Gay Rights

[AyJSimon]

Need I quote you some statistics on the rampant corrosion of separations, spousal abuse and neglect, divorces, custody battles, and declarations of nullity in order to demonstrate how broken is the understanding of marital fidelity and chastity in today’s world? Perhaps self-mastery is more important than you think.

There’s a popular saying that I want you to meditate on: “why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free?” This is the mentality of young men who cohabitate and hook up with women in a post-family, post-marriage culture.

Feel free to cite me all the statistics you like - especially if they get around to answering my question - which again, was "What does Holly’s fiance’s willingness and ability to remain monogamous before marriage have to say about his unwillingness and inability to do the same after marriage?

 

[Elizium23]

People can give milk away for free and still be bought. My aunt and uncle had sex before marriage, they have been married for 12 years now. People mess up and that doesn’t mean that their marriage and lives are doomed before it even happens. People can and do change.

Oh! Well your isolated anecdote makes everything okay! I retract my position fully. Everyone should have pre-marital sex in order to test drive the car first. Let’s ignore clear Church teaching because today’s world is clearly right when it tells us that sex should be no-strings-attached.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Has it escaped your notice that a virtually uncountable number of couples in human history have retained a lifelong bond of marriage without meeting this restrictive understanding of sexual self-mastery?

Who are these couples?

They weren’t common in ancient cultures, where husbands had sex with slaves.

They weren’t common in Rome, where monogamy was for women, not men.

They weren’t common in the Middle Ages, when those who had premarital sex tended to be promiscuous in marriage.

They weren’t common in the early modern age, when anyone who had sex before marriage was stigmatized.

They weren’t common in the 1900s, when sex before marriage spelled doom for the marriage.

But I’m sure things are different now. We can make human nature change by snapping our fingers, or taking a pill. Good to know!

 

[Prodigal_Son]

People mess up and that doesn’t mean that their marriage and lives are doomed before it even happens. People can and do change.

Yes, but calling it a “change” implies that there has been a moral shift. What we’ve been saying, however, is that the OP’s boyfriend NEEDS such a shift. It’s not a good idea to marry someone with the intent to change them. No way, no how.

 

[Rau]

Feel free to cite me all the statistics you like - especially if they get around to answering my question - which again, was "What does Holly’s fiance’s willingness and ability to remain monogamous before marriage have to say about his unwillingness and inability to do the same after marriage?

It would be fair to say that misbehaviour before marriage is not a plus, but you are probably right that it has only a limited bearing on the prospects for monogamy after.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Oh! Well your isolated anecdote makes everything okay! I retract my position fully. Everyone should have pre-marital sex in order to test drive the car first. Let’s ignore clear Church teaching because today’s world is clearly right when it tells us that sex should be no-strings-attached.

There is NO NEED for a smart aleck attitude. I never said to disregard teaching. I said people can and do change. That is a fact. I don’t appreciate you putting words in my mouth and for your rude response. Maybe you can learn to change your smart attitude.

 

[Rau]

Oh! Well your isolated anecdote makes everything okay! I retract my position fully. Everyone should have pre-marital sex in order to test drive the car first. Let’s ignore clear Church teaching because today’s world is clearly right when it tells us that sex should be no-strings-attached.

This seems to be sarcastic and does not address what Kendra said. The inferences you have loosely drawn amount to a “verballing” of her.

 

[Elizium23]

This seems to be sarcastic and does not address what Kendra said. The inferences you have loosely drawn amount to a “verballing” of her.

Excuse me? Who’s drawing inferences here, me or Kendra? The implication she was attempting to draw was that premarital sex does not affect marital stability or faithfulness. She used exactly one example. In comparison to the billions of married couples throughout history this is a drop in the ocean. So I’d appreciate nobody accusing me of faulty logic when I have done nothing but promote the timeless teachings of the Church and the wisdom accumulated by countless ages of the study of human behavior.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Excuse me? Who’s drawing inferences here, me or Kendra? The implication she was attempting to draw was that premarital sex does not affect marital stability or faithfulness. She used exactly one example. In comparison to the billions of married couples throughout history this is a drop in the ocean. So I’d appreciate nobody accusing me of faulty logic when I have done nothing but promote the timeless teachings of the Church and the wisdom accumulated by countless ages of the study of human behavior.

I think you just want to argue. Seriously. I wasn’t attempting to imply that premarital sex is fine. I was attempting to imply that JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE SCREW UP DOESN’T MEAN THAT THEIR MARRIAGE IS DOOMED AND THAT PEOPLE CAN CHANGE. Is that clear enough for you?

Wait, it probably isn’t because I’ve said it like, twice now.

 

[Rau]

Excuse me? Who’s drawing inferences here, me or Kendra? The implication she was attempting to draw was that premarital sex does not affect marital stability or faithfulness. She used exactly one example. In comparison to the billions of married couples throughout history this is a drop in the ocean. So I’d appreciate nobody accusing me of faulty logic when I have done nothing but promote the timeless teachings of the Church and the wisdom accumulated by countless ages of the study of human behavior.

Ummm, you I think.

Just as a reminder, your post directed at Kendra was:
*Oh! Well your isolated anecdote makes everything okay! I retract my position fully. Everyone **should have pre-marital sex **in order to **test drive *the car first. Let’s ignore clear Church teaching because today’s world is clearly right when it tells us that sex should be no-strings-attached. Kendra did NOT:

• advocate pre-marital sex;
• advocate the merits of test-driving a future spouse;
• imply any merit in ignoring Church teaching

These “conclusions” were introduced by you, and in a manner that suggested they flow from Kendra’s post. Not good. :tsktsk:

 

[Elizium23]

And nowhere did I even say she said anything of the sort. Mine was an independent reply to this thread, and all its posters in toto, so it’s too bad if she took offense, because I do not apologize.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

And nowhere did I even say she said anything of the sort. Mine was an independent reply to this thread, and all its posters in toto, so it’s too bad if she took offense, because I do not apologize.

You quoted me. That isn’t an independent reply.