them, and I’m comfortable with them. I think that goes a long way to making me comfortable in my own moral skin, if I may be permitted a somewhat dubious analogy. I might later change them, but they are the product of my own reflections and experiences. They’re inwardly grown, if you like, rather than externally imposed.
Hmm, the expected flood of atheists coming in to deride the very notion of religion hasn’t materialized yet.
OK, I’m here, and I’m an atheist. I am not going to deride anyone’s belief system, but I just want to make a few comments and ask a few questions.
Is there a passage in the Bible that explicitly forbids pre-marital sex? Can someone quote it for me?
Is it a forgone conclusion that the teachings of the Catholic Church and the Bible are absolutely congruous? For that matter, is it a forgone conclusion that the Bible and God’s will are absolutley congruous? Is it possible that somewhere along the line, something got misinterpreted?
Think about some logical reasons why such a proscription would be in place. Would an all loving god choose to torture so many for so very long, when their only sin was doing nothing at all? That sounds really unlikely to me. Is it possible that the church has imposed such a rule not for our own good, but for theirs? Might there be an element of control or political gain in play? That seems a good deal more likely. Do the rules for modern living closely resemble those of ancient times? In some ways yes, in other ways very much no. Is premarital sex as huge a sin as murder? I, personally, find the notion to be beyond ridiculous, but YRMV.
Let’s take God out of the equation for just a moment, and look at all that sex gives us and what it takes away. Feel free to add to both lists, as there is no way I can be comprehensive here. Then ask yourself how a just god might agree or disagree with each of these points.
Why sex is good:
-It feels good.
-For the most part, it hurts no one.
-It’s the best way I know of for making wanted babies.
-It’s one of the few things in life where the less selfish you are, the more you get.
-It brings about emotional intimacy.
-It bolsters the immune system. (“Honest, Lord, I was just trying to avoid the flu! Becky Lou’s shapely ass had nothing to do with it!”)
Why sex is bad:
-Creating jealousy is extremely painful. Sex is great for hurting feelings, more than almost anything else.
-It’s the perfect vector for a handful of devastating illnesses.
-It’s the best way I know of for making unwanted babies.
-It’s a huge impediment to logic. (But in many ways, so is abstinence.)
I’m trying to think of some more bad things, but I’m coming up short.
Let me also point out that there are not two polar extremes, total chastity and extreme sluttery. There’s a middle ground. One doesn’t have to be either married nor a slut in order to share physical intimacy with a loving and monogamous partner.
Would it be fair to say that, from a purely secular view, that sex is a good thing but, like alcohol, should be enjoyed responsibly? Would it also be fair to say that God has imposed His rules for at least some of those reasons and not out of some arbitrary cruelty?
That’s just my two cents on it.
But I will say this: I have a couple of friends who are living lives of sexual misery because of the Catholic Church. They can never have sex because they are not married, but they are also not allowed to get married. (Legal in this state, but a mortal sin in the Vatican). It makes me sad and angry. I have no desire to convert them to atheism, but I wish they’d wake up and come to it themselves, before they’re too old to really enjoy each other.
And as far as aural sex goes, I hear ya.
This strikes me as a good argument in favor of polyamory. Why is it better to be bound to only one other soul, instead of many?
As for the rules of the Catholic Church, well, I am an atheist, so take this for what it’s worth, but it seems odd to me that God would much care about arbitrary rules like “Don’t have sex before marriage.” Moral principles like, “Don’t hurt others,” seem like more his bag. If you’re having pre-maritial sex, but you’re honest, considerate of your partner, safe, and responsible, I don’t see a deity caring much about wether or not you’ve said your vows, or even wether you intend to stay together for the rest of your lives.
As others have mentioned, I’m not sure marriage negates this. If you’ve managed to have pre-marital sex, you might just be able to justify divorce at some point.
Was sex great with all three women? If not, would you be satisfied spending the rest of your life with the pairing that offered the least-pleasurable encounters?
I was brought up Catholic, went to the Catholic schools, did the Confirmation in 11th grade for Grandma. Just an assumed step, I wasn’t asked if I wanted to - went through the classes not even absorbing what I was doing - I’m doing it for Grandma. I was a good kid who did what I was told and honored my father and my mother.
I didn’t have any sort of any flavor or brand of sex until I was 28 years old. When I did, it was with my now husband, who at the time was 23. We dated for a few months before we had sex. He was brought up Catholic too, but had been sexually active since he was 17 - no guilt there. But at the end of our first date, we were making out a bit at his place, I was fretting over how to stop the momentum, and he felt that I’m sure. He said “Whenever you’re ready - you just say the word. I’ll wait.” And we did wait. It took a few months of time together for me to be certain. I had major self-esteem issues and had never been in real honest love or even had an actual boyfriend in those 28 years. I needed a lot of time to be sure he wasn’t having me on: only dating me to win a bet, dating me to be closer to my much more attractive sisters, or just trying to have some sex. {All of which had been my experience with guys prior} Three months later he was just as happy and content with our relationship, with NO sexual activity - not even aural or ANYTHING :eek: - that I decided this guy was **Made of Awesome. **
I only fretted over the pre-marital sex Sin for one night. I figured, I had waited long enough. I’m an adult. I had gone through so much disappointment and longing and tears and waiting for someone to see me for me and like it. It’s my time now. If God wanted to put this man in my path, and he seemed intent on staying there, why wouldnt He want me to seize the day? So I went for it. And I’m not ashamed of my decision. I feel a few very mild pangs of guilt now and then, but that’s the upbringing talking, and they are easily ignored.
