Hi all,

I haven't had a chance to really research this, but I was wondering why is premarital sex considered a sin?

First off, what are considered the sins? The ten commandments? If so, then sex is only mentioned in regards to adultery. Adultery meaning outside of your already existing marriage? Or outside of marriage period?

I understand why it is immoral (socially negative) for Christians to have an affair once you are married. You have made an oath in front of the God you believe in, declaring that from this day forward, you choose to be with this person and no one else till death do you part. Breaking that vow is essentially breaking a promise to God, and your spouse.

But why is it sex before marriage is immoral? I understand the negative effects that are possible. There is the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. But if that is a reason to declare sex immoral, shouldn't we also persecute people who cough in public, or who are contagious with the flu, or who have chicken pox? There is also unwanted pregnancies. Although it is a problem, it is one easily remedied with education and resources. Instead of just saying "DONT HAVE SEX, it's a sin" why are we not realizing that sex is going to happen, and focus on educating people on how to actually avoid and prevent the negative effects?

There is of course always the double standard for male and females. Girls are taught that not only will they go to hell if they have premarital sex, but that they will be looked down on by the rest of society. Why is this? I know on the surface, Christianity claims that it's stance on premarital sex is equal between men and women, but can someone please show me in the Bible an example of a man being persecuted for intercourse before marriage?

I know many adults (mostly females) who, in their developmental years, were taught that sex was bad, immoral, that it should not be talked about, and should be a secretive, private thing that is completely unknown to one until the wedding night. Of course, as one develops, hormones take over and many times, people relent to what their natural instincts tell them, and then are ashamed and guilty. While most adults (even Christians) can agree that the idea of marrying someone you have never slept with is probably not a good idea, relationshipwise, and can also agree that they themselves didn't wait till marriage or had a very hard time doing so, there is still the residual effects of being taught that premarital sex is wrong, and it is only propagating the incorrect ideas about it, and promoting the unhealthy, uneducated, biased, and hypocritical view of sex in the US today.

No sin is against GOD.

That is why I chose Wicca. We dont condemn people for doing what their body instincts tell them to. In fact we dont mention anything about sex, the only comdemning phrase that we have is, "Harm none do what you will." So I guess if you dont hurt the person then in my religion it is fine.
I am curious to know about the views of different religions on the topic of sex.

Sorry? I'm not sure if it's context or grammar, but I am not grasping that response...

Well its obvious the negitive impact of premarital sex on this world. If everyone only had marital sex, there wouldnt be no such thing as std's, obviously cause there would be no way for them to spread. Also the amount of parentless children would be way down as well. Those two alone would improve living in this world for many many people dramaticaly. Of course you'd also have to add in that if you divorced someone, you couldnt re-marry.

Im going with context

I will explain. Sin separates us from GOD that is its only purpose. do y'all understand or need more elaboration??

Sin is also humanistic which GOD is not. Ya'll are thinking of GOD as physical thinking that way you won't understand how GOD feels. GOD IS A BIG GIGANTIC BALL OF ENERGY NOTHING MORE

I also beleive GOD didn't make each planet, star, solar system and constellation. GOD ALLOWED THE SPARK IN WHICH CAUSED THE BIG BANG AFTER THAT CHEMICALS WERE RELEASED DUE TO A CHEMICAL REACTION. IT EXPANDED INTO WHAT MOST OF US SEE TODAY. I give GOD credit for creating time and from there it was all simple. If we could create and distinguish time we would be GOD... That simple

I could use a little more. If sin seperates us from God (which I to believe it does) then how is God not against sin? Why would he seperate himself from from somthing we wasnt against?

