Kids and Sex: How old is old enough?

[PrezLeefun]

Kids and Sex: How old is old enough?

So how old is old enough? Are some adolesents mature enough to handle sexual relationships? Can they keep a lasting mature realtionship with another adolesent? Is it innapropriate for a 18 year high school student to date a single teacher? Does age really have a strong effect on how a relationship will play out?

Ok spill...how do you feel about it.

[Wolfcounsel]

I believe I've already spilled it.

At the age of 18, when both kids are capable of supporting themselves, taking care of a roof over their heads, paying their own bills, wiping ther own butts, et cetera, and they are married to each other, then that is a good time. Younger adolescents need not apply for the above.

[Rink]

Indeed I second what the WolfieCounselor says on this subject. :thumb:

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

No sex until marriage.

[DeclinetoState]

So if they can get married at 16, 15, or even younger (as they can in some places), that's not a problem?

[PrezLeefun]

good question DC. I like to hear an answer to that as well.

[SmellyFed]

I'm sort of torn on this issue. For thousands of years, kids have been marrying at 14-16. Now kids dont stop being kids until they are 21-22. I'm not sure this is an altogether healthy change.

I think we, as a society, have our kids too late in life and we coddle them far too long. Not to mention, kids are usually lucky to have a single sibling whereas 100 years ago, odds were that they would have 8-10 siblings. Kids grew up learning to take care of their little brothers and sisters - they learned to parent before they became parents.

Now our 21-22 year old adolescents are having children without the first clue of how to parent them.

[jag]

So if they can get married at 16, 15, or even younger (as they can in some places), that's not a problem?
Silly question. That marriage is problem in itself, the sex becomes a non-issue

Other than that I agree with WolfieCounsel.

[Wyatt_Junker]

No sex until marriage.

Ditto.

[DeclinetoState]

Silly question. That marriage is problem in itself, the sex becomes a non-issue

Other than that I agree with WolfieCounsel.

Huh? :confused:

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

So if they can get married at 16, 15, or even younger (as they can in some places), that's not a problem?

Like I would ever support that.

No marriage until mentally, financially, and physically ready. No sex until marriage.

[Wolfcounsel]

"So if they can get married at 16, 15, or even younger (as they can in some places), that's not a problem?" --DeclinetoState


Of course it's a problem. What dumbasses passed those stupid laws allowing snot-noses to get married?<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Apollo5600]

"So if they can get married at 16, 15, or even younger (as they can in some places), that's not a problem?" --DeclinetoState

Pakistan?

[For_My_Canada]

Well, can't exactly do anything about them if they have, now can you?
If teens such as myself want to have sex, fine by me. They make their choices, but it is good to show them what can happen with teens and sex.
As for the "won't have sex til I'm married" people, if it is for health reasons, cool by me, but for those who base it on religious ideas, well, your choice again, lol.

[DesertFox]

Kids in earlier times married early because people died early. IIRC what Paul Johnson said in his superb book Birth of the Modern, until the Industrial Revolution 3-4ths of all kids died in their first year of life. Life expectancy after the age of five was on the order of 40 years -- for men. Most women died in childbirth, victims of the ignorance of germs and the importance of hygiene. With survival itself such a monumental struggle, it made perfect sense to marry young.

It doesn't today. We know things about human beings now that no one knew in earlier times, things about the psychology of the human animal. I don't mean what psychologists tell us; I mean what people our age can see with our own eyes and figure out ourselves from experience of living. My observation is that women don't have the confidence they should have to be independent operators until their early 20's at the earliest. Men have the confidence early but not the knowledge and experience necessary to earn a decent living to support a family, and that happens in the late 20's for most men.

I didn't used to oppose sex before marriage. Knowing what I now know, my views have changed. What I do oppose is bringing kids into the world before you or your partner know enough about yourselves to be able to make a decent life with each other, which is the basis of a decent family. Since making babies and nurturing mutual commitment is what nature intended sex for, that logically means no sex before marriage.

In this day and age you never of hear the role of sex in cementing commitment between a man and a woman. But that's what marriage used to do -- he didn't get any until he took her as his wife, and she saved herself for him. Being the source of sexual pleasure for each other cemented the bond -- hence "the tie that binds."

By cheapening sex thru making its ready availability socially acceptable, we have cheapened marriage; in cheapening marriage we have cheapened the family; and in cheapening the family we have cheapened life itself, since marriage was the guarantee of a stable family that literally launched the future and stabilized civilization by keeping an eye to that future.

