honeymoon with the WHOLE family?

[honeyblonde 0]

I guess I'm just lucky that my husband's favorite writer is Simone de Bouvier, not someone I'm guessing any of you have even heard of, much less read.

Is this arrogance really necessary Liz?

Not meant to be arrogant. Just a whole different genre of literature from what I've seen on the reading lists of those who debate here. Also someone I'm guessing you would consider to be a very inappropriate person based on what I've read.

Also, how is sex between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own space harmful to society? Please explain this position.

Edited October 13, 2006 by honeyblonde

[Veiled Princess 1]

I think that it is a bit hypocritical to say one fights for women's rights and then deny that women have just as strong of a need for sex as men do and assume that if a woman has sex outside of a committed relationship she is somehow being exploited or easy or fast or that she is buying into the whole Larry Flint porn world.

I guess I'm just lucky that my husband's favorite writer is Simone de Bouvier, not someone I'm guessing any of you have even heard of, much less read. He understands that treating women differently in this area than we treat men is just another form of sexual discrimination. That said, we both agree that when someone chooses to enter a monogomous relationship, they should take that committment seriously and not betray the other person's trust.

I don't think it applies to only women's rights but to the society as a whole...

I agree that women have sexual desires/needs as strong as men but I still believe they should be married before fulfulling them just like men.

Men also lose out because of premarital sex... when a woman has a little baby boy and the father has left her hanging because he was never committed to her or the idea of a family in the first place, then that boy has lost a father and this is something very important in any child's life... male or female...

Little boys need good men in their lives to teach them how to be good men... little girls need good men in their lives to teach them that a man can and will love her for her and not because she spreads her legs for him.... by depriving either of them of this necessity we have done them a huge injustice and encouraged a negative reaction later on as is apparent in the society we find ourselves in today.

[LaL 418]

Nothing I have said contradicts anything else. Perhaps you just don't understand my position.

However, I find the statement that not registering a marriage with the govt is not Islamic and then referring to it later as an 'Islamic only marriage" to be contradictory.

I never said that not registering a marriage with the govt is not Islamic. Again, I am not talking about what is Islamic or not.

You said premarital sex causes harm to a woman and society. Yet you say marriage do not need to be recognized by society. How does society than distinguish between the harm that results from premarital sex versus the harm that results from a marriage it isn't expected to recognize? This is what I am asking you to explain.

Again... premarital sex is just as the name implies... sex before/outside of marriage.... if one has taken whatever steps they believe is correct to marry then they can not be considered as engaging in premarital sex.... because they are married.

A woman choosing to engage in this act without any type of commitment from the man is detrimental to her view of her own self worth. This is harmful to her.... she teaches this to her children (who possibly have no contact with their fathers because he made no commitment to stick around for them) who then pass this on to their children. All those children with no father figure in their lives learn that men do not love or value us enough to stick around anyway so what's the point of expecting them to commit? The boys learn that it's acceptable to sleep around with women while making no commitment to them whatsoever.... and so the cycle continues and spreads until we find ourselves in this modern day society of single moms and welfare checks because the men in this society do not care to and are not expected to take responsibility for anything.

If more women expected to be married before having sex and making babies with men it would send the message to them that it won't be tolerated when they skip out... whether their agreement is 'recognized' or not. By engaging in premarital sex we send the opposite message to them... take what you want from us and you don't have to commit if you don't want to. This is a bad message to send and it's one that affects generations to come.

if the marriage is just before the eyes of god, how is it enforceable by the laws of the society you live in?

[Veiled Princess 1]

So if a couple within a society feels they are married by the exchange dates and milk, an exchange of vows between the two, etc. their sex is then less harmful to society because they too are married according to their standards?

In my opinion yes. Because they are committed to each other in the sense that they consider themselves to be married and both parties have an expectation of what the other's rights/responsibilities/etc are.

[chri'stina 190]

I guess I'm just lucky that my husband's favorite writer is Simone de Bouvier, not someone I'm guessing any of you have even heard of, much less read.

Is this arrogance really necessary Liz?

Not meant to be arrogant. Just a whole different genre of literature from what I've seen on the reading lists of those who debate here. Also someone I'm guessing you would consider to be a very inappropriate person based on what I've read.

