This is a question for non-Christian members (or more specifically, those who have no moral objections to sexual relationships outside of a marriage covenant). My question is - If you started dating a Christian who believed that they must not have sex before marriage, would you wait for marriage or move on? this is partly inspired by a question I was about to ask in another thread about inter-Faith relationships, but I thought it might be better to discuss as a thread on its own.

thoughts and comments appreciated.

I think it would depend upon the true emotional commitment one would have. Apart from that I sincerely hope we don't hear any of those dumb "test drive" comments.

well sex is a sacred thing. its between you and the person youre doing it with.
so for me, since having sex, i totally wouldnt wanna wait. may look for someone else. although i guess it really does depend on that person, you may just care about them too much, and just stick it out until the big day.
...but if they leave at the alter, after All that time...id probably have no choice but to kill them

For myself this is never an issue that has cropped up and no one has requested we wait till marriage for sex.
If however I was in a serious relationship with some one who wanted to wait I would wait.
There are many other ways to satisfy your needs if the other person believed in waiting.

Hmmm. Don't know how I would react at all... Might question the whole idea. Never happened to me and never thought about it. Not that there is a lack of alternatives with 3+ billion other opposite sex people to chose from. I guess if I lived in a small village in the middle of nowhere with very limited population of let's say 50, I wouldn't have much of a choice other than be creative... Maybe that's the reason they married very young in the old days...

hmmmm..............yeah
ill stick with sex actually

I'd give them a reading list featuring the Origin of Species and the God Delusion and cure them.

I thought the idea of Christianity was to sin all you like and then ask forgiveness, what's so special about saving yourself that you can't be forgiven?

each to their own i suppose just trying to make a point that if i care about the other person enough then i would wait.

Hi PA. Great question and I wonder what consensus will be achieved in this particular post by non-believers towards the topic.

I do have a question and perhaps it might not be answers but what were marriage customs like in the era the Bible was written? For both Jew and Greek. Not sure if they are the same as in having to have a ceremony, I am sure many did have ceremonies, and having marriages regulated by the government, it is doubtful people needed to acquire a license from a government office, but it is most likely they did report status for tax purposes maybe.

Either way what is your view on a couple who decide to get married, are truly in love, have a modicum of maturity, intend to carry it full through, but are not necessarily going through the motions of society regarding an official engagement and civil or church ceremonies of marriage? I just do not believe the Bible actually condemns people for not having a piece of paper from the government who decide to continue their relationship. Of course having such a paper is most beneficial since how else can you visit your loved one in a hospital if ever they become hurt to the point they cannot consent.

But here is the just of it. What if two people too young to get married by their parents standards, but are mature enough, actually mature enough to know they found each other and are not in some game of simply believing it and then moving on to another falling for the same ploy again, and decide to have 'premarital sex'? Is it a sin then? What if they actually do stay together for the rest of their lives? Does it somehow not become a sin then even if it was at first?

I know such situations are never the rule but the exception. Not advocating a loophole or anything or encouraging anyone to compromise their Christianity. Most people who think they control something quickly find out they do not have full control especially when it comes to believing someone might be the one and then find out it was not so.

That's rather inconsequential when I look back over the years.

I believe that the much more important question to ask is whether your partner believes in sex after marriage!

Harte

Yes - but I can't ever see me actually marrying a Christian, hence I'd avoid the entire dating thing.

In general, however, my answer is "Yes - If you like someone enough to want to marry them, then you'd respect their decision to wait".

I believe that the much more important question to ask is whether your partner believes in sex after marriage!

Many do, but not with their marriage partner.

I can't see me marrying a hardcore christian like that, or a hardcore religious anyone, but if she beleived that sex is that special. Then I'd respect her wants.

But, in my opinon, sex is just sex.

Of course... I'd have to make sure she isn't a tranny or anything first. Before deciding to marry her.

Hmmm... first of all, it's rather unlikely that I'd want to marry someone with ideas that rigid (ie, they believe it's immoral to have sex before marriage--if that's the case, we're going to have issues that expand well beyond sex). And it's even more unlikely that I'd meet that person anyway... they aren't hanging out in the same places I like to hang out, they aren't doing the same kinds of leisure activities, or attending the same kinds of functions, they in general probably don't have the same social values I do.