All this, by pure logic and without any invocation of God, shows that we need strongly to encourage pre-marital virginity and post-marital fidelity. Jesus understood these verities when He spoke of the wrongness of "lusting in your heart." Marriage requires strong commitment, and commitment to anything means simply not allowing yourself to think outside the lines required for that thing to survive. You ignore the temptations by disciplining yourself to turn your thoughts elsewhere when they begin to stray. Self-discipline is the basis of all commitment.

Among His many other attributes, Jesus was a heckuva psychologist.

[norminater]

The proper age is 17.

[DesertFox]

Why 17, norminater? Because you say so, or because you're 17?

[norminater]

Nope, 17 is just the proper age to have sex. Old enough to handle the responsiblity of raising a child and still young enough to enjoy it.

C'mon, how many of you were born out of wedlock?

[DesertFox]

I see. You're just jacking your jaws.

[Wolfcounsel]

"Nope, 17 is just the proper age to have sex. Old enough to handle the responsiblity of raising a child and still young enough to enjoy it.

C'mon, how many of you were born out of wedlock?" --nominater


At 17, you're not even old enough to enter into a legal contract. Never mind that you're barely able to wipe your ass. Your question about how many people were born out of wedlock has absolutely nothing to do with how many people know how to take care of themselves and children.

[DesertFox]

He's another kid playing on an adult board, Wolf.

[norminater]

I didn't say it was an optimal situation, but if a 17 year old makes a mistake and gets someone/gets pregnant, they are old enough to handle it.

[Hottjohn]

In my case, my kids will be old enough to have sex when they are in their 30s and have great jobs and are married. Except for my daughter, she'll be able to start dating when she's 30.

[Wolfcounsel]

"He's another kid playing on an adult board, Wolf." --DesertFox

In that case, the youth mantra is needed.:cool:



I am young and foolish yet.

(Repeat)

[Wyatt_Junker]

Good post earlier there Jack.

:claps:

[someone036]

It's hard to me to say since I'm only 14, and haven't been 18 yet (obviously lol). I think it's okay as long as they use protection. The age should be 16, 17, or 18. I'm not sure yet because I don't think I can imagine myself having sex 2 years from now. Probably 17 or 18 would be okay.

I have another question for Christians. What is the purpose of a girl um being able to have a baby as early as age 11, usually 13 or so, when the bible says you have to wait until you're married?

[UnkHiram]

It's hard to me to say since I'm only 14, and haven't been 18 yet (obviously lol). I think it's okay as long as they use protection. The age should be 16, 17, or 18. I'm not sure yet because I don't think I can imagine myself having sex 2 years from now. Probably 17 or 18 would be okay.

I have another question for Christians. What is the purpose of a girl um being able to have a baby as early as age 11, usually 13 or so, when the bible says you have to wait until you're married?

If you (ever) do a bit of research you will discover that 100 years Girls ago did not get pregnant at 11, that is a byproduct of the hormones that are injected into so much of the food we eat. Also you will notice that life expectancy has grown tremendously --- 200 years ago 45 was a good long life --- 200 years before that 40 was considered old.

A CHILD should not have sex! We define adulthood as beginning at 18.

[Wolfcounsel]

"What is the purpose of a girl um being able to have a baby as early as age 11, usually 13 or so, when the bible says you have to wait until you're married?" --someone036

Most people, male and female, 11, 12, 13, or so years old hardly know enough about supporting themselves and maintaining their own household and managing their expenses, the same as some older ones.

Never mind protection, which is unreliable in many cases. Why are young kids in a hurry to make babies? Because in the case of the female, she knows Big Daddy Government (the taxpayers) will wipe her ass, and the baby's ass, with a handout support check and food stamps, and day care in school, and various other things? How about the momma's boy daddy, and daddy's little princess, busting their asses trying to support themselves and the baby soon to come? Oh, there's abortion? Not to be concerned as long as it is legal to murder the baby?

Millions of people around the world do not go by the Bible, yet they are married, by the way. Male to female.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[PrezLeefun]

"So if they can get married at 16, 15, or even younger (as they can in some places), that's not a problem?" --DeclinetoState

Pakistan?

and florida.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I didn't say it was an optimal situation, but if a 17 year old makes a mistake and gets someone/gets pregnant, they are old enough to handle it.

A "pregnancy" is not a mistake --- two people who CONSENT to have sex with each other do so purposefully. The RESULT of intercourse is the creation of another life, it is procreation.

IF the two do, and a child is, no accident occurred.

ANYONE under 18 years of age should not be having sex -- they are not emotionally or mentally ready for its consequences (nor should they be expected to be). ANYONE over 18 years of age should SERIOUSLY contemplate and be aware of the consequences of their decision. THEIR decision will effect more than just their life (and that of their partner). It is NOT about doing what one wants to do, what feels good, what feels right, and what they CAN do because they are "old enough."

