[quote=name:Lt.Church]although they somewhat do condoms are not meant to prevent pregnancy, they are made to stop the spreading of STD's and STI's. who could say they WANT one of those? :wtfage:[/quote] Strange, I took the fact that they have a little pouch to catch the semen and the large amounts of spermicide to mean that they do prevent pregnancy.

Quote from O)Lt.Church

although they somewhat do condoms are not meant to prevent pregnancy, they are made to stop the spreading of STD's and STI's. who could say they WANT one of those?

Strange, I took the fact that they have a little pouch to catch the semen and the large amounts of spermicide to mean that they do prevent pregnancy.

what would happen if there was an age law on having sex?

what would happen if there was an age law on having sex?

Dear Black Knight: There are. They're called [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent]Age of Consent[/url] and Statutory Rape. Of course, those only deal with age differences. When dealing with two minors, laws against would really only cause more problems. Most [i]adults[/i] are ignorant of the numerous state and federal laws in place, so what can we expect from children? What would be the punishment? Would parents be held responsible? No, involving the government and criminalizing the actions of consenting individuals is a bad idea. I think there are actually some states with age laws on the books, but how can they really be enforced? And to what end? Who would really receive protection or justice under such a law? It would only be a law of control, and those are dangerous. Dear Falkoner: [quote=name:Falkoner][quote=Hercanic]Of course it is, what else would it be? By volunteering your opinion, you open it up for discussion. That is the nature of a forum.[/quote] [quote=Hercanic]but understand that your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.[/quote] Your opinion.[/quote] Your point?

Dear Black Knight:
There are. They're called Age of Consent and Statutory Rape. Of course, those only deal with age differences. When dealing with two minors, laws against would really only cause more problems. Most adults are ignorant of the numerous state and federal laws in place, so what can we expect from children? What would be the punishment? Would parents be held responsible? No, involving the government and criminalizing the actions of consenting individuals is a bad idea. I think there are actually some states with age laws on the books, but how can they really be enforced? And to what end? Who would really receive protection or justice under such a law? It would only be a law of control, and those are dangerous.


Dear Falkoner:

Quote from Falkoner

Quote from Hercanic

Of course it is, what else would it be? By volunteering your opinion, you open it up for discussion. That is the nature of a forum.

Quote from Hercanic

but understand that your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

Your opinion.

Your point?

[quote=name:Hercanic]Dear Black Knight: There are. They're called [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent]Age of Consent[/url] and Statutory Rape. Of course, those only deal with age differences. When dealing with two minors, laws against would really only cause more problems. Most [i]adults[/i] are ignorant of the numerous state and federal laws in place, so what can we expect from children? What would be the punishment? Would parents be held responsible? No, involving the government and criminalizing the actions of consenting individuals is a bad idea. I think there are actually some states with age laws on the books, but how can they really be enforced? And to what end? Who would really receive protection or justice under such a law? It would only be a law of control, and those are dangerous. Dear Falkoner: [quote=name:Falkoner][quote=Hercanic]Of course it is, what else would it be? By volunteering your opinion, you open it up for discussion. That is the nature of a forum.[/quote] [quote=Hercanic]but understand that your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.[/quote] Your opinion.[/quote] Your point?[/quote] Why should they? Because studies show that underage sexual action releases "eroto-toxins" into the mind, effecting it negatively. Although this is a free country, if you know someone is going to commit suicide and you tell the police, they are required by law to detain you and give you psychiatric aid. People keep saying that we do what we want, you do what you want because at the end of the day I can't effect you. But the fact of the matter is, you cannot do virtually anything without having some effect on another. To think be ignorant of that is a new kind of stupidity.

Quote from Hercanic

Dear Black Knight:
There are. They're called Age of Consent and Statutory Rape. Of course, those only deal with age differences. When dealing with two minors, laws against would really only cause more problems. Most adults are ignorant of the numerous state and federal laws in place, so what can we expect from children? What would be the punishment? Would parents be held responsible? No, involving the government and criminalizing the actions of consenting individuals is a bad idea. I think there are actually some states with age laws on the books, but how can they really be enforced? And to what end? Who would really receive protection or justice under such a law? It would only be a law of control, and those are dangerous.


Dear Falkoner:

Quote from Falkoner

Quote from Hercanic

Of course it is, what else would it be? By volunteering your opinion, you open it up for discussion. That is the nature of a forum.

Quote from Hercanic

but understand that your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

Your opinion.