However, if I met someone I was complete cool with, a soul mate as it were.. .sure, I could wait, no problem at all if it was for the right reasons. It's just very unlikely I'd meet that person. LOL.

Hmm I do not see someone as not wanting to engage in recreational sex as being rigid especially if in their mind if they do love someone and want them for life they would simply marry them. That is not the same as simply saying not married, no sex, because marriage is just a symbol for the right relationship, which most people who do not want to engage in recreational sex, even in the confines of serial monogamy have the same values...the only difference is this person wants to go the extra measure and not settle for serial monogamy and believes it is possible to meet one and only and never have to move on. Ideals can be beautiful and do not have to be viewed in terms of rigid but I can see how some maintain the same stance, though for different reasons, and are just being rigid.

It is a misconception that just because someone has a stance like this and bases it on Christian principles that they are being rigid when someone else can have the same stance and are basing it on their own considerations that sex is sacred, their awareness of sexual diseases, seeing failed relationship happen all around them, the sexual relations involved in those failed relationships, the broken hearts, and simply want something better than what others settle for.

Hi Clovis, thanks for the question. A really good one, I might add.

I've never been one to put restrictions on what constitutes a "marriage". I have stated in the past that marriage is definitely NOT defined by a piece of paper. Biblically speaking, it requires the two people to publically acknowledge their devotion to each other (though there are no stipulations as to how "public" this needs to be - presumably at the very least it would be family). From this point of view then, I would argue that any person who has dedicated themselves to another person in a lifelong monogamous relationship, regardless of their legal standing, are "married" in the eyes of God.

However, to play Devil's Advocate to that, I have seen cases where this has been abused. I knew a Christian couple once who were both unmarried (in the legal sense) but admitted to everyone that they were married "in the eyes of God". At this point, I had no problem with their desire to engage in sexual relations with each other, because as mentioned, marriage is not a piece of paper. BUT, and here's the real "but" to all of it..... these two split up. Six months later, both of them were in separate relationships, again claiming that they were "married in God's eyes".

For these people, the "married in God's eyes" rhetoric was just an excuse to have sex. I'm not saying this will always be the case. My brother is in one such relationship right now - though he is not a Christian, his devotion to his partner is absolute and a few years ago he made an announcement at a family dinner that they considered themselves married for all intents and purposes, though they never intend to "tie the knot" so to speak.

Sorry for the long way around this post, but I will say you made a great point. A piece of paper does not equal marriage. But by the same token, simply saying "we're married in God's eyes" does not necessarily make it true, either. If it is used like an excuse (such as I saw was done), then you things like the biblical stance on Divorce to consider, which these people never did.

My apologies if this post doesn't make a heap of sense. I'd intended to go to bed hours ago but got caught reading various articles in various places and suddenly it's hit 6:15am. I think most of it makes sense, but in the chance that it doesn't, I'll clarify anythying tomorrow. Good night All the best,

~ PA

No it makes perfect sense. I will not even get into the ten commandments but simply stating they were married in the eyes of God when it was not real perhaps broke a few of them, just maybe, I would think so. But that is the pitfall of such and it is always the exception and not the rule that 'marriages in the eyes of God' as used in this manner ever work out long term.

I'd have a hard time with that. Sure, I could force myself to deal with the urges, but at the same time, why should I? If I'm in love with the woman, I may just have to, even though it'd be mighty hard. If not though, definitley move on. I'm not a sex crazed Atheist, I just believe that there's nothing wrong with sex and it's something beautiful that you and your partner can experience together. When you're ready and at the right age of course. And also intelligent enough to have SAFE sex.

Yep, i'd wait no problem. There are alternatives, i mean thats what the internet was invented for right.

What is the logic of this ancient prohibition? If you marry each other, is there a difference if sex happens before or after you mutter "I do?" In more than 50% of the cases, they later say, "I don't anymore," so what's it all about?