Also, how is sex between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own space harmful to society? Please explain this position.

I think the point you are missing by some of the ladies here, is that some people do not believe they should have sex before marriage, as an honor to God. If you do not agree that is your opinion but you should not knock those who wait. If someone says "I really want to follow what my beliefs say", then they will try hard and one of those things would be not to have premarital sex.

You can disagree but you shouldn't knock it, as you had said in another post that you "think for yourself" implying that those who wait don't think for themselves. You have to do a whole lot more thinking and determine yourself, to not to have sex before marriage. It's easy to have sex before marriage, especially in western countries.

Nothing I have said contradicts anything else. Perhaps you just don't understand my position.

However, I find the statement that not registering a marriage with the govt is not Islamic and then referring to it later as an 'Islamic only marriage" to be contradictory.

I never said that not registering a marriage with the govt is not Islamic. Again, I am not talking about what is Islamic or not.

You said premarital sex causes harm to a woman and society. Yet you say marriage do not need to be recognized by society. How does society than distinguish between the harm that results from premarital sex versus the harm that results from a marriage it isn't expected to recognize? This is what I am asking you to explain.

Again... premarital sex is just as the name implies... sex before/outside of marriage.... if one has taken whatever steps they believe is correct to marry then they can not be considered as engaging in premarital sex.... because they are married.

A woman choosing to engage in this act without any type of commitment from the man is detrimental to her view of her own self worth. This is harmful to her.... she teaches this to her children (who possibly have no contact with their fathers because he made no commitment to stick around for them) who then pass this on to their children. All those children with no father figure in their lives learn that men do not love or value us enough to stick around anyway so what's the point of expecting them to commit? The boys learn that it's acceptable to sleep around with women while making no commitment to them whatsoever.... and so the cycle continues and spreads until we find ourselves in this modern day society of single moms and welfare checks because the men in this society do not care to and are not expected to take responsibility for anything.

If more women expected to be married before having sex and making babies with men it would send the message to them that it won't be tolerated when they skip out... whether their agreement is 'recognized' or not. By engaging in premarital sex we send the opposite message to them... take what you want from us and you don't have to commit if you don't want to. This is a bad message to send and it's one that affects generations to come.

if the marriage is just before the eyes of god, how is it enforceable by the laws of the society you live in?

I was wondering the same...as any 2 people could think they want to be married and simply say they are married in the eyes of God. What happens when a week later the guy or girl bails? Then you have no proof of marriage to society or the law. That doesn't seem to protect a woman very much either.

[Veiled Princess 1]

Also, how is sex between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own space harmful to society? Please explain this position.

I think I've explained my opinion on this already.

[Bosco 1]

I guess I'm just lucky that my husband's favorite writer is Simone de Bouvier, not someone I'm guessing any of you have even heard of, much less read.

Is this arrogance really necessary Liz?

Not meant to be arrogant. Just a whole different genre of literature from what I've seen on the reading lists of those who debate here. Also someone I'm guessing you would consider to be a very inappropriate person based on what I've read.

Also, how is sex between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own space harmful to society? Please explain this position.

How often have you seen reading lists posted here? At very least when passing off your intellect spell her name correctly. It is "Beauvoir". A Bouvier is a type of dog.

You are making leaps. Just because I am not an existentialist doesn't mean I find Beavoir inappropriate. Just because I make choices for myself doesn't mean I judge those who choose otherwise or deem them inapprorpriate. Also, having sex outside of marriage doesn't make you more of a feminist or someone who chooses not to less of one. You come across as having no tolerance for views more conservative than your own. If someone expresses them, you project that they are judging you. Don't you realize it is possible for people to make choices that may be more restrictive than yours without them thinking differently of you?

I never said sex between two consenting adults is harmful to society. You should direct that to the people that did.

[Jenn! 918]

Not meant to be arrogant. Just a whole different genre of literature from what I've seen on the reading lists of those who debate here. Also someone I'm guessing you would consider to be a very inappropriate person based on what I've read.

Also, how is sex between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own space harmful to society? Please explain this position.

I think the point you are missing by some of the ladies here, is that some people do not believe they should have sex before marriage, as an honor to God. If you do not agree that is your opinion but you should not knock those who wait. If someone says "I really want to follow what my beliefs say", then they will try hard and one of those things would be not to have premarital sex.