Your point?

Why should they? Because studies show that underage sexual action releases "eroto-toxins" into the mind, effecting it negatively. Although this is a free country, if you know someone is going to commit suicide and you tell the police, they are required by law to detain you and give you psychiatric aid.

People keep saying that we do what we want, you do what you want because at the end of the day I can't effect you. But the fact of the matter is, you cannot do virtually anything without having some effect on another. To think be ignorant of that is a new kind of stupidity.

[quote]Why should they? Because studies show that underage sexual action releases "eroto-toxins" into the mind, effecting it negatively.[/quote] Bit off-topic, but could you provide links to any information on this? I tried a quick search in a couple places and couldn't find much.

Quote

Why should they? Because studies show that underage sexual action releases "eroto-toxins" into the mind, effecting it negatively.

Bit off-topic, but could you provide links to any information on this? I tried a quick search in a couple places and couldn't find much.

I often quote vague studies as the need arises.

I often quote vague studies as the need arises.

Lol, "eroto-toxins." Sorry, unless you back that up with a source, Jello, I can't take your post very seriously. =oP

Lol, "eroto-toxins." Sorry, unless you back that up with a source, Jello, I can't take your post very seriously. =oP

[quote]Ideally, your wife is your best friend. But if you remove the best friend aspect from a wife or girlfriend, what are you left with? [/quote] [color=#b5b5ff]An empty relationship based solely on sexual/physical pleasure or social-political gain (i.e. the average high school relationship). Such relationships are, in my opinion, meaningless and degrading to society.[/color]

Quote

Ideally, your wife is your best friend. But if you remove the best friend aspect from a wife or girlfriend, what are you left with?

An empty relationship based solely on sexual/physical pleasure or social-political gain (i.e. the average high school relationship). Such relationships are, in my opinion, meaningless and degrading to society.

[quote]I then went on to say that experience helps. Experience in dating helps one relate to the opposite gender. Experience in kissing helps establish a strong physical connection, etc etc. All this builds on your confidence and self-esteem.[/quote] You acted completely like you were talking about sex, you think I don't plan on dating girls? You don't need to have sex to have a healthy relationship. [quote]Your point? [/quote] That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them. [quote]Now I can understand if it did hurt someone then that would be a problem, but I don't believe that's what this topic is about. [/quote] That is completely what this topic comes down to, and it often [i]does[/i] hurt people, I'd say it's worth it to make laws against premarital sex simply for the small cases where it ruins lives, seeing as in the other cases it doesn't help that much.

Quote

I then went on to say that experience helps. Experience in dating helps one relate to the opposite gender. Experience in kissing helps establish a strong physical connection, etc etc. All this builds on your confidence and self-esteem.

You acted completely like you were talking about sex, you think I don't plan on dating girls? You don't need to have sex to have a healthy relationship.

Quote

Your point?

That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

Quote

Now I can understand if it did hurt someone then that would be a problem, but I don't believe that's what this topic is about.

That is completely what this topic comes down to, and it often does hurt people, I'd say it's worth it to make laws against premarital sex simply for the small cases where it ruins lives, seeing as in the other cases it doesn't help that much.

Dear Falkoner: [quote=Falkoner]You acted completely like you were talking about sex, you think I don't plan on dating girls? You don't need to have sex to have a healthy relationship.[/quote] Acted? No, you assumed. I used specific wording. [quote=Hercanic]No, of course it isn't. But if I may ask, what is the main difference between a best friend you live with and a wife (beyond the contract and any religious ceremony)? [u]Intimacy[/u]. Experience does in fact help in a variety of ways and situations, [u]as it does with anything[/u].[/quote] [quote=Hercanic]The word I used was intimacy, not sex. Sex is a significant facet of intimacy, but it is not the whole of the concept. I then went on to say that experience helps. Experience in dating helps one relate to the opposite gender. Experience in kissing helps establish a strong physical connection, etc etc. All this builds on your confidence and self-esteem.[/quote] I did not go into detail about sex given the age demographic of this site, but I let you make the mental connections with "etc, etc". Also, I never claimed that you needed to have sex to have a healthy relationship. Don't put words in my mouth. The [i]only[/i] claim I've made is that [u]experience helps[/u], as it does with anything. [quote=Falkoner][quote=Hercanic]Your point?[/quote] That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.[/quote] That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. Let's put things back in context: [quote=Hercanic]It is perfectly fine that [i]you[/i] want to practice abstinence, but understand that your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.[/quote] [quote=Hercanic]Now, I understand your viewpoint, and you're free to decide whatever you'd like. That's not the purpose of my argument, to alter your personal choices. Instead, I am debating against your assertion that everyone else should follow that same choice.[/quote] So, if your point was to try making me eat my own words, you have failed miserably. Finally, in case you overlooked it, I expanded on why your view that everyone should wait until marriage before sex is not applicable nor relevent to everyone: [quote=Hercanic]Dear Falkoner: Not everyone believes in marriage, nor does a marriage concretely protect against any of the potential dangers of premarital sex. You can still get pregnant, get divorced, or contract an STD from an unfaithful or dishonest spouse.[/quote] I am assuming one of the principle reasons you are adamant about abstinence and waiting until marriage is due to your religious views. Is that an fair assumption? That is another reason why I said your views are not applicable or relevent to everyone, because not everyone is Mormon. There are a variety of faiths, atheism, etc. You believe your religion is correct, and that's fine, which is why you believe in it. To that idea, I originally countered with this: [quote=Hercanic]Fact is, there are hundreds of active religions (compounded with numerous differing interpretations), and thousands of defunct religions (Aztecs, Greek myth, etc), but none have any more proof over any other religion that they are the correct choice.[/quote]