I think maybe you somewhat misunderstood my point... If someone really believed, for moral reasons, that sex should wait until marriage, I'm going to guess he and I would have a lot of moral ideas that wouldn't jibe, not just sex.

Now, that being said... waiting is still not something I'd be opposed to and in fact, might even welcome it, but it would have to be for the right reasons. Since I don't think it's immoral to have sex before marriage, that's not a right reason for me.

Kinda see where I'm going with that? From my point of view, someone who INSISTED we wait at all costs, would be too rigid from my point of view. Not that it isn't for someone else, but for me it would be.

I definitely see where you are coming from but cringe kind of at your use of the word immoral as if it is an empty hollow word and someone would choose to wait simply because of the statement 'it is immoral'. Some people view morals as not having meaning and are ends to themselves instead of means to an end. Someone can have much thought out and concerned reasoning behind such morals making it not just an empty word...not sure if I expressed myself properly or not and I doubt you see morals as this hollow word with no actual rationalization behind them but I do see many people who disregard some traditional morals because they simply do not get them.

I would be interested in the idea that if a pagan such as myself were to get engaged to a christian, would the christian be willing to have sex with their pagan partner in say the great rite? (either before marriage or after?). I think the idea that only christians would be under some sexual obligation, or that only christians deal with sexual situations in relationships because of the idea of sin is limiting. Think of it this way, to pagans sex is an expression of the goddess, given as a gift, not a sin and there is no moral rule against sex before marriage. Would a christian if they loved their pagan partner forsake the idea of premarital sexual sin to honor the Goddess? I wonder...

I'd say yes. My current girlfriend is Catholic and I am not, and if she chooses to abstain I'm fine with that. Its a matter of commitment. Some people are just in it for the action, some people are in it for other benefits.

Okay I am Catholic and let's just say I do not follow the bible word for word. I only believe in, what I think is right to believe in and waiting to have sex isn't one of them. Because their is nothing morally wrong with sex, and I don't even feel like you have to love the person, only thing I advise in this day and age is obviously getting them tested. Does that make me a horrible person?

hahaa No at least not to me, I see people everday as spirtual beings, so most would be like well...if you have sex with people you're not married to obviously you worship the devil or some load of crap.

Truth is I ironically form many wonderful intutive realationships with multiple people including family, friends, strangers and romantic ones as well, sex is just a part of something like eating food. It only means something if you actually invest your energy with that person, if not it's like everything else.

I don't find a person to be anything more or less with or without sex, from the get go I already know if I have a connection to them or not and what type of connection it is, I also don't believe that age is a factor for if we are just energy haha...it's a lot more complex than that...but that's a whole different topic.

Anywho, I do respect others morals that have a REASON behind waiting, peoples beliefs are important, but I also believe that one shouldn't be restrained behind society, they must feel comfortable as well in whatever lifestyle that may be.

I could wait, but I don't think a Christian could handle being married to me. I am not so sure I could be faithful. I don't have any probations against sex before marriage or being faithful during marriage in my religion. Being chained to someone who is uptight sex isn't going to work for me. As long as it is ok with the couple it is nobodies business but theirs. I know this is off topic, but I think Clinton's have an open marriage which is why Hillary hasn't left him.

If she was rich as well as hot then I would probably wait because then you would have a good sex life and financial set up, set up for life (you can always divorce her later). Otherwise I would move on.

HAHA! Same with me.
I don't prefer such close mindedness.

Im sure Dawkins is a massive turn on for chicks

Just think of the holy orgasms that await though!!!

That actually makes sense!

However, forgiveness come with a price.
You must be loyal to the church and give up your Sundays and 10% of your income.

Great way to keep people in control!

Although I wouldn't like the idea of attempting to convert them out of their religion.
That just causes too much trouble, wastes my time, and all it does is annoy and anger them.

(This is a serious question) ,Is it breaking the rules ****ing(w a n k i n g) each other off?

I sure hope not?

I fixed the post.

Do you mean with other people or to other people?
When it comes to masturbation, 3 words:
KNOCK YOURSELF OUT!!

I would move on.

Sex is not the most important thing in a romantic relationship , but it is pretty up there.

