Premaritial Sex

[Mookage]

Being a child in a divorced home I know that most adults practice premaritial sex. Both my parents are in relationships in which they have ingaged in sexual activity while neither of them have remarried. Therefore, having been brought up around premaritial sex I have lost the influence that the Catholic faith gave me which is rejecting premaritial sex.

[Chrissi]

Originally Posted by chardish

This is an odd way of phrasing it - I, as well as others who abstain, do not want to have sex before we are married. The urge and the compulsion is still there, yes, but abstinence is about putting what you know is best for you in the long term above the passions and desires of the moment. It is not about denying what you want - it is about putting what you want above your urges.

Don't see how that's relevant to what I said.

Originally Posted by chardish

Wrong! Utterly, utterly wrong. I do care about those things, but I don't see either meaningless sex, sex when you're not ready, or sex with people other than the one you love as being plausible means to those ends.

Premarital sex does not mean it's meaningless, not-ready, or non-loving. Maybe you interpret it this way. I don't. I love my boyfriend. Sex with him is very meaningful to me. So we're not married. So what.

Originally Posted by chardish

I don't think there's such a thing as "sexual compatibility"

Sorry, but I just have to... HAHAHAHAHA... okay... I guess it's not your fault. You're severely naive.

Originally Posted by chardish

unless you're interested in nonmonogamous, short term relationships

Everyone has a sexual preference. Not just people in non-monogamous short-term relationships.

Originally Posted by chardish

, in which case abstinence probably isn't the best choice for you (if you read my post you would have seen where I said that.) The elements of a good sexual relationship are communication, trust, physical attraction, compatible personalities, etc...these attributes are far more important than the geometry of the act.

I agree entirely, however, you are missing my point. It wasn't just the geometry. Say your partner turns out to looooooove BDSM and can only get his/her rocks off if you're pinching his/her nipples; however, you find the act repulsive and get turned off. This is just one of many examples of sexual incompatibility.

Originally Posted by chardish

You develop a good sex life with someone else based on a relationship that you already know contains those elements. Not the other way around.

Agree.

Originally Posted by chardish

And people who abstain are quite particular. If you're only going to have sex with one person for your entire life, you're going to make damn sure that you're compatible with them.

So if you are going to be with them for the rest of your life, why don't you make sure you enjoy sex with them first? Love, affection, respect, experience, and attraction don't guarantee you an enjoyable sexual experience.

Originally Posted by chardish

Bolded for emphasis, since premarital sex isn't a way to avoid this either! Yes, the more experience you have, the better you are at sex. But what's wrong with developing that experience, and learning the ins and outs of sexuality (no pun intended) with the person you plan on spending the rest of your life with? You make it seem like premarital sex is somehow a remedy for sexual inexperience, and it's not.

No qualms here, good point made. Learning with your partner is a good idea.

Originally Posted by chardish

I don't know whether to ascribe that comment to ignorance or cynicism, but suggestion that women who abstain will never achieve orgasm is not only factually incorrect, but insulting to countless men who abstained until marriage. If you cannot put the other person's sexual wants before yours, then you are not in a loving relationship.

It's not about "putting your patner's sexual needs before yours". You may be perfectly willing and excited about pleasing your partner; however, that doesn't mean you're going to be successful. First of all, your partner NEEDS to know how to please themselves before you can EVER BEGIN to know how to please them. Otherwise it's just a shot in the dark.

My real point here was that often, people who abstain come into their relationship expecting great sex right off the bat due to their strong, dedicated love for one another, but in actual fact, love and sex aren't dependent on one another. Sure, they may best be enjoyed together, but love doesn't guarantee great sex. That's the point I'm trying to make. Another point I'm trying to make is that, statistically, women who don't masturbate tend to be chronic anorgasmics. As in, they will never have an orgasm in their lives. It's not due to the unwillingness of the partner; it's due to a lack of personal experience and lack of knowledge about her own body. If she can't please herself, you probably can't please her. This is especially true of females, which is why I'm saying "her". Men tend to be a lot easier to please, physically, sexually. Non-masturbating women tend to be VERY, VERY difficult. From what I've heard (which is a lot), women who can't, haven't, or aren't willing to have an orgasm masturbating are highly unlikely to have an orgasm from their partner. Ever.

