Hey Naughty. Your points of view are ones I've heard before, and used to share, unfortunately. Keep reading for responses.
***********************
Epsilon: Marriage is but a label of commitment, and a statement of love. Who are you (a virgin) to say that sex is wrong before marriage. You have experienced neither of these things, so your closeminded approach seems only an escape to justify your current lack of emotional (and physical as this thread would have it) bondage with another. It is both immoral, and just plain wrong to judge and label people when you have no experience whatsoever with the matter at hand.
***********************
Ha ha, how ironic that you label me as closeminded for voicing my opinions, "Oh yee who worship at the Temple of the Open Mind." (Ha ha, I have to add that to my signature.).
Some of what you're saying was responded to in my last post. For those that weren't:
Who am I? One who believe firmly that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died for OUR (YOURS AND MINE) sins. Don't think all intelligent conversation has to end now. "Uh oh, some religious idiot who can't be swayed." You're right about the can't be swayed part, but why would my ideas less valid because I'm a Christian or 17? And why are yours more valid because you've had pre-marital sex? My parents share the same opinions as myself, and before they were Christians, THEY had pre-marital sex. Now are my opinions valid because they are shared by those who HAVE made the same mistake as yourself?
It is hippocritical to judge somebody for being judgemental, which I wasn't trying to do. (And yes, I know there is judgement in saying you were being judemental).
***********************
While I agree with you that having a child at a young age (and due to that young age, most likely also before marriage) would most likely lead to both the poor life of the child, as well as of the parents. Children require money to keep them clothed, fed, and at a certain standard of living. Remember though, adults need that same standard of living. Many married people have the same - or even worse due to the monetary weight of University - economic problem with having children as do unmarried people. So why then is it worse for an unmarried person to have a child than it is for a married person? Both will give the same low quality of life to the child.
***********************
It isn't about money to me. It's about the value we place on human life. See below for more.
***********************
That brings about the topic of birth control. I'm sure you have heard of contraceptives. Yes my friend, they do exist. With a 99% efective rate on condoms, and yet again, a 99% efecive rate on 'the pill', the usage of both quite assuridly eliminates the possibility of having an unexpected child. If you can't afford to have a child, make sure you can afford these two things before having sex...
***********************
I don't know about you, but last time I checked 99% was NOT the same as 100%. What will you do if you happen to be in the other 1%?
But I'm glad to see you making a statement FOR responsibility, even if it is conditional responsibility. My opinion: If you can't deal with having a child, you shouldn't be having sex, PERIOD.
***********************
Although, there is the unfortunate side-effect of both contraceptives being faulty. Damn technology, it brought another fetus into the world. Now, before we go into the debate about abortion, let me ask you a few questions.
First, have you ever stepped on an ant? A spider maybe? Or killed a sac of spider eggs... Eaten an egg?
***********************
HUMAN BEINGS ARE NOT ANIMALS. This ever-present idea of a human life being worth the same as an animals is inherently flawed. We can respect and love animals, but obviously we are superior to them. Don't misconstrue what I'm saying. ALL human beings are equal. Animals are not.
***********************
Second, what do you remember of your pre-birth-canal life?
***********************
Nothing. But does that mean it didn't exist, or that I wasn't concious? Science can't tell us if a fetus is concious yet. But if conciousness is the basis for life, then obviously your grandmother, who just had a car accident and is in a light coma, isn't alive, right? Mind if I kill you when you go to sleep? You aren't alive, then, right? What? You say you are? But you aren't concious!
Neither do I remember the first year of my life. Was I not alive then, either? Your logic is flawed.
***********************
...Okay, with these questions taken care of, tell me again why aborting a fetus (which does not yet hold a state of conciousness) is a bad thing to do - or at least any worse than the things listed above? In light of the fact that was the child allowed to live, it would grow into a life of poverty, and low living standards (due to the parent's inability to fend for the child) be a worse consequence than aborting the fetus before it had even gained conciousness.
***********************
My parents literally began to raise me in a dirt-floored shack. I'm glad I'm alive now, to be my upper-middle class self.
Does life become less valuable with less money?
***********************
And, just for your further comprehension:
con·scious (knshs)
adj.
1. Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts.
2. Mentally perceptive or alert; awake
3. Capable of thought, will, or perception
***********************
I've been over this. See above.
***********************
Now tell me again why it is that people should deny themselves the basic right for joy, both emotionally and physically? This is a union and melding of self and joy like no other. Until you have experienced it, you have no right to tell other people not to.
***********************
You're right, I don't. I never will. I don't have the right to tell anybody (except my children, when they come ) what to do. But I don't have to support it, and I can be a vocal opponent of it.
Oh, and I don't believe in a basic right for joy. I believe in a basic right for the pursuit of joy, so I don't think it's my place to force others to follow my beliefs, if they don't want to. But I can recommend.
And why shouldn't people? I think perhaps we've been over this, yes?
***********************
As well, regarding waiting till your wedding night; while it may be a hell of a ride for you to have waited, she's going to wish that she could enjoy the night at all. That is, if she can think above the pain, she'll be wishing you had doen this earlier so that this would be a night for her to remember for different reasons
***********************
No, not my wife. The woman I marry will share the same belief in post-marital sex. And a married couple's sex life is not contingent on one night, right? Besides, does it always hurt the first time? Maybe some guys are a bit insensitive, but if it hurt my wife, I hope we'd be able to move through it at a pace that is comfortable for her, even if that means waiting. After all, if I can wait for twenty-some-odd years, I can do it for a bit longer, right?
Marriage is not about sex. But sex is about marriage.
Epsilon