Sexual incompatibility does not make for a "truly" happy marriage. This also sets the temptation for possible adultery. And if your marriage isn't really happy, then I feel this will affect any offspring down the line also. Why so ?

Because happy parents have happy children.

Sexual desire is a very powerful force (for some more than others). And that is how god, I guess, wants it to because he created people with a strong sex drives, esp. men


I would have to go through many fornication sessions first, before I commit.

Did 8 years of sinning before committing to hubby. But we waited a long time before we sinned. We weren't easy.

ROFL!!!


Lucky for me i never had a problem with premarital sex...
I was a sex object, I'd ask women for sex and they object.

I think that is dependant on the person, and the relationship they with one another.

If that person is willing to stick it out and is commited then i don't see the problem

its really based on ones wants.

personally if i was "in love" i could wait

It really does depend on the person, most important thing is to have openess with a person. I like to know whether the person likes only one on one type of relationships, or can basically be a 'swinger' and not get offended, sometimes it is good to have opposites and sometimes it is not...I say whatever situation comes up you apply your own rule that fits best.

lol! Imagine that...
No sex before marriage by either god fearing christian couple, then once hitched, full on swingers parties and all...

I'm an expert on this topic . . .
I've had eight wives.

Of course,
ONly one was mine.

I don't think sex before marriage matters much in a society where over 50 % divorce. Ultimately I think no sex before marriage is a good thing but so is a very long courtship - a year or two. This forces people to get to know each other. It also causes a stress not having sex and that's a great way to see how someone handles it.

But let's be honest - most don't follow it. nor did they really in the past. I guess it depends what your definition of sex 'is'. And the fact that men tend then to use prostitution more. Yet not having sex has never killed anyone.

I say make divorce harder to attain.



lmao . good one.

You'd be suprised

If I truly love the person, and want to spend the rest of my life with them, then yes, it's worth the wait. I'm sure it would be frustrating, and rather hard (no pun intended ) at times, but worth it if she was the one.

Interesting. How would you do that?

If you just limit it to, say, partners that commit adultery, then people would commit adultery just to get out of a marriage. If you enforce a 3 year wait, then people will be unhappy for 3 years waiting to get out of a bad marriage and move on with their lives.

I think I might go the other way - make Marriage harder to obtain. Raise the age limit to mid twenties. Only allowing people to get married once would make them think twice about both Marriage and Divorce, whereas, today - Divorced is just a stage you go through before you get married again.

Most likely, I would move on.

Also how long are you waiting to get married? It would probably fast-track you to marriage in certain circumstances like Dean Geyer and Lisa Origliasso (australian example). Like is usually attracted to like so I can't imagine dating a strict Christian, but on the other hand you can't often help who you fall in love with or are attracted to.

I suppose for a while it would add some exciting frisson.



If they did that whole clintonesque rigmarole of 'well oral sex doesn't really count' that would just irritate me - because it would show they were slippery and hypocritical.

When I was an athiest, i would not have chosen/ did not chose, to have sex with a person before marriage, because any person prepared to have sex with me outside of marrriage, would logically be happy to have sex with someone else outside marriage, and that might include our marriage.


I wanted to have only one sexual partner ( the one i was married to or going to marry), and so i plotted a course towards that end. Mind you I did have a few lucky escapes from nubile young women who threw them selves at me.

Many years later, looking back, i could see the hand of god/ angels watching over me even then, when i didnt know they existed.

dont blame something else for what you felt/believed/accomplished by yourself. it was All you. nothing else (well maybe you thought it was)
but give yourself some credit or a pat on the back for what YOU did.

Wow, if angels intervened in my potential sexual encounters or near misses, I'd be furious.

Hard question to answer. Of course it would entirely depend on the relationship and the woman. I would do it if I was close to certain I was going to get married to her but in all reality I would find out about her abstinence within the first couple of dates and unless there was some instantaneous overpowering connection lovey dovey of a thing happening I would move on.

I guess it would also depend on if we could do umm 'other things' or not.

Sex isn't important to me but the thing is either is marriage.

Waiting is ok, but what if the sex is right out terrible ???