Originally Posted by chardish

No. You just know more about your perspective.

No, I was actually referring to the fact that I study sex, marriage, and families in university. It is my minor. As an academic in the field, I know more than most people about these issues. I hope to be a counsellor one day. Possibly a sexual counsellor.

Originally Posted by chardish

Since you attempted to find flaws in the concept of abstinence, if your points were valid, why wouldn't they be important to an abstainer?

Not seeing your point,

Originally Posted by chardish

What's wrong with that? In fact, doesn't that sound like the best thing ever? To enjoy sex, no matter what?

It's more along the lines of not knowing what you're missing.

Originally Posted by chardish

The part I bolded is absolutely true. Masturbation causes you to associate the sexual response with something that is inward, self-centered, and focused on individual pleasure, rather than something that is shared, altruistic, and focused on the other. It's like the idea of "set and setting" - I'd rather not make the set and setting for orgasm something that I do alone and bring upon myself.

I'll have to find more information about this; it sounds interesting.

Originally Posted by chardish

And for the record: "pregnancy/STDs" is the worst argument against abstinence there could possibly be.

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. I don't know when I tried to argue this. As I explained, masturbating but not having sex is still abstinence. It is, by its very definition, the lack of SEX, not masturbation, that makes someone abstinent.

[vifs]

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Sperm don't "pass through" condoms. I don't know what they're teaching kids these days, but let me have a crack at them.

Ok like 2 years ago in 9th grade in health we had the "Family Life" Unit
basicly all we learned was where everything was and this dude came in to tell us to pracitice absanice(sp?)
we didn't go over anything else but that pretty much, the school system wasn't even aloud to show us what a comdom looked like
I don't know how it is in other schools but here you don't learn jack

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Don't see how that's relevant to what I said.

You said "For some, the best option is to have sex whenever you want." Abstinent people have sex whenever we want, too. We just don't have it before we're married.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Premarital sex does not mean it's meaningless, not-ready, or non-loving. Maybe you interpret it this way. I don't. I love my boyfriend. Sex with him is very meaningful to me. So we're not married. So what.

Point conceded. But that still doesn't mean that premarital sex is necessary to achieve a high level of sexual satisfaction.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Sorry, but I just have to... HAHAHAHAHA... okay... I guess it's not your fault. You're severely naive.

Do my other statements and observations suggest I'm naive? I know a fairly significant amount about human sexuality. What I meant to indicate was that there is no trait of "sexual compatibility" in a relationship that is independent of the things I mentioned: trust, attraction, communication, etc. The things that Jewpin mentioned earlier mostly fall under one of those categories. For example, if person X is a prude and person Y is open to sexual experimentation, then chances are they don't have compatible personalities. Furthermore, a couple typically talks about all major issues (sexuality included) before a marriage. It's not like you can only discuss thoughts, feelings, and opinions about sex after you've already had sex.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Everyone has a sexual preference. Not just people in non-monogamous short-term relationships.

Don't get what you're saying here.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

I agree entirely, however, you are missing my point. It wasn't just the geometry. Say your partner turns out to looooooove BDSM and can only get his/her rocks off if you're pinching his/her nipples; however, you find the act repulsive and get turned off. This is just one of many examples of sexual incompatibility.

Again, this seems like a personality/communication issue. I don't know enough about fetishes to really make an appropriate counterpoint, but it's not like couples refrain from all physical activity before marriage. Different abstaining couples have different personal limits, of course, but you still learn something about the person you're with through any physical acts of affection.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

So if you are going to be with them for the rest of your life, why don't you make sure you enjoy sex with them first? Love, affection, respect, experience, and attraction don't guarantee you an enjoyable sexual experience.

Perhaps not at first, but it guarantees you that you've found someone you're willing to take the journey to a satisfying sexual experience with.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

It's not about "putting your patner's sexual needs before yours". You may be perfectly willing and excited about pleasing your partner; however, that doesn't mean you're going to be successful. First of all, your partner NEEDS to know how to please themselves before you can EVER BEGIN to know how to please them. Otherwise it's just a shot in the dark.

Simply untrue. Why must the goal of learning what pleases you be achieved individually? I don't argue that abstinent people have sex lives that are free of difficulty. That's what I mean about putting what the other person needs first - your objective is to find out what pleases them.