Simple he is ALL Positive Energy none can come within his sphere it would be shunned off. Basically destroyed and the Positive would over ride the other negative etc...Sin is physical GOD is not. GOD DOESN'T THINK, GOD DOESN'T TALK, GOD DOESN'T FLY OR WALK, GOD DOESN'T JUDGE, GOD DOESN'T DO ANYTHING IN OUR UNIVERSE PERIOD BUT WAIT WAIT WAIT UNTIL WE DESTROY OURSELVES =)

GOD NEEDS US MORE THAN WE NEED GOD. I hate even typing that but its the truth. GOD NEEDS US AND RELIES ON US 2 KEEP GOD GOING FOR ETERNITY BECAUSE EVERYTHING CAN BE DESTROYED VIA PHYSICAL OR SPIRITUAL.

If a person See's GOD , most are not equipped to understand his(It's) nature. Humans don't have the capacity. IMO!
As for premarital sex, that's a sociological law more than a religious one. And social rules change all the time.

I know not of this god you speak of.

Just another attempt of the churches to control the masses.

However, I do think it wise at such young ages to refrain. Like was mentioned before about std's or Aids, etc... it would keep the diseases down if there was less promiscuous people banging everything that moves...

Reminds me of an old Eddie Murphy movie.... "damn, even the fish stop swimming when you come by"....... (anything that moves)....

As far as i feel, If you love some one, wether your married or not to them, GO FOR IT!

But stay away from married people...marriages have such a hard enough time these days getting thru life and lasting....

Whoa.


Okay, I didn't mean for this thread to turn into a SCREAMING MATCH (spiritualacender, im lookin at you.)

Back on topic, I understand that its a social thing, as is killing, stealing, etc. They all pretty much help the society out as a whole if they are looked down upon. And the sins regarding false idols and using Gods name in vain seem to speak for themselves as well. I mean, if you wanted to be ultimate ruler of the earth and people and skies and stuff, you couldn't let people think you don't mind if they worship someone else, or even just your name.

But, we have the education and the resources now to combat the negative effects of premarital sex. Everything from sex ed classes to prophylactics, to birth control pills and readily available counseling and medical assistance. If it becomes the norm that premarital sex has a very low amount of negative effects, do we scratch it off the list of sins?

*edited:

Let me add that I am not trying to promote people just banging anything that moves lol. I think that there is a certain responsibility involved with being sexually active, including using the resources I mention above to lower the chance of negative effects. This sense of responsibility can probably only be reached at a level of maturity that is higher than what we see now as the beginning stages of sexually active teenagers.

But I'm gearing this more towards adults. Fully mature ones who have the ability to act responsibly.

I agree Roger you also have some Wisdom. Wisdom is Knowledge that is understood. we will never see GOD I AM FINE WITH THAT AND STILL WORSHIP IT EVERYDAY ALLDAY. Not out of fear but because it is my true creator..... We didn't make anything its not our decision. IT'S GOD'S WILL UNTIL WE KILL OFF EVEN GOD

I personally do not put it in the list of sins, but having sex without connection leads to children with no dads or worse no mothers. If people would look close enough, they would find that the degression of the United States correlates with the degression of marriage and family.

I agree bogcreeper....
The children these days grow up with no supervision and doing whatever they want, because of absent parents. There seems to be the lack of family values these days... Some of these street gangs have closer ties than some familys.
We are in for some troubled times ahead...and not getting better soon.

Here is a link I found on the subject... http://www.layhands.com/IsPremaritalSexASin.htm

At least if there is Love, a relationship can stand a chance at working...especially if a child comes of it...

Blessings to all...

Sex is a mortal sin. Also steals your energy and attacks you spirit =). THE UNIVERSE HAS ITS WAYS OF ADAPTING AND DEALING WITH FOOLS. Kinda like it has a mind of its own. Thats why we got std's and plagues. The Universe wants to live and stay. But it will be something cosmic that destroys our Planet that it won't have control over.

PLEASE STOP WITH THE CAPS, SERIOUSLY! WE CAN HEAR YOU!

Interesting question Sundog. It is like the Bible doesn't specifically prohibit *spam filter* either but that is considered sinful by many Christians.



I agree.

