What's wrong with marrying a non-virgin?

[David_Thorne]

I really haven’t seen much uncharitableness from the other side, merely concern for what Norseman is saying. That is the opposite of uncharitableness. If I was acting out of line I would prefer someone to tell me that I was…and I have.

We’ve only seen snapshots of Norseman’s argument; bits and pieces. I think he needs to formulate the entire argument so we can see it in its entirety. Uncharitableness includes unnecessary harshness as well. I think we should forget all of the previous comments that hurt us and try to move forward in a slightly calmer, more constructive fashion. If we cling to previous comments, we’re not able to fully understand The Other (as it were). Various people have argued that the past actions of a person doesn’t define them, but we aren’t putting that into practice here, even for trivial things like a rude comment.

 

[Norseman82]

Norseman, I think your words have hurt people more than you realize. Not only did you make non-virgins feel lesser because they lost their virginity and that they are somehow tainted, you also objectified virgins and made it seem like they are some kind of commodity or prize to be won.

People are people. both virgins and non-virgins alike are sinners. No one is better than anyone else. We may not commit the same sins but we all offend the Lord our God and He still forgives us equally. We are implored to do the same: forgive others. How can we expect God to forgive us if we won’t forgive others.

Again, I’m sorry if you felt attacked by me, it was never my intention to insult you.

OK, but what about the hurt of all the “jilted virgins” (which is what I was trying to show as an example of how it could be wrong to marry a non-virgin over a virgin, which is the topic of the thread)? If I were to go back through this thread, the attitude can be summed up as “tough luck, too bad, man up, that’s life, stop feeling entitled”. I see a double standard here.

 

[Lucky7]

We’ve only seen snapshots of Norseman’s argument; bits and pieces. I think he needs to formulate the entire argument so we can see it in its entirety. Uncharitableness includes unnecessary harshness as well. I think we should forget all of the previous comments that hurt us and try to move forward in a slightly calmer, more constructive fashion. If we cling to previous comments, we’re not able to fully understand The Other (as it were). Various people have argued that the past actions of a person doesn’t define them, but we aren’t putting that into practice here, even for trivial things like a rude comment.

This is fair. Let’s try it. I challenge Norseman to formulate/summarize all that he is trying to say here…and then we can go from there. Having said that, if he says some of the same things/his summary doesn’t give us a better/changed idea of what he believes, then I think you;re going ot have people respond the same way.

And then we’ll all be wasting our breaths all over again.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Norseman, I think your words have hurt people more than you realize. Not only did you make non-virgins feel lesser because they lost their virginity and that they are somehow tainted, you also objectified virgins and made it seem like they are some kind of commodity or prize to be won.

People are people. Both virgins and non-virgins alike are sinners. No one is better than anyone else. We may not commit the same sins but we all offend the Lord our God and He still forgives us equally. We are implored to do the same: forgive others. How can we expect God to forgive us if we won’t forgive others.

Again, I’m sorry if you felt attacked by me, it was never my intention to insult you.

Absolutely this! My sexual history doesn’t make me less deserving of my fiance. And his virginal status did not entitle someone else to him and I took that away.

We aren’t objects, we are people in love building a life together.

 

[Marie1234]

OK, but what about the hurt of all the “jilted virgins” (which is what I was trying to show as an example of how it could be wrong to marry a non-virgin over a virgin)? If I were to go back through this thread, the attitude can be summed up as “tough luck, too bad, that’s life, stop feeling entitled”. I see a double standard here.

I don’t feel “jilted” in the least. Just because a man had sex with someone in the past doesn’t mean he’ll love me any less in the present. Again, I know that many people did not have the kind of faith as I had as I grew up. Faith is a gift from God. Not everyone has it. Not everyone acknowledges it. Most people don’t find it until later in life. How could I ever judge someone for such a thing? It’s not my place to feel hurt.

 

[David_Thorne]

Norseman, I think your words have hurt people more than you realize. Not only did you make non-virgins feel lesser because they lost their virginity and that they are somehow tainted, you also objectified virgins and made it seem like they are some kind of commodity or prize to be won.

People are people. Both virgins and non-virgins alike are sinners. No one is better than anyone else. We may not commit the same sins but we all offend the Lord our God and He still forgives us equally. We are implored to do the same: forgive others. How can we expect God to forgive us if we won’t forgive others.

Again, I’m sorry if you felt attacked by me, it was never my intention to insult you.

I think everyone just needs to apologize and forgive. I also think it’s time for a group hug. :grouphug:

God loves and will forgive no matter what we do.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

OK, but what about the hurt of all the “jilted virgins” (which is what I was trying to show as an example of how it could be wrong to marry a non-virgin over a virgin, which is the topic of the thread)? If I were to go back through this thread, the attitude can be summed up as “tough luck, too bad, man up, that’s life, stop feeling entitled”. I see a double standard here.

Do you really think that it’s anyone’s business what the virginal status of two people getting married is? Or that two people should not get married because it might hurt someone else’s feelings that they aren’t being married? Or that anyone should ever feel as though they are more deserving of someone’s partner than they are because they refrained from sex?

 

[Norseman82]

This is fair. Let’s try it. I challenge Norseman to formulate/summarize all that he is trying to say here…and then we can go from there. Having said that, if he says some of the same things/his summary doesn’t give us a better/changed idea of what he believes, then I think you;re going ot have people respond the same way.

And then we’ll all be wasting our breaths all over again.

Does post 320 answer the question?