Dear Falkoner:

Quote from Falkoner

You acted completely like you were talking about sex, you think I don't plan on dating girls? You don't need to have sex to have a healthy relationship.

Acted? No, you assumed. I used specific wording.

Quote from Hercanic

No, of course it isn't. But if I may ask, what is the main difference between a best friend you live with and a wife (beyond the contract and any religious ceremony)? Intimacy. Experience does in fact help in a variety of ways and situations, as it does with anything.

Quote from Hercanic

The word I used was intimacy, not sex. Sex is a significant facet of intimacy, but it is not the whole of the concept. I then went on to say that experience helps. Experience in dating helps one relate to the opposite gender. Experience in kissing helps establish a strong physical connection, etc etc. All this builds on your confidence and self-esteem.

I did not go into detail about sex given the age demographic of this site, but I let you make the mental connections with "etc, etc".

Also, I never claimed that you needed to have sex to have a healthy relationship. Don't put words in my mouth. The only claim I've made is that experience helps, as it does with anything.

Quote from Falkoner

Quote from Hercanic

Your point?

That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. Let's put things back in context:

Quote from Hercanic

It is perfectly fine that you want to practice abstinence, but understand that your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

Quote from Hercanic

Now, I understand your viewpoint, and you're free to decide whatever you'd like. That's not the purpose of my argument, to alter your personal choices. Instead, I am debating against your assertion that everyone else should follow that same choice.

So, if your point was to try making me eat my own words, you have failed miserably.


Finally, in case you overlooked it, I expanded on why your view that everyone should wait until marriage before sex is not applicable nor relevent to everyone:

Quote from Hercanic

Dear Falkoner:
Not everyone believes in marriage, nor does a marriage concretely protect against any of the potential dangers of premarital sex. You can still get pregnant, get divorced, or contract an STD from an unfaithful or dishonest spouse.

I am assuming one of the principle reasons you are adamant about abstinence and waiting until marriage is due to your religious views. Is that an fair assumption? That is another reason why I said your views are not applicable or relevent to everyone, because not everyone is Mormon. There are a variety of faiths, atheism, etc. You believe your religion is correct, and that's fine, which is why you believe in it. To that idea, I originally countered with this:

Quote from Hercanic

Fact is, there are hundreds of active religions (compounded with numerous differing interpretations), and thousands of defunct religions (Aztecs, Greek myth, etc), but none have any more proof over any other religion that they are the correct choice.

