Chastity until Marriage...

[Progo35]

One issue that has botherd me over the last several years is the propensity I see in our culture to assume that any healthy dating relationship involves sex. Whenever I hear about somoene who waits until marriage on TV, that person is usually portrayed as a prude, frigid or believing that God will kill him or her if he/she has premarital sex.

This bothers me because I feel strongly that I want to wait until marriage to have sex. I have three motivations for this: one, sex is supposed to be special-a gift God gives to two people. Secondly, I think that sex outside of marriage is unwise-most people I know who have chosen to do this have wound up dealing with issues directly related to that decision-pregnancy fears, date rape, feelings of low self worth and betrayal when the former partner leaves. And, of course, there is the risk of STIs. Finally, I do feel a connection between my decision not to engage in sex before marriage and my relationship with God-abstaining from sex until marriage is one of the ways that I have chosen to honor Him.

But, even when I dated a Christian guy, he decided that he wasn't satisfied with just kissing or hugging and said that he wanted to have sex, and I wound up participating in things that I really did not want to do, three times totally against my will, because of which, I ended the relationship. We didn't have intercourse, but we definitely went places that I knew I didn't want to go. This was partially my fault for giving in...but, in any case, one of the things that bothers me is that I do have a history of sexual assault, and so some people feel that it is this that makes me uncomfortable with intimacy. The thing that really makes me upset is that by listening to my boyfriend and some of my other family members, I started to believe that, which contributed to my getting into a bad situation. So, in short, why do people have to presume that if someone doesn't want to have sex, there is something wrong with his or her sex drive? I also feel stereotyped sometimes, like people believe that because I don't want to have sex before marriage, I automatically condemn everyone who does. I definitely advise against it if someone asks, because I care about them, but I'm a pretty empathetic person, and am concerned with that person's well being. Usually my thoughts on this decision are that we all do make mistakes that that God is a forgiving God-but that that person should stop, just as Paul says that being forgiven doesn't give us the freedom to sin.

So, anyway, as I've gotten older Ive begun to think about what I want in life, and I think that I would like to have a boyfriend and get married someday, but I sometimes worry that that will be hard to do because I'm not willing to have sex.

Just an interesting topic for everyone to think about.

[Zerbie]

You've got several issues in this post. I'm sure you'll get many varied responses. Just one note: I hope you don't think everyone who has sex outside of marriage has made a mistake. I did; one person was a mistake, the others were not. It depends on many things. And once you throw gay issues into the mix, there is also the question of what is meant by marriage.

I hear you about the assault/abuse background. It can be hard to know where the effects of the abuse end and one's natural propensity begins. You might feel unsure at times, and that's okay. But whatever the reason it sounds like you have considered reasons for waiting until marriage to have sex, and that's respectable and commendable. I'm glad that you know what you want, what does and doesn't work for you. There are guys out there who will respect that too. I suggest you marry one who respects that about you.

Assumptions are silly. Can't worry about them - people are going to have them and people are going to be wrong sometimes (a lot?). EVERYONE who knew us assumed that a certain man & I were having "hot sex" (someone's exact words to me) from the day we met: when in fact we hadn't even held hands until 6 weeks went by (imagine that!), and still had not had sex when all the assumption was that we'd been at it for months and months. What they saw between us was a complete comfortable naturalness in each other's presence combined with a lot of passion and love. That's the guy I married btw. ;)

[d_pedr]

Progo

Sex before marriage is an interresting conscept.

In the Old Testament, if a man had sexual intercourse with a woman, he either married her, or paid her father the 'Bride Price', which consisted of items that if tended carefully would sustain her for the rest of her life, as her prospect of marriage had become so small.

Several times, through various people, we hear of the wedding festivities, and that they then slept with (King James Vesrion 'he knew') with the lady, and she became their wife.

Both these imply that the relationship changes with sex into the marriage.

Most people remember their first time, and how it changed the relationship.
I found that this message even came across loud and clear in Brokeback Mountain, where the stars' relationship overwhelmed all other relationships around them.

You must do as you feel comfortable, and if the man won't wait, and then leaves because he won't wait, there has got to be a better guy out there for you.

A colleague of mine at work comes from Algeria, and there the wedding feast lasts more than the actual day, and when the bride and groom retire, the guests wait outside their balcony for the blood soiled cloth (after they have had sex for the first time) to be shown to prove the bride's virginity.

In the west, we look on this as more private.


If we take this view of sex, there are an aweful lot of hurting divorcees out there who don't even know they were once married!