 

[austenbosten]

We’ve only seen snapshots of Norseman’s argument; bits and pieces. I think he needs to formulate the entire argument so we can see it in its entirety. Uncharitableness includes unnecessary harshness as well. I think we should forget all of the previous comments that hurt us and try to move forward in a slightly calmer, more constructive fashion. If we cling to previous comments, we’re not able to fully understand The Other (as it were). Various people have argued that the past actions of a person doesn’t define them, but we aren’t putting that into practice here, even for trivial things like a rude comment.

I’m sorry my friend but norseman’s demeanor has been highly inappropriate and his argument seeks to objectify people based on their virginal status.

Snapshot or not…the crux of his argument is that we should punish those who have already been forgiven by God and that repentant former fornicators should not be allowed to marry virgins (completely ignoring masturbators and pornographers…as long as they are virgin they should marry only virgins) that argument is wrong. I don’t need time for him to formulate his point. The crux of his argument in my opinion is wrong and his attitude on here in my opinion has been dismissive and accusatory.

 

[Norseman82]

I’m sorry my friend but norseman’s demeanor has been highly inappropriate and his argument seeks to objectify people based on their virginal status.

Snapshot or not…the crux of his argument is that we should punish those who have already been forgiven by God and that repentant former fornicators should not be allowed to marry virgins (completely ignoring masturbators and pornographers…as long as they are virgin they should marry only virgins) that argument is wrong. I don’t need time for him to formulate his point. The crux of his argument in my opinion is wrong and his attitude on here in my opinion has been dismissive and accusatory.

Let me ask you this. Is it more just to punish those who play by the rules or those who don’t?

 

[David_Thorne]

OK, but what about the hurt of all the “jilted virgins” (which is what I was trying to show as an example of how it could be wrong to marry a non-virgin over a virgin, which is the topic of the thread)? If I were to go back through this thread, the attitude can be summed up as “tough luck, too bad, man up, that’s life, stop feeling entitled”. I see a double standard here.

No one is entitled to a person to marry. I haven’t met the person I am to marry and I have just accepted it. That is life and we have to be happy whichever way it goes. At all times we should be remembering our destination.

 

[austenbosten]

Let me ask you this. Is it more just to punish those who play by the rules or those who don’t?

Now who is being punished Norseman? May I honestly ask you that?

 

[Lucky7]

Does post 320 answer the question?

I think if that was all you said, most people would have been just fine with it. The thing is that is not all you believe as we have seen by other posts you have made. And maybe what you believe is just that… and the rest of us just need to accept that…even if we think you’re wrong, judgmental, etc…because you’re not willing to change how you think.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I’m sorry my friend but norseman’s demeanor has been highly inappropriate and his argument seeks to objectify people based on their virginal status.

Snapshot or not…the crux of his argument is that we should punish those who have already been forgiven by God and that repentant former fornicators should not be allowed to marry virgins (completely ignoring masturbators and pornographers…as long as they are virgin they should marry only virgins) that argument is wrong. I don’t need time for him to formulate his point. The crux of his argument in my opinion is wrong and his attitude on here in my opinion has been dismissive and accusatory.

Sorry to use you as an example, I promise I’m not making assumptions about your history. But I feel like Norsemans argument is that if you aren’t a virgin and that wonderful girlfriend of yours that you mentioned is, then she belongs more with him and you are taking a chance from him. Even though you and your girlfriend have something real and deep.

That doesn’t sit right with me.

 

[austenbosten]

Sorry to use you as an example, I promise I’m not making assumptions about your history. But I feel like Norsemans argument is that if you aren’t a virgin and that wonderful girlfriend of yours that you mentioned is, then she belongs more with him and you are taking a chance from him. Even though you and your girlfriend have something real and deep.

That doesn’t sit right with me.

I’m not insulted, I know Norseman’s argument and yes it doesn’t sit well with me either, I’m worried about Norseman’s views on marriage.

We do have something real and deep and I am greatly blessed for that.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Um, marrying someone to reward them or decking someone as a punishment pretty much destroys the meaning of marriage.

 

[David_Thorne]

I’m sorry my friend but norseman’s demeanor has been highly inappropriate and his argument seeks to objectify people based on their virginal status.

Snapshot or not…the crux of his argument is that we should punish those who have already been forgiven by God and that repentant former fornicators should not be allowed to marry virgins (completely ignoring masturbators and pornographers…as long as they are virgin they should marry only virgins) that argument is wrong. I don’t need time for him to formulate his point. The crux of his argument in my opinion is wrong and his attitude on here in my opinion has been dismissive and accusatory.

The highest ideal marriage is partwise based on two virgins marrying. I think Norseman is striving for that. Is this accurate, Norseman?

 

[Marie1234]

Sorry to use you as an example, I promise I’m not making assumptions about your history. But I feel like Norsemans argument is that if you aren’t a virgin and that wonderful girlfriend of yours that you mentioned is, then she belongs more with him and you are taking a chance from him. Even though you and your girlfriend have something real and deep.

That doesn’t sit right with me.

It doesn’t sit right with me either. Virginal women are not some prize for virginal men. That doesn’t even make sense. For me to marry a virgin just because he’s a virgin is a recipe for a disastrous marriage.

 

[Marie1234]

I’m not insulted, I know Norseman’s argument and yes it doesn’t sit well with me either, I’m worried about Norseman’s views on marriage.

We do have something real and deep and I am greatly blessed for that.

 

[David_Thorne]

Back to the original question: “What’s wrong with marrying a non-virgin?”

Excluding everything else about the person, nothing.