[quote=name:Hercanic] Also, I never claimed that you needed to have sex to have a healthy relationship. Don't put words in my mouth. The [i]only[/i] claim I've made is that [u]experience helps[/u], as it does with anything. [/quote] Exactly. Practice on the fat chicks they're easy. [quote=name:Hercanic] [quote=Falkoner][quote=Hercanic]Your point?[/quote] That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.[/quote] That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. [/quote] Exactly. It appalls me that people would be so blind in the belief that their values are a universal truth that everyone should accept. [quote=name:Hercanic] I am assuming one of the principle reasons you are adamant about abstinence and waiting until marriage is due to your religious views. Is that an fair assumption? That is another reason why I said your views are not applicable or relevent to everyone, because not everyone is Mormon. There are a variety of faiths, atheism, etc. You believe your religion is correct, and that's fine, which is why you believe in it. To that idea, I originally countered with this: [quote=Hercanic]Fact is, there are hundreds of active religions (compounded with numerous differing interpretations), and thousands of defunct religions (Aztecs, Greek myth, etc), but none have any more proof over any other religion that they are the correct choice.[/quote][/quote] Exactly. It appalls me that people would be so blind in the belief that their values are a universal truth that everyone should accept. [quote=name:Donkey Punch] Let's all celebrate the fact that Falkoner will never get the power to force upon the rest of us such a ridiculous belief.[/quote] [quote=name:Falkoner] [quote]Your point? [/quote] That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them. [/quote] EL OH EL. [img=http://winace.andkon.com/pics/pot_kettle.jpg]

Quote from Hercanic

Also, I never claimed that you needed to have sex to have a healthy relationship. Don't put words in my mouth. The only claim I've made is that experience helps, as it does with anything.

Exactly. Practice on the fat chicks they're easy.

Quote from Hercanic

Quote from Falkoner

Quote from Hercanic

Your point?

That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power.

Exactly. It appalls me that people would be so blind in the belief that their values are a universal truth that everyone should accept.

Quote from Hercanic

I am assuming one of the principle reasons you are adamant about abstinence and waiting until marriage is due to your religious views. Is that an fair assumption? That is another reason why I said your views are not applicable or relevent to everyone, because not everyone is Mormon. There are a variety of faiths, atheism, etc. You believe your religion is correct, and that's fine, which is why you believe in it. To that idea, I originally countered with this:

Quote from Hercanic

Fact is, there are hundreds of active religions (compounded with numerous differing interpretations), and thousands of defunct religions (Aztecs, Greek myth, etc), but none have any more proof over any other religion that they are the correct choice.

Exactly. It appalls me that people would be so blind in the belief that their values are a universal truth that everyone should accept.

Quote from (U)Donkey Punch

Let's all celebrate the fact that Falkoner will never get the power to force upon the rest of us such a ridiculous belief.

Quote from Falkoner

Quote

Your point?

That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

EL OH EL.

[quote=name:Hercanic][quote=Falkoner][quote=Hercanic]Your point?[/quote] That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.[/quote] That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. Let's put things back in context: [/quote] Irrelevant. Anyone in power would enforce their beliefs on people. Your sub-arguement here is thus rendered useless and the CONTINOUS quote of this statement is deemed unnescesary. [quote]Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!"), but this is actually not that common. A more typical manifestation of argumentum ad hominem is attacking a source of information -- for example, responding to a quotation from Richard Nixon on the subject of free trade with China by saying, "We all know Nixon was a liar and a cheat, so why should we believe anything he says?" Argumentum ad hominem also occurs when someone's arguments are discounted merely because they stand to benefit from the policy they advocate -- such as Bill Gates arguing against antitrust, rich people arguing for lower taxes, white people arguing against affirmative action, minorities arguing for affirmative action, etc. In all of these cases, the relevant question is not who makes the argument, but whether the argument is valid. [/quote]

Quote from Hercanic

Quote from Falkoner

Quote from Hercanic

Your point?

That your views are not relevent or applicable to all no matter how strongly you believe in them.

That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. Let's put things back in context:

Irrelevant. Anyone in power would enforce their beliefs on people. Your sub-arguement here is thus rendered useless and the CONTINOUS quote of this statement is deemed unnescesary.

Quote

Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!"), but this is actually not that common. A more typical manifestation of argumentum ad hominem is attacking a source of information -- for example, responding to a quotation from Richard Nixon on the subject of free trade with China by saying, "We all know Nixon was a liar and a cheat, so why should we believe anything he says?" Argumentum ad hominem also occurs when someone's arguments are discounted merely because they stand to benefit from the policy they advocate -- such as Bill Gates arguing against antitrust, rich people arguing for lower taxes, white people arguing against affirmative action, minorities arguing for affirmative action, etc. In all of these cases, the relevant question is not who makes the argument, but whether the argument is valid.