Wow that spamfilter makes it look really bad lol! I was just talking about lesbianism - in a really non spamfilterish way actually

I agree that the degression of marriage and family has an negative impact on everyone. But, there's two things I want to point out. One is that having protected sex doesn't lead to children with no dads or moms. Second, having sex with a connection still leads to children with no dads or moms.

Marriage does not guarantee parents any more so than the weatherman can guarantee sunshine.

I think this whole thing was looked down upon by our older generations to prevent teen pregancy and fatherless/motherless children. If you think about it is that a bad thing? I for one am not against sex before marriage, but I am against people who have unprotected sex and aren't willing to consider the consequences.

The bible is against pre marital sex



Corinthians 6:9-11, "Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God".

Corinthians 7:2, "Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife and every woman have her own husband".

You are absoulutly right SunDog. But this is also do to the sinful nature man posses. Truth is if we lived, all of us, according to the bible, we would all be much better off.

Not really.

If we lived, all of us, according to the bible, homosexuals probably wouldn't be better off. Muslims definitely wouldn't be better off.

I understand your point of view, that the bible should be used as a manual for everyone to refer to on life, but I have to disagree. I think the bible is just the result of men in power writing down the rules they thought would benefit them (and their society, by default) the most. These societal rules (or sins) were already in place before Moses came down from Mt. Ararat. Premarital sex was not one of those.

i see marriage as a contract to raise children together.

if you dont want kids dont have sex.

ergo dont have sex until after the marriage point.

Really? how about sex between married partners? Married to each other, of course.


Really? I will admit that a healthy romp with one you love can be somewhat tiring, but it also revitalizes one, and the love you and your partner share. As to "attacking your spirit", I have never felt closer to my partner than at the moment of climax with her.


Before knocking it altogether, you might want to give sex a try

aren't sexually frustrated people easier to control ?

Christians tend to be educated in the spirit of shame when it comes to all matters related to sex. However my opinion is that premarital sex is considered a sin because seeking personal pleasure takes your mind off the jealous god in need of constant worship, and all hedonistic practices are prohibited.

I can also spot a link between sex and the primordial sin of Adam and Eve...that forbidden fruit seems to me a metaphor for something else. and thus this sin must be among the greatest

Sex is fantastic! Just be smart about it... and be prepared to actually raise the child if you f*** up (no pun intended)

If we all lived according to the bible, there wouldnt be homosexuals, or muslims.

Pretty hateful stuff...

I think it sets up an unhelpful mentality - things that are natural are therefore expressions of the concept that we are all born 'sinful'. Instead of working through life situation by situation relegating sex to being intrinsically shameful gives them odd ideas:



Lol I mean seriously...

Whoa Preacherman!!! Your comment only serves to confirm the many postings here in regards to the Bible being mans interpretation of God.

Therefore, those postings have not been in vain.

Why would god give us such strong sexual urges if we couldnt have sex. To some people masturbation is a sin, so what the hell! Maybe if god didnt want us to have sex he wouldnt make us want it so much. Or maybe god wants us all to get married very early in life so we can go through with our sexual urges, then get divorced, and it would be ok since were married. That would stop most of the STD's and the death of millions of people a year right? damnit god why make us so horny?


Look at all the incest, rape, and premarital sex that goes on among animals, humans have the exact same sexual drive, its just portayed differently. We as humans just put boundries on it ( thats why its in the bible) because in our society we dont want incest, rape, and STD's spreading. So i think its ok to bone before marriage as long your not raping someone, spreading an STD, or screwin ur sis.

Because sex is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE thing that should only be done with one person, 3 times, (once for each child) in you entire lifetime.

THATS WHY, NOOB!

Or.. much of anything else.

Not that I agree with it, but just from what they seemed to be teaching me growing up:

You are only meant/supposed to have sexual relations with one person throughout your entire life. That one person is supposed to be the person you spend the rest of your life with, have children with, grow old together with, and all that good stuff.

