(Guardian) Jill Filipovic—The moral case for sex before marriage

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Purity peddlers construct a false universe where there are pure virgins who wait until marriage, and then there are slutty whores who are going home with different men every night of the week. The truth is that most adults will have a great many important relationships in their lives – some of those relationships will be romantic, and some of those will be sexual. That's a good thing: our relationships with other people, sexual or not, are how we grow, evolve and learn about ourselves. They're how we figure out what love is, what we like physically and emotionally, and how to negotiate our own needs with someone else's. Despite the claims of the wait-till-marriage camp, waiting to have sex won't protect you from heartache, frustration or love lost. But a variety of fulfilling relationships, sexual and not, will make you a more well-rounded, compassionate and self-assured person.

My point isn't that everyone should have sex before marriage – people should determine for themselves when they are ready to have sex. For the vast majority of people, that's going to be before they're married. Making that choice isn't a moral failing. On the contrary, it's often a great, healthy, overwhelmingly positive choice. Whenever you choose to have sex, the cultural message that waiting until marriage is the best choice is simply wrong. And it's wrong for almost everyone.

Read it all.

Filed under: * Culture-WatchHealth & MedicineMarriage & FamilyMenPsychologySexualityWomenYoung Adults* TheologyEthics / Moral Theology

8 Comments
Posted September 26, 2012 at 5:30 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. Br. Michael wrote:

As one of their brilliant philosophers said, “I want to *** who I want, when I want, where I want.”  Randy maies have never had it so good.  This is what a society in decay looks like.

September 26, 7:02 am | [comment link]
2. m+ wrote:

I disagreed with so much of the article I decided to try and find an acceptable statement.  It is:

We’re obsessed with sex on television, in music and in advertisements, but we somehow lack the ability to talk about sex as a positive, moral, pleasure-affirming choice that, like any other adult decision, comes with a set of responsibilities.

And even in this quote, “pleasure-affirming” is problematic.  Sex and marriage are about so much more than individual pleasure.  This article (and the follow up comments) does successfully illustrate the gap between the modern secular view and the traditional Christian.

September 26, 9:43 am | [comment link]
3. Milton wrote:

Fork, Britain, some assembly required, but it certainly is done.

September 26, 12:13 pm | [comment link]
4. Jim the Puritan wrote:

Just another illustration of how Christians are to be in the world, but not of the world.

September 26, 4:17 pm | [comment link]
5. Teatime2 wrote:

Indeed, #4. But until Christian males (who aren’t consecrated celibates) are expected to embrace the rules and standard as well as females then it’s rather difficult to take seriously. Shoot, men on this very blog said the fault is on women for not being vigilant ‘‘gatekeepers.’’ As long as the double standard remains, we Christians appear as deluded hypocrites.

September 26, 11:03 pm | [comment link]
6. Jim the Puritan wrote:

#4—I don’t disagree with you.  But my feeling is at this point in the 21st century, neither women nor men (Christian or not) are embracing chastity.  See, e.g., http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/relationship/features/28337-the-secret-sexual-revolution .

My feeling is it’s due to several things:  (1) Societal pressure to delay marriage; (2) the present “divorce” culture which has resulted in marriage being viewed as more of a negative than a positive for a lot of folks; (3) the church’s overwhelming failure during the past 50 years or more to support Christian marriage and Christian courtship.

September 27, 1:16 am | [comment link]
7. High_Church wrote:

The issue here in not only the abandonment of a natural moral law, but the absolute stupidity of what was said in the article and the more grievous fact that many if not most people would take it seriously.  The author of this article is simply uneducated. By that I don’t mean in a moral sense, but in logic and rhetoric.  She doesn’t know how to use evidence to make a case.  She makes a lot of wild assertions and provides some evidence, but she never connects the two.  According to Sir David Hume she has an “Is-Ought Problem”.  She says was “is”, but makes no logical journey to what therefore “ought” to be.  Moreover, and this is really just sad, many of her assertions are denied by modern psychology.  People are not more “well-rounded, compassionate, and self-assured.”  Study after study shows that people with multiple sexual partners, especially women, tend to be more depressed, narcissistic, and have a poor self-image.  See Jean Twenge’s book The Narcissism Epidemic.  What this woman is peddling is rubbish, both from a secular and Christian point of view and most depressing thing is that based on the comments I read on the Guardian website, a lot of people bought the dung she was selling.  Good night Western Civilization.

September 27, 2:13 pm | [comment link]
8. Jim the Puritan wrote:

#7—I think the Scriptures describe it as “itchy ears” hearing what they want to hear.

September 27, 2:23 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): (USA Today) Military leaders battle junk food

Previous entry (below): (Forbes) Top Medicare Drug Plans Jacking Up Premiums By Double-Digits

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)