An analogy might be cooking. Say you know how to cook a wide variety of dishes, but your wife has never heard of any of them and is unfamiliar with the ingredients in them. Are you going to say "Well, that sucks, I guess you better keep cooking for yourself until you learn some of the dishes I make, and then I'll cook for you," or are you going to say "Why don't I try cooking various things and you can see what you like and what you don't, and we can communicate with one another and I can learn how to cook things just the way you like them?"

There is a large amount of discovery required to achieve a satisfying sex life - personal discovery, and discovery about the other person. I've never contested this. I just don't understand why undertaking that discovery with the other person is sub-optimal.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

My real point here was that often, people who abstain come into their relationship expecting great sex right off the bat due to their strong, dedicated love for one another

I don't know anyone who is abstinent and thinks this. I don't doubt that there are people who think this, but I don't know them. And I don't understand how the misconceptions of others about abstinence harm the practice of abstinence at all.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

love doesn't guarantee great sex. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Love guarantees great sex eventually.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Another point I'm trying to make is that, statistically, women who don't masturbate tend to be chronic anorgasmics. As in, they will never have an orgasm in their lives. It's not due to the unwillingness of the partner; it's due to a lack of personal experience and lack of knowledge about her own body. If she can't please herself, you probably can't please her.

See a couple points above. This is why communication is important. There's nothing specially beneficial about masturbation that is not true about regular intercourse. Besides, if the woman already knows what pleases her, but can't communicate it to her husband, how is that different than the woman not knowing what pleases her at all? A satisfying sex life is dependent upon communication (among other things, of course, but communication is very very very important.) You don't just magically have better sex because you masturbate.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

From what I've heard (which is a lot), women who can't, haven't, or aren't willing to have an orgasm masturbating are highly unlikely to have an orgasm from their partner. Ever.

Abstinent, non-masturbating women? Let's make sure we're covering all bases of the argument here.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

It's more along the lines of not knowing what you're missing.

If you're having a very satisfying sex life with the love of your life, who cares if it's not the most satisfying sex life you could possibly be having? And if you're with the love of your life, the very satisfying sex life is like the whipped cream & cherry on the sundae. It's not the heart of the relationship, and it's not the reason you stay with the other person. It helps you stay happy, but it's not the reason you are happy.

Originally Posted by Chrissi

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. I don't know when I tried to argue this. As I explained, masturbating but not having sex is still abstinence. It is, by its very definition, the lack of SEX, not masturbation, that makes someone abstinent.

My bad. That wasn't against you, that was against other people trying to defend premarital sex by playing the pregnancy/STD card.

[vifs]

i guess this helps prove that we never learn anything in school, but why is it so hard for a girl to have a orgaism? doesn't seem that complicated to me

[Chrissi]

Originally Posted by chardish

Love guarantees great sex eventually.

I'm tired of writing pages and pages on this topic, so I am just going to go after the most wrong thing you said.

No.

Love does not guarantee great sex. As I said earlier, certain people get off in certain ways. Some people are easier than others. Some people require being administered a coffee-flavoured enema, a few pairs of handcuffs and 10 metres of rope to attain orgasm. Other people can't deal with that and get grossed out, frightened, and/or turned off. These differences don't stop people from falling in love; however, they guarantee a lack of sexual compatibility.

Originally Posted by vifs

i guess this helps prove that we never learn anything in school, but why is it so hard for a girl to have a orgaism? doesn't seem that complicated to me

It's not hard for every girl, but it's hard for many because of a woman's physiology. The clitoris is much smaller than the penis and we only see the tip of it. For one thing, the clitoris does not get stimulated during vaginal-penile intercourse. Or not very much. Some women can orgasm from this sort of stimulation, however, they are the minority. It's difficult to meet a man who can't orgasm from intercourse. Sex and the penis are designed to work well together; the optimal mechanism to stroke the penis is achieved through intercourse. However, the optimal mechanism to rub the clitoris is not even CLOSE to the way intercourse works.

The clitoris is kind of just something that's left over from not forming a penis in the womb. As such, there isn't a specific sexual mechanism that is intended to naturally stimulate it.

In much less words, the explanation is, for most women, sex doesn't cause orgasms.