Now, if you have sex before you are married, you are thereby having sexual relations with someone whom you have no commitment to. Marriage is supposed to be that commitment that provides the structure for you to then say you are with the one person you know you will always be with for the rest of your life and therefore you can have the most intimate of intimate relationships with them. Sex in other words, (oooo...ahhh)

But yea, that seems to be the idea behind what Catholic school was trying to teach the kiddies for the 12 years I went to one.

Then again, they also tell you how bad masturbation is, so they basically expect you to deny yourself of any kind of sexual pleasure throughout your entire life until you are married. Except for like kissing and hugging, you're allowed to do that. They never did give a straight answer as to whether other certain sexual activites were appropriate or not - and yes, I was in classes where students were asking priests about it, haha.

Oh man, anyways - I understand the idea behind what they taught, but they do it in such a way that it's as if you are supposed to feel bad about yourself for having sexual desires and letting yourself be touched or what not.

Lawl, you used the term, "Noob", wrong. A Noob is an ignorant person who is aggravated easily, "Noob" is often associated with demeanors and presented to be a mindset, rather than a offensive insult to ones intelligence. Anyways, sex is sex - it is simple. God is not a old man on a throne, it is a non-aware positive energy which all life originates from. Religion was only made to attempt to understand how we were created as we didn't know then, and we STILL don't know now. Humans are imperfect , and no one can explain everything. No one knows whether god exists...and no one can really prove it exists either. But, no one can stop you from believing in god either.

It is simple really, why do you believe the Church was ahead of society? The Church and papacy created laws they believed to be moral to control the public. To literally instill order, though sometimes a bit drastic. (Burnings or crucifixion.) We tend to end up believing ourselves too much over generations and the flame was passed to each pope until the church was really questioned about its approach and control. (Martin Luther which branched to the development of Lutherans and Protestants.)

Well, to say premarital-sex is a sin would be to prevent numerous things such as.....

• Over population.
• STDs.
• Unwanted Children.

or Hindu's, pagans, buddhists, etc, etc etc. And those uppity women! They'd be right back where they belong, right brother?
Yeah, we would just have people who were so ashamed of not being "normal", with no one to turn to or talk with about their "problem", that they would commit suicide.
Oh wait..THAT's a sin too. So I guess we would have a bunch of folk who were ashamed AND miserable, AND awaiting death so that they could be judged by their god for having 'unpure' thoughts and cast into torment.

And we wouldn't have people eating pork, or rabbit, or shellfish.
And no one would wear cotton AND rayon, or silk AND satin.
One good thing though: professional sports would be non-existant because they "don't serve god"
In fact, a lot of things would be gone......

Actually Noob is just a stylized version of the term "newbie" so it can refer to someone who doesn't know what the heck they're talking about. And would only having sex during marriage really fix these things? Over population is NOT caused by pre-marital sex. People STILL have kids when they're married. Even more so than non-married people because they're "expected" to or it's the cultural norm. When people get married in countries that aren't technologically advanced, the main reason they have children is to help with work. The more kids you have, the more help you get. So, no, pre-marital sex does NOT cure over population. Actually I would assume that most people are going to use some kind of contraception considering they probably don't want to be carrying around their ex's baby. And Catholics ARE NOT allowed to use contraceptives, so it doesn't matter if they are married or not; they're still going to have babies if they have sex. STDs can also be passed through other means than sex. Take cold sores for example. Cold sores are in fact a type or oral herpes that over 85% of the adult population has. Now, this STD is NOT passed through sex, but through contact with the sores. Parents can give the virus to their children through a simple kiss goodnight, even! Also, many, many other STDs can be passed through other bodily fluids such as blood. So STDs may DECREASE but they won't go away. Plus, if someone has an STD and they have a child, that child is also at a great risk of catching the STD from it's mother. Unwanted children are also something pre-marital sex does NOT cure. Married couples have sex and have unwanted babies, not just unmarried people. Sure, the media is telling us that casual sex is okay and makes you "popular" or "desirable" but the media IS NOT telling teenagers and young adults to not use contraceptives. That would be religion. Religion tells us that sex is used only to make children, not for personal pleasure, but the media is telling us it's okay to have sex and enjoy yourself. They are NOT telling people to not use a condom or birth control pills, however. And most schools have sex-ed where teenagers can learn about the many forms of contraceptives, how to use them, and where to get them. So, no, unwanted children are NOT a result of pre-marital sex. Pre-marital sex is becoming the cultural norm and no one is doing anything to stop it. We have the freedom of speech. The fact is, teenagers are impressionable and are going to do whatever they want without thinking about the consequences whether religion says it's okay or not. I can speak from personal experience there. But really, if you use protection, what's so bad about pre-marital sex? It makes us feel good and lets us express who we are. We shouldn't however, go sleep with the first person we find to be physically attractive. I believe one should be in a stable, loving relationship that has been going on for at least 6 months to a year before they engage in intercourse. But saving yourself for marriage? That's incredibly unrealistic and considered old-fashioned by today's youth. Sure, STDs are on the rise, and teenagers are getting pregnant, but when has that NOT happened? And over population isn't even being caused by people in technologically advanced nations. The average number of children per family in the U.S. is 2.5, whereas in third-world countries women have up to a dozen children. What's the key to stopping over population, STDs, and unwanted babies? Not enforcing abstinence. It's getting contraceptives to countries who cannot afford them or who do not have the knowledge of these things. THAT is how we cure these problems.