[quote]Acted? No, you assumed. I used specific wording.[/quote] And yet: [quote]Is this coming from personal experience? Unless you're married, given your beliefs I doubt it. Not to boast, but speaking from experience myself, I can tell you there is quite a bit to learn if you care at all about a mutually beneficial experience.[/quote] You posted that because of the topic of sex, your "specific wording" still enclosed sex, which was what the topic we were currently talking about, so it sounded like you were talking about sex, and I'm fairly certain you were, and simply changed your story when DTBK posted. [quote]Also, I never claimed that you needed to have sex to have a healthy relationship. Don't put words in my mouth. The only claim I've made is that experience helps, as it does with anything. [/quote] How does experience in sex help a marriage? Do you think your spouse is going to be happy to hear you've had sex with someone else? If anything I'd say it hurts it. [quote]That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. Let's put things back in context:[/quote] I never said that everyone should follow the same choice, in a perfect world, I'd say they would, of their own accord, but this world isn't perfect, and as I'm not going to be in power, it doesn't really matter what I would do. This discussion isn't about me. [quote]Dear Falkoner: Not everyone believes in marriage, nor does a marriage concretely protect against any of the potential dangers of premarital sex. You can still get pregnant, get divorced, or contract an STD from an unfaithful or dishonest spouse.[/quote] Once again, in a perfect world, you wouldn't have to worry about people being unfaithful, not to mention, whether or not there is still a [i]chance[/i] that things could still go wrong, it's less of a chance than it is otherwise. [quote]Fact is, there are hundreds of active religions (compounded with numerous differing interpretations), and thousands of defunct religions (Aztecs, Greek myth, etc), but none have any more proof over any other religion that they are the correct choice.[/quote] I am not simply spewing my religion on you, many logical points have been made regarding why premarital sex is bad, and yet you continue to focus on the fact that I have a religion, even though it doesn't affect how my view would be, premarital sex is logically bad. [quote=devilek] crap crap crap crap... [img=http://winace.andkon.com/pics/pot_kettle.jpg] [/quote] That's not hypocritical, that picture does not apply, I simply repeated his own words.

Quote

Acted? No, you assumed. I used specific wording.

And yet:

Quote

Is this coming from personal experience? Unless you're married, given your beliefs I doubt it. Not to boast, but speaking from experience myself, I can tell you there is quite a bit to learn if you care at all about a mutually beneficial experience.

You posted that because of the topic of sex, your "specific wording" still enclosed sex, which was what the topic we were currently talking about, so it sounded like you were talking about sex, and I'm fairly certain you were, and simply changed your story when DTBK posted.

Quote

Also, I never claimed that you needed to have sex to have a healthy relationship. Don't put words in my mouth. The only claim I've made is that experience helps, as it does with anything.

How does experience in sex help a marriage? Do you think your spouse is going to be happy to hear you've had sex with someone else? If anything I'd say it hurts it.

Quote

That's funny, because I'm not the one who has stated that he would enforce his beliefs on everyone else if given the power. Let's put things back in context:

I never said that everyone should follow the same choice, in a perfect world, I'd say they would, of their own accord, but this world isn't perfect, and as I'm not going to be in power, it doesn't really matter what I would do. This discussion isn't about me.

Quote

Dear Falkoner:
Not everyone believes in marriage, nor does a marriage concretely protect against any of the potential dangers of premarital sex. You can still get pregnant, get divorced, or contract an STD from an unfaithful or dishonest spouse.

Once again, in a perfect world, you wouldn't have to worry about people being unfaithful, not to mention, whether or not there is still a chance that things could still go wrong, it's less of a chance than it is otherwise.

Quote

Fact is, there are hundreds of active religions (compounded with numerous differing interpretations), and thousands of defunct religions (Aztecs, Greek myth, etc), but none have any more proof over any other religion that they are the correct choice.

I am not simply spewing my religion on you, many logical points have been made regarding why premarital sex is bad, and yet you continue to focus on the fact that I have a religion, even though it doesn't affect how my view would be, premarital sex is logically bad.

Quote from devilek

crap crap crap crap...

That's not hypocritical, that picture does not apply, I simply repeated his own words.

[quote=name:A_of-s_t]Anyone in power would enforce their beliefs on people.[/quote] False.

Quote from A_of-s_t

Anyone in power would enforce their beliefs on people.

False.

[quote=name:Falkoner] How does experience in sex help a marriage? Do you think your spouse is going to be happy to hear you've had sex with someone else? If anything I'd say it hurts it. [/quote] I don't believe pre-marital sex is bad. What if you marry someone who's a bad lay? Prior sexual experience is, in my opinion, a plus. The girls that I've slept with who have had more sexual experience are always more fun than the ones who haven't. I think a good number of the religious stances on sex trace their origins to the simple feeling of being sexually threatened by more promiscuous people. When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men. It's quite natural. But it's life. Nowadays, I have no problems with girls that have had sex before. As I said, I think that the stances of many religions on sex stems from primitive humans feeling sexually threatened and wishing to control the other gender just to make themselves feel better.

