Making The Case For Abstinence (wives, marriages, husbands, young)
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.
Lol, no no, not at all my friend Julia; I am not promoting getting married at 14! (way too young!! )
The reason I mentioned the "14" reference, was in response to the earlier poster's sentence "The religious mandate on sex before marriage was made at a time when newlyweds were barely out of childhood themselves--14, 15, and 16."
ETA: 18 is better than 28, for ppl to get married As the other poster mentioned, ppl are already 16 years into biological adulthood...getting married at 28 for example, only artificially delays what could instead be happening say at 18.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia
If you're not saying that 14 is a good age to be married, but 18 seems too old to you, what are you saying?
18 is considered the age of majority in the U.S., like most of the rest of the world. It's the age at which young people can enter into contracts, including marriage.
Marrying younger than that usually requires parental consent, and in days gone by, that was usually because somebody was knocked up. Pregnant girls didn't go to school then; they usually dropped out. Surely you're not suggesting we go back to those days.
Why would you encourage young adults to marry younger?
Last edited by Phoenix2017; 06-20-2011 at 10:20 AM..
Reason: Corrections / Adds
But then, isn't the whole "saving oneself until marriage" thing itself an artificial delay in doing something that people are naturally driven to do?
Getting married at at 18 could prevent a whole lotta pre-marital intimacy too! (I'm not saying it would eliminate it, but you get the picture.)
Restore the mainstream marriage age to say 18, and ppl would have a lot more incentive to wait until they're married, to be intimate It's fundamentally unfair to have to wait until one is 28, to have intimacy, if one believes in pre-marital abstinence. But again, these marriage age restrictions (28 vs. 18) are foisted on us by society... a couple that actually *wants* to get married at 18, is realistically not gonna have a lot of leverage or support to do so, in today's culture
Last edited by Phoenix2017; 06-20-2011 at 10:29 AM..
Reason: Clarified language
Well people could just go to the doctor and take care of themselves to prevent the spread of stds. And we all know where babies come from and how it happens so you can prevent that too. Its not that hard if you are being healthy and properly using 2 forms of BC as you should. I really don't think abstaining from a buffet of life cuts out your interest either. The table is still there. Just a question of when you are gonna get hungry.
I am glad I didn't wait. I know I would of been curious beyond control and got stuck with someone I didn't really want. I am also glad the person I was with didn't wait. Virgin guys suck in bed. Virgin till marriage was never my personality type. I just waited till 18 so if I did get pregnant I would be able to handle it on my own and my body would not be at risk. I don't believe in abortions and I think some forms of contraception are not healthy to take in your teen years. Along with the periods not being regular...noooo...thats just too crazy risky. LOL
One self righteous peer in my youth also turned me off of staying a virgin. She would go on and on about it. It was like shut up already. No one cares you are pure but YOU! And she turned out to be gay. LOL
As the other poster mentioned, ppl are already 16 years into biological adulthood...getting married at 28 for example, only artificially delays what could instead be happening say at 18.
I wonder what would happen to the divorce rate then? At 18 very few people are who they will be when they get older. At 18 you have very little life, or even self experience. To make a decision then on who should be your partner for LIFE seems to be unreasonable.
Just speaking from personal experience here. I wish that, during the time I was coming of age, (1970s) that sex had not been so free and easy. To be honest with you, I am so burnt out on it now that I could just scream. I think if I had enjoyed the pleasures of the flesh LESS OFTEN when I was young, maybe I would still enjoy it. I don't know.
It boggles my mind these days why anyone even bothers. LOL *that* is how burnt out I am on the whole thing.
So, to answer your question, sort of. If I had a kid I would encourage abstinence based upon my personal experience.
I wonder what would happen to the divorce rate then? At 18 very few people are who they will be when they get older. At 18 you have very little life, or even self experience. To make a decision then on who should be your partner for LIFE seems to be unreasonable.
Especially if you're making that decision just because you're really horny.
. But again, these marriage age restrictions (28 vs. 18) are foisted on us by society... a couple that actually *wants* to get married at 18, is realistically not gonna have a lot of leverage or support to do so, in today's culture
The fact that you would be concerned about your perceived "societal pressures" shows that you are not mature enough for marriage.
Which isn't a negative judgement on you..... it just proves my point that maturity is needed when making a lifetime committment.
Getting married at at 18 could prevent a whole lotta pre-marital intimacy too! (I'm not saying it would eliminate it, but you get the picture.)
Restore the mainstream marriage age to say 18, and ppl would have a lot more incentive to wait until they're married, to be intimate It's fundamentally unfair to have to wait until one is 28, to have intimacy, if one believes in pre-marital abstinence. But again, these marriage age restrictions (28 vs. 18) are foisted on us by society... a couple that actually *wants* to get married at 18, is realistically not gonna have a lot of leverage or support to do so, in today's culture
Couples who marry young, particularly when they do not go on to college, are at high risk for divorce. Whatever the reasons for this increased likelihood, the fact remains that we can only move forward, not backward. There was no point in history where everything was perfect.
I'm going to vote "not a simple question", simply because it's an individual decision.
Edit: I think abstainers are missing out, but that's just me.
This.
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.
)
As the other poster mentioned, ppl are already 16 years into biological adulthood...getting married at 28 for example, only artificially delays what could instead be happening say at 18.
(I'm not saying it would eliminate it, but you get the picture.)
It's fundamentally unfair to have to wait until one is 28, to have intimacy, if one believes in pre-marital abstinence. But again, these marriage age restrictions (28 vs. 18) are foisted on us by society... a couple that actually *wants* to get married at 18, is realistically not gonna have a lot of leverage or support to do so, in today's culture 