However, this isn't the whole story. Many women are quite particular about the way their clitoris is stimulated. If you do it wrong, it hurts. It usually takes a woman a while to learn how to masturbate herself. As well, there are women, like me, who just require a lot of stimulation for a long time to achieve orgasm. I need somewhere between 10 minutes and an hour of stimulation to achieve orgasm. I have never had an orgasm through just plain oral sex or just plain intercourse. I also can't seem to orgasm from a partner's administrations, no matter how devoted or loving he or she is. I'm just the only one who can actually get my rocks off. My partner can help, quite a bit, with other stimulation, but when it comes to my clitoris, no one else has ever been successful, even when very devoted to the cause.

There. Very long personal explanation.

[angelofthedead]

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Another point I'm trying to make is that, statistically, women who don't masturbate tend to be chronic anorgasmics. As in, they will never have an orgasm in their lives. It's not due to the unwillingness of the partner; it's due to a lack of personal experience and lack of knowledge about her own body. If she can't please herself, you probably can't please her. This is especially true of females, which is why I'm saying "her". Men tend to be a lot easier to please, physically, sexually. Non-masturbating women tend to be VERY, VERY difficult. From what I've heard (which is a lot), women who can't, haven't, or aren't willing to have an orgasm masturbating are highly unlikely to have an orgasm from their partner. Ever.

Very good point.
I may be the exception to it.
I have NEVER masturbated. Yet, I can climax just fine during intercourse. Multiple times even. I've only been with one person my whole life, and I care deeply about them, and I really think that may be a reason why we both find sex so enjoyable.

[Chrissi]

Originally Posted by angelofthedead

Very good point.
I may be the exception to it.
I have NEVER masturbated. Yet, I can climax just fine during intercourse. Multiple times even. I've only been with one person my whole life, and I care deeply about them, and I really think that may be a reason why we both find sex so enjoyable.

You climax from intercourse? You're lucky in the first place. That you do it without having masturbated is highly unusual. It's good though.

[angelofthedead]

Yes. I do. Multiple times. It may be unusual, but it works in my favor.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Love does not guarantee great sex. As I said earlier, certain people get off in certain ways. Some people are easier than others. Some people require being administered a coffee-flavoured enema, a few pairs of handcuffs and 10 metres of rope to attain orgasm. Other people can't deal with that and get grossed out, frightened, and/or turned off. These differences don't stop people from falling in love; however, they guarantee a lack of sexual compatibility.

So, you're saying that two people who love each other and are compatible, have good communication, trust, and confidence, and are comfortable enough with each other to get married, cannot agree on matters of sexuality enough to have an appreciable sex life?

I don't buy it.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Grandiagod]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

So, you're saying that two people who love each other and are compatible, have good communication, trust, and confidence, and are comfortable enough with each other to get married, cannot agree on matters of sexuality enough to have an appreciable sex life?

I don't buy it.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

You don't have to buy it, I'll give it to you for free.

If you'd step back and take a look at real life for a second you'd notice the countless numbers of people getting divorces because they couldn't meet their spouse's needs.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Grandiagod

You don't have to buy it, I'll give it to you for free.

If you'd step back and take a look at real life for a second you'd notice the countless numbers of people getting divorces because they couldn't meet their spouse's needs.

And those divorces are necessarily due to a couple who were abstinent and couldn't come to a sexual agreement?

Come, now, and give me some real stats if you want to argue that.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[KH Luxord]

I'm only 13, but I still get to place my opinion on this. So here it is.

Most teenagers or unmarried couples have sex probably because they are depressed with their own lives, so they want to bring in some enjoyment, perhaps?

It shows that they strongly love each other (depending on if it was forced or not, or real feelings for each other or not), yet, it might be against some religion, so it might be breaking religion to show their love to each other, even though, it's not like it will create a big problem (ex: going to hell), it is just not right to some branches of Christianity, so it might create a problem to the family and their religious life, but I personally don't think that it is much of a problem (I'm Catholic, so I don't care about PmS).

Maybe it is a gift to each other for a birthday, Valentine's Day, a dating anniversary, or to celebrate engagement (before the wedding), perhaps? Those are some of the major times that PmS might happen.

Of course, when married, it can still be on your/your spouse's birthday, Valentine's Day, or your anniversary. But, I guess it kind of depends on age.