Do you ignore reality on purpose? Or are you just unaware?

There would be homosexuals. It's a genetic trait, not a rebellious period or a choice in defiance. They would still be gay, they would just have to suffer so as not to offend all you people living by the bible.

I agree that sex *should* be considered more 'sacred' than it is, and that more responsibility should be involved. But I do not see why that is considered a sin against God. Just cause he said so?

Because, that would make too much sense!!! Actually, all kidding aside, I don't get it either. Must be because I was raised secular, and the very idea of "SIN", seemed very alien to me. I still don't understand it. The idea that you were a good girl, if you waited until your wedding night, and then when you first had sex, which would be the same act if you had before marriage, you are still a good girl. It is the same kind of act. What is the difference of sex before and sex after, if it's the same biological act. I may believe in some form of higher power, maybe God, but I think they would be more understanding as to why you shouldn't. Granted, if had children, and are true to your spouse or partner, then it's better, but I don't think it's bad the other way around. Maybe just more inconvenient.



I don't believe that is true. Now, if every married couple were true and faithful to each other, then maybe I see your point. Since I have seen, that countless marriages have infedilities happen all the time, and a lot of the times the faithful spouse getting the STD, the idea of marrying to stem off STD's doesn't make sense to me. Plus, there have been couples, I have known, that have stayed true to each other, not married though, and yet have shown to not get STD's. I do not think marriage, no matter how it is done, is a cure all to this.


I also don't agree with the parentless children thought. I have seen unmarried couples parent their kids very well. I have seen married parents neglect their children, even let them get taken from their homes, out of neglect. Do you mean fatherless children too? Why, because they are not around. What do you call married military fathers deployed for months, even years at a time. Trust me, even though the mother has to become the father too, (trust me, I have become that), it does show on the children. Nothing is cut and dried to a legal and binding name, because situations are always so very different in each marriage. It just seems to me, no one accounts for that.


Something I totally agree with too. Only it's because of the age of the minor, and I do believe that age is not going to get them ready for such an intimate act. I think their responsiblity level is also low on their priorities, and so wouldn't be ready if anything comes of them being intimate.

n000b.

Tho you make some good points, premarital sex is not the cause of overpopulation, couples have more kids when they are married.

Exactly what I tried to point out in my rediculously long rant.