Keep to what you feel is right, and don't be forced into sex before you're ready.

love and Hugs

[Vanessa White]

because you have stated intentions that are important to you, without having an expectation that everyone feels the exact same way. I admire that. I have thought at times in my life, about living in a celibate way, or at least only being sexually intimate with the person I am in a long term commitment with. What I mean, is that I don't have the luxury of legal marriage, but have always been committed only to the person i am with at the time. However, I have also had sexual encounters at times with persons that I was not in a committed relationship with, some of those feel now like they should not have happened, others had special meaning to me. If you wish to wait, then I trust that the man who is meant for you will come into your life, and not pressure you to be anything other than yourself. Trust in God that it will be so, and feel confident in who you are and what you stand for. It is good and right for you, so be it!

[Progo35]

For a gay couple, I guess I would think of "marriage" as either a legal marriage in the states that allow it, a civil union in the states that allow that, or, if you cannot get married in your state, perhaps a relationship in which both people agree that they are married, even if the law doesn't recognize it and thus honor each other in that manner by taking care of/loving each other, sharing resources and having sex with each other without other partners.

I guess in terms of seeing sex before marriage as a mistake, I have two ancedotes: My best friend chose to have sex when she was 16 and since that time has regarded sex as a normal part of most dating relationships. Unfortunately, she has allowed herself to be taken advantage of if she feels that that will keep a guy from leaving her. For instance, she once said to a guy, "Did you hook up with me just to get some? Because I would have done it." This wasn't a long time relationship, she dated this guy twice. From her actions over the last two years, which has included doing and thinking everything that her husband tells her too-which has destroyed our friendship-I feel that she doesn't have a solid understanding of self-respect and thus doesn't understand what it means to respect others, such as myself when her boyfriend kept telling her I was a bad influence. So, I don't think that having pre-marital sex made her this way-she has a weaker personality than I thought, features of which were evident before she had sex- but I feel it has contributed to wearing down her boundaries of what is right and wrong in terms of respecting yourself and others.

Now, on the other hand, I know that a very strong Christian woman I know had sex with her husband either while they were engaged or just before, and they are both incredibly dedicated to each other. They have been married for 38 years. So, I guess they didn't make a mistake in a practical sense. In terms of religious concerns, for me, I would generally consider sex before marriage to be a mistake. My empathy for people and my understanding of how Christ relates to us as fallen people helps me to see the other side of the issue from people who have had sex and not regretted it.

[d_pedr]

Hi Progo

I nearly kept myself for marriage, having had some heavy petting, but managing to stop short of sex, until I was with the person, who became my wife.

She had at least one heavy sexual relationship, before ours, and afterwards, which led to divorce, even in her current relationship she finds it hard to keep monogomous. Whether this has anything to do with this or not I do not know, but she is who she is and we are still good friends, which is good for our children (the younger lives with me, and stays with mum every other weekend, the elder stays at mums now, and stays each weekend).

Have you ever seen the film 'When Harry met Sally'? In that Harry states that its impossible for a man and a woman to be friends, as eventually sex will get in the way. From what I remember, they marry by the end of the film. I find intimacy difficult, as there are some relationships I would like sex to get in the way, and others when I don't want it to feature; but its difficult to control.

I respect your strength in keeping to your commitment. Be yourself, and let God be your Guide.

love and hugs

[Zerbie]

In terms of religious concerns, for me, I would generally consider sex before marriage to be a mistake. My empathy for people and my understanding of how Christ relates to us as fallen people helps me to see the other side of the issue from people who have had sex and not regretted it.

Anyone else find this quite insulting?

[tdogg]

I think for those who choose not to have sex before legal/church marriage, that's their choice and I respect it.

I do not believe having sex is wrong or a sin necessarily, it depends upon one's own beliefs, boundaries and condition of their heart. In other words, what is the motivator for that person to engage in sexual intimacy will determine whether or not it's 'wrong'. It's not my place to say someone is wrong or right about having sex.

I can't say that I have any significant regrets (save perhaps one) with having sexual intimacy outside of marriage. I know very few people who have suffered much because of it, and know of no special statistics that would support waiting for marriage. In other words, I would image the divorce rate wouldn't be significantly different either way.

For me as a lesbian, I do not have the priviledge of 'getting married', legally. Yes, I can have a ceremony at the handful of gay churches here in my area, but legally they are meaningless. Yes, my partner and I can register as "domestic partners" and obtain some priviledges within the state of CA, but once we cross state borders, it means nothing.