Quote from Falkoner

How does experience in sex help a marriage? Do you think your spouse is going to be happy to hear you've had sex with someone else? If anything I'd say it hurts it.

I don't believe pre-marital sex is bad. What if you marry someone who's a bad lay? Prior sexual experience is, in my opinion, a plus. The girls that I've slept with who have had more sexual experience are always more fun than the ones who haven't. I think a good number of the religious stances on sex trace their origins to the simple feeling of being sexually threatened by more promiscuous people. When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men. It's quite natural. But it's life. Nowadays, I have no problems with girls that have had sex before.

As I said, I think that the stances of many religions on sex stems from primitive humans feeling sexually threatened and wishing to control the other gender just to make themselves feel better.

[quote]I don't believe pre-marital sex is bad. What if you marry someone who's a bad lay? Prior sexual experience is, in my opinion, a plus. The girls that I've slept with who have had more sexual experience are always more fun than the ones who haven't. I think a good number of the religious stances on sex trace their origins to the simple feeling of being sexually threatened by more promiscuous people. When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men. It's quite natural. But it's life. Nowadays, I have no problems with girls that have had sex before.[/quote] And you've also been divorced, I don't mean to target you personally, but that definitely changes your view on this subject.

Quote

I don't believe pre-marital sex is bad. What if you marry someone who's a bad lay? Prior sexual experience is, in my opinion, a plus. The girls that I've slept with who have had more sexual experience are always more fun than the ones who haven't. I think a good number of the religious stances on sex trace their origins to the simple feeling of being sexually threatened by more promiscuous people. When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men. It's quite natural. But it's life. Nowadays, I have no problems with girls that have had sex before.

And you've also been divorced, I don't mean to target you personally, but that definitely changes your view on this subject.

Well, for the record, I was never married. But regardless, does my experience make my perspective invalid?

Well, for the record, I was never married. But regardless, does my experience make my perspective invalid?

[quote=name:Falkoner][quote]I don't believe pre-marital sex is bad. What if you marry someone who's a bad lay? Prior sexual experience is, in my opinion, a plus. The girls that I've slept with who have had more sexual experience are always more fun than the ones who haven't. I think a good number of the religious stances on sex trace their origins to the simple feeling of being sexually threatened by more promiscuous people. When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men. It's quite natural. But it's life. Nowadays, I have no problems with girls that have had sex before.[/quote] And you've also been divorced, I don't mean to target you personally, but that definitely changes your view on this subject.[/quote] His experience might only bias slightly more towards a view he had before, but the same goes for you. You still have no grounds for why your view is "right" other than your [i]belief [/i]that divorce is wrong blah blah blah. [quote=name:Doodan]But regardless, does my experience make my perspective invalid?[/quote] Exactly. Falkoner's argument is just "I'm right and you're wrong just because I believe God said so."

Quote from Falkoner

Quote

I don't believe pre-marital sex is bad. What if you marry someone who's a bad lay? Prior sexual experience is, in my opinion, a plus. The girls that I've slept with who have had more sexual experience are always more fun than the ones who haven't. I think a good number of the religious stances on sex trace their origins to the simple feeling of being sexually threatened by more promiscuous people. When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men. It's quite natural. But it's life. Nowadays, I have no problems with girls that have had sex before.

And you've also been divorced, I don't mean to target you personally, but that definitely changes your view on this subject.

His experience might only bias slightly more towards a view he had before, but the same goes for you. You still have no grounds for why your view is "right" other than your belief that divorce is wrong blah blah blah.

Quote from [Doodan]:]

But regardless, does my experience make my perspective invalid?

Exactly.

Falkoner's argument is just "I'm right and you're wrong just because I believe God said so."

[quote]When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men.[/quote] He has been slowly influenced to believe otherwise, so his original views were basically the same as mine.

Quote

When I was younger, I had trouble with the idea of girls that I cared about sleeping with other men.

He has been slowly influenced to believe otherwise, so his original views were basically the same as mine.

[quote=name:Falkoner] And you've also been divorced[/quote] When and where the hell did you ever got that piece of information from Doodan?

Quote from Falkoner

And you've also been divorced

When and where the hell did you ever got that piece of information from Doodan?