Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have no idea what the "real" conclusion is. There are major problems with how both the studies I could find mentioned were conducted. There is also problems with the conclusions based on the results, as in what were the reasons for the decreased unhappiness in one group over the other. In doing the search there was also an article that only 3% of Americans do not have sex before marriage hence the majority of sucessful and unsucessful marriges had one or both partners having sex before marriage.
As your are asking us for our personal opinions, which is important, mine is that once you eliminate all the other factors there is probably no statistically significant difference between the two groups. But that is just an opinion. I also think whatever the results of a properly conducted study concluded the fact that you may or may not have a happier marraige if you do or don't are not strong arguements to convince young people to have or not have sex.
If the methodology is flawed than the entire study should be disregarded as neither right nor wrong.
I understand and do not dispute that a study with that small a sample size should be questioned. That is something that we can agree on. The thing is though, even before this thread existed, I believe that premarital sex was bad based on what God's word teaches us. I understand that is not something you can hang your hat on.
I'm not in anyway disagreeing with you about the lack of quality from the study, but I think if someone says the conclusion is the direct opposite, I believe it's fair to ask them how they are drawing that conclusion conclusively, do you not?
I have answered your question about my children. You choose to either not read, or disregard.
Do not cast aspersions on my integrity, Grasshopper.
You never answered the question. We aren't stupid, other people are picking up on your nonsense. If you don't see men as being much more than sperm donors than honestly that's your business but again I just wonder if you really truly believe that or that's just something you just make up to win an argument. If you really believe that, then surely you must teach your children. If not, then where is the conviction behind your thought process.
I didn't ask you how you taught your sons biology. I asked, specifically do you tell your sons that they are not needed besides just giving sperm for their children to be conceived? Yes or No?
Yes, and also included the following; If they want to raise a family they have to bring more to the table than sperm. Did you miss that?
I made it very clear, their families would survive without them if they chose to be irresponsible with said sperm. I also made it clear that each child would be loved unconditionally as would their partners regardless. My sons made the choice to be more than sperm.
My son's are teaching their sons the same.
Imagine, generations of men knowing they need more than sperm to make a family, but all it takes is sperm. Imagine generations of men understanding their family will survive without them if they donate and go. We call that Drive-by-Sperm.
You never answered the question. We aren't stupid, other people are picking up on your nonsense. If you don't see men as being much more than sperm donors than honestly that's your business but again I just wonder if you really truly believe that or that's just something you just make up to win an argument. If you really believe that, then surely you must teach your children. If not, then where is the conviction behind your thought process.
Are you speaking for others now? Is there a small crowd behind you encouraging, interaction with me?
Were you picked for this? Draw the short straw, or something?
Do I hear them?... stop breathing on me... shhhhhh. you do it.... aaahahahahaha
Yes, and also included the following; If they want to raise a family they have to bring more to the table than sperm. Did you miss that?
I made it very clear, their families would survive without them if they chose to be irresponsible with said sperm. I also made it clear that each child would be loved unconditionally as would their partners regardless. My sons made the choice to be more than sperm.
My son's are teaching their sons the same.
Imagine, generations of men knowing they need more than sperm to make a family, but all it takes is sperm. Imagine generations of men understanding their family will survive without them if they donate and go. We call that Drive-by-Sperm.
When I stated that a male and female being together was God's intentions for us, you responded that a sperm is the only thing necessary for a man. So it's clear at this point you are just arguing just to argue. I never argued that women could not take care of children by themselves, I only stated that it wasn't God's design and it's not ideal. You are now saying something similar to what I have said all along yet you still argued with me.
I understand and do not dispute that a study with that small a sample size should be questioned. That is something that we can agree on. The thing is though, even before this thread existed, I believe that premarital sex was bad based on what God's word teaches us. I understand that is not something you can hang your hat on.
I'm not in anyway disagreeing with you about the lack of quality from the study, but I think if someone says the conclusion is the direct opposite, I believe it's fair to ask them how they are drawing that conclusion conclusively, do you not?