You can disagree but you shouldn't knock it, as you had said in another post that you "think for yourself" implying that those who wait don't think for themselves. You have to do a whole lot more thinking and determine yourself, to not to have sex before marriage. It's easy to have sex before marriage, especially in western countries.

I don't see how Liz criticised anyone who makes the choice to abstain until marriage.

[Veiled Princess 1]

I was wondering the same...as any 2 people could think they want to be married and simply say they are married in the eyes of God. What happens when a week later the guy or girl bails? Then you have no proof of marriage to society or the law. That doesn't seem to protect a woman very much either.

Some societies are just behind-on-shoulders-backwards and don't recognize valid contracts between two people...

It's about the mindset of the people involved.... there needs to be a commitment.. a contract between those people... an agreement that it's not just a matter of climbing into bed but about making a family and a life together.

When this is lost and it's accepted that this is not a need the society suffers.

[Bosco 1]

I don't see how Liz criticised anyone who makes the choice to abstain until marriage.

Maybe there are just some of us who think for ourselves and don't go looking for a book or religion or society to tell us what to think. Maybe some of us think that if there is a higher being it expects us to use the brains we have and think for ourselves instead of just swallowing other people's opinions.

I think most of us viewed this statement to mean that those who follow religious or societal reasons to not have premarital sex are unable to think for themselves or swallowing other people's opinions.

[crazyinEgypt 0]

First of all, this thread has once again turned into the "hot topic" that burns my backside every time I read it. Really, I could care less if someone is with their husband before marriage. It's none of my business.

Doodle, back to the honeymoon topic. My husband and I had our own flat for 1 week, then his family wanted us to stay with them. At first it was a bit uncomfortable, but after a day, it was like living with my own sisters. I love them all! Everything will be fine.

[Jenn! 918]

I don't see how Liz criticised anyone who makes the choice to abstain until marriage.

Maybe there are just some of us who think for ourselves and don't go looking for a book or religion or society to tell us what to think. Maybe some of us think that if there is a higher being it expects us to use the brains we have and think for ourselves instead of just swallowing other people's opinions.

I think most of us viewed this statement to mean that those who follow religious or societal reasons to not have premarital sex are unable to think for themselves or swallowing other people's opinions.

Oh. I just took her statement as advocating the existence of choice and making the decision that is best for ourselves. I don't think she means that choosing to abstain from sex until marriage means that you are not thinking for yourself. But I don't want to speak for her.

[chri'stina 190]

I don't see how Liz criticised anyone who makes the choice to abstain until marriage.

Maybe there are just some of us who think for ourselves and don't go looking for a book or religion or society to tell us what to think. Maybe some of us think that if there is a higher being it expects us to use the brains we have and think for ourselves instead of just swallowing other people's opinions.

I think most of us viewed this statement to mean that those who follow religious or societal reasons to not have premarital sex are unable to think for themselves or swallowing other people's opinions.

Definitely.

[Bosco 1]

I don't see how Liz criticised anyone who makes the choice to abstain until marriage.

Maybe there are just some of us who think for ourselves and don't go looking for a book or religion or society to tell us what to think. Maybe some of us think that if there is a higher being it expects us to use the brains we have and think for ourselves instead of just swallowing other people's opinions.

I think most of us viewed this statement to mean that those who follow religious or societal reasons to not have premarital sex are unable to think for themselves or swallowing other people's opinions.

Oh. I just took her statement as advocating the existence of choice and making the decision that is best for ourselves. I don't think she means that choosing to abstain from sex until marriage means that you are not thinking for yourself. But I don't want to speak for her.

Perhaps, but no other choices were being discussed at that time and it is definitely implying that some of the people engaged in the discussion were engaged in the latter behavior.

[Bosco 1]

So if a couple within a society feels they are married by the exchange dates and milk, an exchange of vows between the two, etc. their sex is then less harmful to society because they too are married according to their standards?

In my opinion yes. Because they are committed to each other in the sense that they consider themselves to be married and both parties have an expectation of what the other's rights/responsibilities/etc are.

OK, VP, you shocked me with this one. It is rather a liberal concept that breaks from your normally conservative stances.