If your young and have PmS, then, chances are that you are depressed or just can't control your f***ing hormones. No offense to those that had it already.

Maybe, you're an adult (females), and you're Biological Clock is ticking its way to its end, and you want to have a child, or maybe you just want to have children before it ticks, then I guess that's a time when it really might be necessary to you or to your parent's when they told you when you were a child, "I want grandchildren!" So you want to have their grandchildren before your BioClock is up. That is when PmS is ok, I guess...

But, if you are a teenager, and you have PmS, if your parents told you not to have children as a teenager, wear a condom!!! Don't be an idiot!!! Your parents strictly told you not to have children at a young age, so make sure you don't have children at a young age, or your parents/and your girlfriend's parents (males) will beat you over the head for having a child/making your girlfriend have a child, because they didn't plan to be grandparents yet, and they didn't want them to fall out of their studies. So, have protected sex if you are a teenager.

So, I don't care if you have PmS or not. But follow the orders of your parents. They don't want to see your partner pregnant being underage, and having to deal with abortion whether they have enough money or not, because it counts as killing, which is a major sin. And if the baby does come, the mother and father fall out of school because they have to take care of little Johnny, or the parents have to give the baby to an orphanage, or, the worst of all, abandon or kill the child.

So, teenagers, wear a condom during your PmS. And adults, do whatever the f*** you want, because I don't care. You're an adult. You are old enough to make your own decisions. Your parents don't control your f***ing life anymore, so you can do whatever the f*** you want. If that includes having PmS, do whatever the f*** you want, because no one f***ing cares if you do or not.

But after you get married, you might be somewhere in your late 20s or your 30s already because you planned on going to school to get your PhD or your Masters, your Teaching Credential, or whatever, and then what ended up happening, you got married a bit later than most people. So you know what happened, 30% of your chances of having a child went down the f***ing drain.

But, use that thought fellow teenagers, and think before you have PmS. Not to be a bit controlling with you guys, but just giving some critical advice.

PS - I did not yet, because I am 13, and I go to a smart school (Oxford Academy, in Cypress, CA), so I have the sense to not have PmS yet. Not like a 13-year-old would have PmS anyway, so I don't even know why I am mentioning this.

PSS - Sorry for any typos that are in there, if there are any in there, because Firefox points out your spelling mistakes when made.

[KH Luxord]

Originally Posted by Mookage

Being a child in a divorced home I know that most adults practice premarital sex. Both my parents are in relationships in which they have engaged in sexual activity while neither of them have remarried. Therefore, having been brought up around premarital sex I have lost the influence that the Catholic faith gave me which is rejecting premarital sex.

Well, I am Catholic, and I learned that PmS is not that much of a big deal. The big deal is adultery!!!

The definition of adultery discusses the following:

1) Being married/Dating and having sex with another's spouse, which is breaking Commandment 6 and Commandment 9 (Adultery and Coveting Neighbor's Spouse) (Cheating Externally (which includes two or more people)).

2) Being married/Dating and having sex with another person other than your spouse that is not married (loose man/woman) (breaking Commandment 6 and 9) (Cheating Externally).

3) Being married/Dating and looking at/watching/thinking about porn/or some hot people that you saw someday, and masturbating. The act of self-orgasm is also known as adultery, so if you are married or dating, DON'T DO IT!!! (breaking Commandment 6) (Cheating Internally (which includes only the self and thoughts)


So I hoped I helped you in showing you the true meaning in that Commandment. Because as Catholics, I guess we should all know the true meaning of the Commandments that God had sent down to Moses to spread His message to the people through him (Moses).

Originally Posted by Chrissi

Sperm can never "pass through" a condom unless the condom has been degraded somehow or there is a hole in it. An ideal condom, like one kept in a drawer at a reasonable temperature that hasn't had holes poked in it and hasn't expired, used properly, has a MUCH lower risk rate than 17%. Less than 1%.

The "83%" that you hear is 1) a made up statistic, and 2) it's supposed to be the success rate of condoms used altogether. That means used by the average person. That means, used wrong.

Sperm don't "pass through" condoms. I don't know what they're teaching kids these days, but let me have a crack at them.