IMO, if two people are commited to each other in a relationship, why is that not sufficient for them to show their commitment in an intimate sexual way? Also, I personally don't feel that people who want to be intimate that way but not necessary committed is wrong - as long as both people are aware of what they and the other expects (or doesn't expect). My partner and I have a deep level of commitment, we aren't married (not legally allowed), have not yet registered as domestic partners (coming soon as we do want to realize the few priviledges that we would get within the state of CA) but love, respect and care for each other deeply. We have been honest from the start regarding our feelings, expectations and various issues (physical, mental, emotional health, etc). I truly see no reason why we should not be sexually intimate, we are that intimate in every other way.

That said (and it's only my opinion), Meghan if that is your choice I would respect that, and say good for you. There is nothing wrong with that at all. You go girl! (or...maybe it's 'don't' go!) :) :love:

[Progo35]

I'm sorry, Zerbie, I certainly didn't mean that to be offensive-I hope you will overlook it.

[keltic63]

let me admit up front that I skimmed this thread so if this has been mentioned already, forgive me.

sex before marriage: marriage in whose eyes? God's? or government? I really don't think that the license granted by the civil authorities, which may be procured by 2 people whose private parts are, shall we say, complimentary, and of the appropriate ages, is any indication of the sanctity, validity, viability, and commitment of the impending marriage. does that little piece of paper indicate "permission" to participate in sex? does having sex without that piece of paper automatically reduce the couples actions to nothing more than a vulgar act?

couples, straight or gay, do not need the permission of the govt, nor the blessing of the church, to lead committed, loving lives together.

those who wish to wait until marriage: bless you! for young people, I think it is an especially honorable commitment to wait.

[Progo35]

This is what I said earlier in this thread

"For a gay couple, I guess I would think of "marriage" as either a legal marriage in the states that allow it, a civil union in the states that allow that, or, if you cannot get married in your state, perhaps a relationship in which both people agree that they are married, even if the law doesn't recognize it and thus honor each other in that manner by taking care of/loving each other, sharing resources and having sex with each other without other partners."

[andrewlittle]

In terms of religious concerns, for me, I would generally consider sex before marriage to be a mistake. My empathy for people and my understanding of how Christ relates to us as fallen people helps me to see the other side of the issue from people who have had sex and not regretted it.

Anyone else find this quite insulting?

Well, no, actually I didn't. I do think there is, as usual, a language barrier of sorts. I think Progo's use of the words "for me" meant that she was trying to say she didn't necessarily believe her thoughts should be universal. The "fallen people" part could probably be insulting, unless you remember that in Progo's language everyone - every single person - is "fallen", and Christ relates to us all. I don't think she was saying "you're fallen, but I'm not."

This is what I said earlier in this thread

"For a gay couple, I guess I would think of "marriage" as either a legal marriage in the states that allow it, a civil union in the states that allow that, or, if you cannot get married in your state, perhaps a relationship in which both people agree that they are married, even if the law doesn't recognize it and thus honor each other in that manner by taking care of/loving each other, sharing resources and having sex with each other without other partners."

Yes, you did - and I applaud what you said. This sounds very much like you are making room in your understanding for committed, mongamous relationships between same-gender partners. Now, if you'll forgive me, I'm going to talk about you like you're not in the room - forgive me (oh yes, I said that already - forgive me).

Now, ladies and gentlemen of the forums - oh, yes, you too u-dog - here we have a young (well, compared to me), conservative, Christian woman who is acknowledging, I believe, the inherent double bind in which the church generally places GLBT folk and saying, "I see your point. Because you can't get "married", there has to be another way to be in a covanental relationship." (Well, in so many words she said that.) She acknowledged honoring each other, caring for each other, sharing with each other, and engaging in intimacy with each other without following up with any judgment. I, for one, am proud to know this woman.

Now, back to you, Progo. Bless you for breaking yet another stereotype. I think you remind me somewhat of Cathy of frankandcathy (who you don't know, but people will tell you that I thought very highly of her).

As to your question. There is, in my mind, no particular universal right and wrong in this regard. You are the one who has sole discretion as to what you do with your body and with whom you do it. If a man does not honor your sovereignty in that regard, he will not honor other things about you. If you felt differently than you do, I think pre-marital intimacy would not necessarily come with a lack of honor and respect. But if someone coerced or forced you to have sex, I for one would call that what it is - it would be a form of rape, which is using power over someone else. That is not respect and will not grow into respect.

[u-dog]

I agree with everything you said Andy. I was just thinking, yesterday, how much ProgA reminds me of Cathy.

[BenL]

sex before marriage: marriage in whose eyes? God's? or government? I really don't think that the license granted by the civil authorities, which may be procured by 2 people whose private parts are, shall we say, complimentary, and of the appropriate ages, is any indication of the sanctity, validity, viability, and commitment of the impending marriage. does that little piece of paper indicate "permission" to participate in sex? does having sex without that piece of paper automatically reduce the couples actions to nothing more than a vulgar act?