You have to read the study to comment on it. The whole study. Work the numbers. Look at the design.
Research Methodology and Design 101 is a good start. A few semesters of statistics and applications of those numbers beyond high school is helpful. A course in algebra is helpful, but a good scientific calculator is fine. It is more helpful to understand the numbers before using the calculator method. Just use it to check your work, not do the work.
I conduct a study about sex- here are the findings.
75% of the participants agree they like sex
What does that say about the rest? It says nothing. It might say they do not like sex. It might be because the 25% does not even know what sex is. We will not speculate. But we could speculate.
So, I present to you a graph with bars and numbers. I give you the following probability number <p.01.
I conclude the following-
Sex must be good because 75% like sex.
How would that not be obvious even to an idiot?
With those numbers and percentages sex HAS to be good. Indisputable.
I happen to agree sex is good so that makes the results even better.
A keen observer tells me my results mean nothing. I balk, I declare the the bearer of this news hates sex.
The keen observer replies, but there are only four people in your study. I read the fine print.
I understand and do not dispute that a study with that small a sample size should be questioned. That is something that we can agree on. The thing is though, even before this thread existed, I believe that premarital sex was bad based on what God's word teaches us. I understand that is not something you can hang your hat on.
I'm not in anyway disagreeing with you about the lack of quality from the study, but I think if someone says the conclusion is the direct opposite, I believe it's fair to ask them how they are drawing that conclusion conclusively, do you not?
I jumped into this conversation due to the appearance that two sides were speaking past each other, one side putting down the study as flawed and the other side supporting the findings. If some one claims that studies show that sex before marriage improves marriages then the onus is upon them to produce those studies. It was also not the size of the other studies but who were asked to participate that is bias as well.
What either of us believes is important only to ourselves unless and until we try to force that belief upon others, and I mean this in a total sense not just on this one topic. This particular topic is so personal that I think it should be left to each of us to decide for ourselves and not make a big issue of it, there are more important things to work on making one's marriage, life, world better than this one factor OMHO
When I stated that a male and female being together was God's intentions for us, you responded that a sperm is the only thing necessary for a man. So it's clear at this point you are just arguing just to argue. I never argued that women could not take care of children by themselves, I only stated that it wasn't God's design and it's not ideal. You are now saying something similar to what I have said all along yet you still argued with me.
God gave women the ability to raise their children without men. Clearly you are not really necessary. God designed it that way. God did not make an imperfect choice. God knew women were not the weaker vessel. Women have been raising their children without men for centuries. That is fact.
You can get rid of the entire fornication argument too, given the fact sex is not a requirement for fertilization. The elimination of sin through science.
You do not have to agree.
Last edited by RonkonkomaNative; 03-06-2015 at 01:54 PM..
Reason: spelling
You have to read the study to comment on it. The whole study. Work the numbers. Look at the design.
Research Methodology and Design 101 is a good start. A few semesters of statistics and applications of those numbers beyond high school is helpful. A course in algebra is helpful, but a good scientific calculator is fine. It is more helpful to understand the numbers before using the calculator method. Just use it to check your work, not do the work.
I conduct a study about sex- here are the findings.
75% of the participants agree they like sex
What does that say about the rest? It says nothing. It might say they do not like sex. It might be because the 25% does not even know what sex is. We will not speculate. But we could speculate.
So, I present to you a graph with bars and numbers. I give you the following probability number <p.01.
I conclude the following-
Sex must be good because 75% like sex.
How would that not be obvious even to an idiot?
With those numbers and percentages sex HAS to be good. Indisputable.
I happen to agree sex is good so that makes the results even better.
A keen observer tells me my results mean nothing. I balk, I declare the the bearer of this news hates sex.
The keen observer replies, but there are only four people in your study. I read the fine print.
We are not discussing the study because you have already reiterated that the numbers are not enough to draw a conclusion. I didn't disagree with you, I think that is valid. For the 5th time, I'm not defending the study.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
or 60 