Finally, someone got something right about sex. I don't know who thought of sperm being able to pass through condoms, because they can't!!!! They can only pass through if the condom is not lubricated, if it has been destroyed by the heat because it was left in a car, or in the f***ing microwave or at room temperature because condoms are supposed to be colder than normal room temperature. Also, if there are holes on it, then I don't know what kind of idiot would wear it. Unlike most schools, Oxford Academy (in Cypress, CA, you have to test to get in, but it is a public school, it's a College Preparatory Secondary School (meaning that you get prepared for college, but the school is a school requiring testing) actually teaches correctly by teaching us somewhat graphic videos. I'm going in to 8th grade, but during my 7th grade year there (feels like yesterday, though it was just a couple of months ago) we watched videos on sex, birth, condoms, and STDs.

Originally Posted by vifs

Ok like 2 years ago in 9th grade in health we had the "Family Life" Unit
basically all we learned was where everything was and this dude came in to tell us to practice absanice(sp?)
we didn't go over anything else but that pretty much, the school system wasn't even aloud to show us what a condom looked like
I don't know how it is in other schools but here you don't learn jack

You had a bunch of typos that I just fixed, but it is spelled abstainance (meaning to not have sex before marriage). And I think he might of said NOT to practice abstainance. I just finished 7th grade on June 19, 2007, and am going into 8th grade. And at my school (listed above), we kind of watched videos on what ejaculation looks like inside the vagina (so we saw intercourse from the INSIDE), we saw the birth of a live child, we saw what a condom looked like when taken out, but we saw how it was put on and what it looked like going on through pictures rather than live. But, we were all 12 or 13, so it was kind of understandable. But at Oxford Academy, even though we are in Jr. High, we still were treated like we were in High School. So, anyway, we saw what it looked like putting it on in the drawing. And I'd rather not discuss it, but it was not really pretty watching it. And then we watched videos on STDs, and that was it for the Reproduction unit. So, I'm sorry that you guys didn't get to learn as much as a Freshmen as my classmates and I did as 7th graders.



*EDIT* - This double post was made to mention different things. The first post was relating to the topic. And the second post was related to the post of another person in this thread. So, just to clarify that, there you go.

[toxicninja]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

So, you're saying that two people who love each other and are compatible, have good communication, trust, and confidence, and are comfortable enough with each other to get married, cannot agree on matters of sexuality enough to have an appreciable sex life?

I don't buy it.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

I think people who love each other have affairs because of sexual dissatisfaction.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by KH Luxord

Well, I am Catholic, and I learned that PmS is not that much of a big deal. The big deal is adultery!!!

WHAT?!

They're BOTH big deals! Who taught you otherwise?

Also, your post is all well and good, but we're really trying to keep religion out of the discussion so that all parties involved can address points. It's a whole 'nother issue when you bring religion into it.

Originally Posted by toxicninja

I think people who love each other have affairs because of sexual dissatisfaction.

If they're cheating, they're lacking some SERIOUS components necessary to a marriage before unavoidable sexual dissatisfaction.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[toxicninja]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

If they're cheating, they're lacking some SERIOUS components necessary to a marriage before unavoidable sexual dissatisfaction.

--Guido

wouldn't they just leave the person instead of cheating if that was the case? I know loveless marridges exist but my point was people who love each other cheat out of sexual desire.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by toxicninja

wouldn't they just leave the person instead of cheating if that was the case? I know loveless marridges exist but my point was people who love each other cheat out of sexual desire.

And my point was that we aren't considering marriages that don't have necessary components of a successful marriage.

That is, a good marriage is going to have the communication, trust, and everything else in place such that a sexual incompatibility will be talked about and fixed, rather than having one spouse just up and find another partner.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[KH Luxord]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

WHAT?!

They're BOTH big deals! Who taught you otherwise?

Also, your post is all well and good, but we're really trying to keep religion out of the discussion so that all parties involved can address points. It's a whole 'nother issue when you bring religion into it.



--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Depends on who you ask. You see, PmS is a big deal, but I mean, it all depends on the reason. Read my first post.

And thanks. I was just clarifying, to make sure that I don't get banned for a double post on accident...

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by KH Luxord

Depends on who you ask. You see, PmS is a big deal, but I mean, it all depends on the reason. Read my first post.

You mentioned the Catholic Church in your post. To the Church, premarital sex is very much a big deal. That's all I was saying.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com