Look, you couldn’t be a more Catholic woman than my Mother. Twice a Week Church goer. All the Days of Obligation celebrated. Fasting and sacrificing all during Lent. Stations of the Cross until her knees were bruised through Advent. Taught in a Catholic school. Alms for the poor, soup kitchen volunteer, etc., with two jobs and three children. Waited 4 years for Pope John Paul II to annul her marriage in The Church so she could marry again after the divorce. But in that 4 years of waiting, StepDad “shacked up” with us, and there was no shortage of lovin. 
She’d go through the proper motions for the annulment and re-marriage In The Church (even though StedDad was not Catholic) - whatever was expected of her by her Catholic Employers, but she wasn’t going to let any rules from her Invisible Friend prolong her happiness. She was an adult with three children, she certainly had the experience and reason to make her own decisions about her life and seeing to the well-being of her family. The sex thing seemed like a silly thing to fret over at that age and stage in life. I think I took that line of thinking as well.
I’m not a practicing Catholic right now, but the worry and the guilt does linger. My opinion? God wants us to be happy, but he doesnt want us to act like asshats either. He’s like the parent who wants to be proud of us when we are good and behave ourselves, and is just sad when we disappoint Him. How sad does pre-marital sex make Him? I can’t say. It’s my hope the He can see each circumstance for what it is. But I don’t think God is vengeful and smiteful or smoteful or whatever, I think He just wants us to love and be loved, and treat others as we would like to be treated. I’ll just go on thinking that.
tdn-there’s a lot of sense in what you say. I would add to the negatives of sex manipulation or using–perhaps a more neutral term would be unwanted emotional entanglements. On the positive side, I would add the bolstering of trust, but that could go with your emotional intimacy.
I am not against premarital sex, in fact I think it is important to know this aspect of your future life partner. I just don’t think sex should be done thoughtlessly and without some degree of caring for your partner-however brief that partnering is.
But I will say that knowing it doesn’t mean that people don’t change (or you yourself change) and what was once acceptable may no longer be so. IOW, there are no guarantees in life re sex or anything else.
Thank you.
I’d almost lump unwanted emotional entaglements in with jealousy, but it would make more sense to do it the other way around. In fact, there are both positive and negative emotions at play. That’s just the nature of the beast. And the negative emotions are very powerful, and can destroy lives. Marriage or not, go ahead and play, but be very careful.
I’m reminded of a story. There’s a guy who is sort of famous for engaging in “free love.” At any time, he’s got seven or eight girlfriends, and he has sex with all of them. They all know about his lifestyle and are OK with it. One particular woman was usually his after midnight booty call. Once, she called during the day. She said that she was going on a date with some loser, and first wanted to come over and get a “protein shake.” And so she did.
Afterwards, the guy was chuckling to himself that the poor sap would never know where his date’s mouth was just an hour before he kissed her. What a sucker! Ha ha! Then he started wondering how often his dates did the very same thing to him. How often had he been the poor sap? He said that that night was the drunkest he’d ever gotten in his life.
Free love is a beautiful thing, but it most definitely has a dark side.
I would propose that it’s never really free. Someone is paying on one side or the other.
I have to agree–I just don’t believe that “fuck buddies” truly exist. I can see that they are out there, but I have to wonder about the emotional investment of one party or another. IME, there’s always one partner who wants more, cares more etc and puts up with stuff in hopes that the other partner will eventually come to his or her senses… Somebody’s bound to get hurt. The hurter can say all s/he wants, “hey, the ground rules were established from the get go.” but I don’t think that absolves anyone from blame. The hurtee has a responsibility to themselves as well–as in, don’t put yourself in such a position in the first place. Chance is a fine thing!
I liked tdn’s story and I hope that guy was ok with his partners’ using him the way he was using them. Turnabout is fair play and all that. Since he got the drunkest he’d ever been, it sounds like he wasn’t happy with it–it’s not so nice when the tables turn. That said, that is not the way I would like my sex life to be–nor is it the way anyone I know in RL would like their sex life to be. Then again, I’m married and in my 40s. I didn’t want sex to be like that in my 20s, either–and I was pre-AIDS in my coming of age.
Dangerosa - I must tell you how insulting I find your phase “recovering Catholic”. You may be a former Catholic, No one held a gun to your head to make you stay a part of the Church. To put Catholicism on par with a disease, something toxic, is a slur against me and 1 billion other Catholics.
StG
I find it insulting that you find it insulting - my sister is an alcoholic. Diseases are not bad and having one is not a slur.
So you feel all Catholics are diseased? That Catholicism is a disease?
StG
Maybe everyone has different experiences with religion and so some can claim to be recovering and others can be growing in their faith? Why does one experience insult/negate the other? The Catholic church is huge and it provides a myriad of experiences to those who come in contact with it. The altar boy abused/molested by a priest will have different memories and experiences to draw on then someone who was not, for just one example. I went to HS with the coolest girl who became a nun–so I have a “warm/fuzzy” attitude toward nuns. Those who had schooling from some nuns may tell a different story (and sometimes not).
It’s no use pretending that the Catholic church or any established religion doesn’t hurt some or leave a bad taste in some mouths. But it’s also false to write off the whole faith/Church because of one’s experience–others may not share that pain.
And now that I’ve stated the obvious, I’m off. 