This may seem like a tangent (what I'm about to say, not what Keltic said), but I think it is germane to the discussion:

The priest or minister or rabbi or imam or judge or justice of the peace do not marry a couple. They marry themselves. They address their vows or promises to each other, not even to God. They may ask God to witness them or to sanctify them, but they still promise each other whatever it is their culture or their personal understanding of marriage would have them promise. Whew! Runon sentence!

That is very similar, in my opinion, to what happens in sex. It is a gift of physical love to each other. When someone is not honest or open in this gift, it's probably wrong. There are times, not so far in the past, when couples would copulate first and then consummate their union officially before the church or government, not the other way around.

Sex is something you give, not something you take. That is the moral crux, in my opinion. Congratulations, Progo, for having principles and sticking by them. I actually think that our two interpretations of the question are quite compatible.

[tymejumper]

This is what I said earlier in this thread

"For a gay couple, I guess I would think of "marriage" as either a legal marriage in the states that allow it, a civil union in the states that allow that, or, if you cannot get married in your state, perhaps a relationship in which both people agree that they are married, even if the law doesn't recognize it and thus honor each other in that manner by taking care of/loving each other, sharing resources and having sex with each other without other partners."

hmmm, this is a hard one. I was married before and had sex, it was my duty after all. Did that make the sex holy? I mean someone said the words and the state said I was married. On the other hand, I am now partnered to the love of my life and we can't legally marry, but the sex is the most amazing, fufilling and holy experience I have ever had. I feel married to her and I certainly wear a ring, consider myself married and purport myself as a "Mrs.".

I think if you wish to wait to be married before having sex, that is great. To thine own self be true. I also think that the schools and churches should explain to young people that the concept of marriage is different from hetero couples, as they can have a legal wedding, than from gay couples, who currently can not. They need not make young people feel that they can never have a relationship if they are gay because they have to wait for a marriage they can't legally have.

[Progo35]

Thanks guys for all your thoughts. This is a really helpful discussion. Andrew, yes, you're right on the money with what I meant-thanks. :). I appreciate everyone's advice and encouragement.

[keltic63]

I, for one, am proud to know this woman.

Now, back to you, Progo. Bless you for breaking yet another stereotype. I think you remind me somewhat of Cathy of frankandcathy (who you don't know, but people will tell you that I thought very highly of her).



I want to second that motion!

I just read what progo wrote in u-dog's watershed thread. Progo gets it!

[ladyinred]

Everyone has their comfort zone. I personally feel intimacy is a personal matter (individual), and you go with what feels right for you.

[Pablo Rafael]

Progo,

Those who know me here know that I usually take a fairly conservative/traditional stance and follow it with a disclaimer. So here it goes...

It is my belief that it is best for people and in accordance with the Bible that two people join together in a monogamous, lifelong committment. I think that what makes a couple married is their committment to each other not a legal document or a church ceremony. I feel that same gender couples as well as opposite gender couples can be "married" because marriage is a matter of the heart.

I believe that the Bible shows us how to live in ways that are good for us and good for those around us. We as gay individuals should strive to live lives pleasing to God and for the good of all our neighbors.

I refuse, however, to criticize those whose lives might have taken a different path or whose understanding is different. I certainly don't claim to understand fully the ways of God, nor is my history without its problems. No one lives up to the ideals set by God. What is important is that we do our best to live lives of love and strive ever more to be closer to becoming the person that God wants us to be.

Tu Amigo, Pablo

[u-dog]

Pablo,

I love you! You are such a ... I don't know ... :good: something:good:. You are a walking billboard for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If i weren't already a Christian, I would want a double dose of whatever it is you're on

[andrewlittle]

Pablo,

I love you! You are such a ... I don't know ... :good: something:good:. You are a walking billboard for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If i weren't already a Christian, I would want a double dose of whatever it is you're on

u-dog's Elisha responding to Pablo's Elijah. The true discipleship of praying for a double dose of faith.

[Progo35]

Pablo-

I'm right there with you! :)

[BrentRichards]

Pablo,

I love you! You are such a ... I don't know ... :good: something:good:. You are a walking billboard for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If i weren't already a Christian, I would want a double dose of whatever it is you're on

Sign me up for that too!

[Pablo Rafael]

Pablo,

You are such a ... I don't know ... something.

This brings to mind a quote from Lily Tomlin:

"When I was young, I wanted to grow up and really be somebody.

Now I realize I should have been more specific."


Seriously though, thanks Dave. I was feeling kind of down and you have cheered up my spirits. :)

Tu Amigo, Pablo