Lawl, if you recall , I stated they are ignorant. Of course I know what a "Noob"is, not knowing what the heck you are talking about could be called being ignorant or uneducated in the topic you are conversing about. Alright if not prevent, you certainly cannot deny that is contributes heavily. So sue me for leaving out a small detail? I don't feel like making a large resonse, but pre-martial sex does end up to unwanted children. Majority of those who have pre-martial sex ARE teenagers and young adults, which results in the female being impregnated and thus, in certain circumstances, both not being able to have the child. What do you call that? It considered a social imperative to control the birthrate in some countries, such as China which you can have one child. STDs and other factors such are exactly why "Pre-marital" was deemed as a sin in order to control the birthrate. Such as in Medieval Ages or before that, during the time Germanic invaders (Ostrogoths, Vandals, Visigoths, etc.) were sacking villages and the roman empire was moved to Constantinople , feudal contracts were developed. Peasants made up over 95% of the population, and Lords only had limited amount of resources and land. The Church still maintained some degree of influence during this era, and even before than. The Hellenistic era with the spread of Greek culture, the Pax Romana, The Renaissance. Though in the Renaissance, humanists actually questioned Christian teachings and focused on individualism, the social standards and moral beliefs spread by the Church centuries before stuck. That is just one example of the numerous social changes in world history, which was primarily noted to be in the Mediterranean.

I realize that there are many teenage girls and young women who are being impregnated at a young age. BUT, whose fault it that? The media and the Catholic church. The media promotes having casual sex which leads to unwanted pregnancies. Pre-marital sex is perfectly safe if you use the right kind of protection such as using a condom and birth control pills at the same time. Even if the condom breaks, you have the BC pills as a back up defense, and you could still go get the morning after pill. Pretty iron clad defense if I do say so myself. BUT, that's not to say that this method would work 100% of the time. There will always be that one girl who gets pregnant even though she used a condom, and BC pills, and the morning after pill, but what I'm trying to say is if you use the correct protection, you'll have at least a 99% chance of NOT getting pregnant. But, does religion support contraceptives? No. THAT, ignorance, and simply being uneducated is why there are so many teenage pregnancies. Catholics don't support contraceptives because sex is strictly for making babies, not because it's a pleasurable activity. What would happen if the church decided to support contraceptives? There would be a LOT less unwanted pregnancies. But really, does the Catholic church really care that much? No. They just want to have women make MORE Catholic children. It's a harsh idea, but it's more than likely to be true. How do you save everyone from going to hell? Make lots of Catholics to go convert everyone. Tell everyone else they cannot have sex unless they're married through the church. Incredibly effective tactic. Obviously we're on the brink of getting over our fears, prejudices, and stereotypes about sex and pre-marital sex. In a few more decades I wouldn't be surprised if people didn't care about marriage anymore. Humans are polygamous creatures be nature, as were our ancestors and modern apes/monkeys. It's no surprise that people aren't faithful to one another even when they pledge to love each other until death. It's just who we are as a species no matter how much we want to deny it. Do I condone polygamy? No, I don't. Does that mean people aren't going to still practice polygamy? Yes. It doesn't matter what I say is right or wrong; what people are going to believe is what the masses are doing, and the masses are currently accepting pre-marital sex as just another cultural development. Are most people too narrow-minded and ignorant to even consider the ramifications if precaution is not taken into account? Yes. Does that stop them? No.

I as a high school student, have had sex education. It is humorous as they basically say..."Don't have sex....yep. *Hands out condoms*" Wow? You are right their are people who will , but no one is even attempting to discourage idiotic acts that will lead to someone getting pregnant. I'm tired and don't feel like posting much. But you point out some key topics that are needed to be discussed by leaders of the USA and other countries. Someone will need to do something eventually, but for now we are tormented by the idiocy presented by others.

What all religious texts written before the women's rights movement mean when they say no premarital sex, is I don't want to raise a b****** (child that isn't mine) and to make sure of it, you don't get to fool around till you are married to me. Men were not held to the same rules as women, thats clear from the historical record. While there were the religious few men who were chaste, the rest of them had sex with women they considered of low status like prostitutes.

The later translations of the bible brought women down even further, and the King James is classic of this. Also the story of Mary Magdelene being a prostitute was untrue but no one bothered to check the facts after the pope who spread the rumor put it out. Its a control issue and always has been.