Doing the right thing is also knowing when NOT to do something, even though one is physically capable of doing it.

[PrezLeefun]

I love your mind Homes!

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I love your mind Homes!

So does Bubba -- glad too, cuz I'd be (and he'd be) sorely disappointed if he married me for my money, LOL :D

[Rink]

Funny many here feel that children under 18 shouldnt even contemplate marriage.

When my mother married she just turned 16 and my dad was 23.

They stayed married for 46 years.

My great grandparents married when they were in their teens and THEY stayed married for over 65+ years.

Its a matter of maturity, some are more mature at a younger age than others.

[Wolfcounsel]

"Funny many here feel that children under 18 shouldnt even contemplate marriage." --Rink


I know many children over 25 also.:laugh:

[PrezLeefun]

rotflmao So do I Wolfie so do I

[someone036]

Its a matter of maturity, some are more mature at a younger age than others.

Exactly. Too bad there is no way to make a law about sex depending on your maturity.

[someone036]

What is the legal age to have sex in America? I know it's 16 here, but I've never heard what it is in America.

[Nutrider99]

Grass in the infield?

Play ball!

[whipple]

Grass in the infield?

Play ball!

ROFL :D

[True American]

"What is the purpose of a girl um being able to have a baby as early as age 11, usually 13 or so, when the bible says you have to wait until you're married?" --someone036

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

I don't know why I find it something I MUST do to reply to your posts Someone036. Might be the fact that you ask questions. Don't stop asking questions. It's a talent which will take you far in life.

First off, it's the lame mentality of the human race to find ourselves so abundantly inherent to the greatest fruits of earth's gifts. We're mammals! Nothing more. Sure, we're most likely the farthest advanced mammal on the planet, but does this make us smarter? Who knows? We didn't know enough to run like hell when the tsunami hit, but every other animal knew enough to flee.
WHY???
Well, probably instinct.

Though we overlook it and don't give it much thought, as we drudge through our lives trying to be better than the Jones' next door. We aren't any better than the Jones'. We will never be any better than them. We breathe the same air, eat the same food and crap the same crap. We try to look our best... why? Because we are animals and we want to exude the best scents we can to attract others in our species for specific purposes.

Do we not play with our mates the way dolphins play? Do we not play a certain ritualistic game with those of the opposite sex to send signals during our mating processes? Sure we do. We are all one with the universe. We are all instinctive by nature and our nature is to multipy our species.

Don't forget that in the day of Jesus, many people died before age 40 anyway. In the day of the Neanderthal, we croaked at age 22. If we were to multiply and raise our young, we had to do it early.
We aren't any different today. We still have the desire to multiply as young teens. It's our food supply and constant age enhancing drugs which make us live longer. When we began our species, there were no refrigerators and freezers. There were no ovens and microwaves. There was no pill the doctor could give you. There was only the ability to multiply to keep your race alive. This has not changed.

Cavemen didn't care if you could afford to raise your children in a nice home with a nice cushy job and a Mercedez. Cavemen only cared that you had a child who could help the tribe hunt. Parents didn't care if you were gainfully employed, although it may have always been likely the mother would hate the boys mate and the father would be intolerent of the girls mate.

When you take away our homes and you take away our money and our food supply, we will still be us. We will still have certain instincts. The Large Bodai Family, (Boa Constrictor/Python etc.) give birth to over 100 babies who simply slither away into the great beyond AT BIRTH while the mother goes her own way. Not all species are expected to raise their young. So, it isn't unusal that our species will have young before they are actually prepared to raise them.

Don't be so adjusted by everything you hear. No one has all the answers. Least of all me! But, I do know it's best at times to not be so full of myself that I can't see the forest through the trees. After all. It's very typical when I ridicule someone for not living what I believe is the proper way to live, to wind up giving an apology.

[whipple]

I'm kinda leaning towards Desertfoxs views on this one.
Unfortunately humans are humans by nature and so will indulge themselves.

Out of interest what is the legal age of consent in the States?

[Wolfcounsel]

"Grass in the infield?

Play ball!" --Nutrider99

Oh really? If that's what I think it means, the first post-pubertal pupa that tries to do that with any of my granddaughters is going to be playing with his own balls as he tries to untie them from around his neck.

http://freeconservatives.com/smilies/atomic.gif
HEH HEH! Come here, little maggot.

[PrezLeefun]

What is the legal age to have sex in America? I know it's 16 here, but I've never heard what it is in America.
The basic age of majority is 18 here. But you can leagally have sex before then bu not with someone 18 or over.

[UnkHiram]

The basic age of majority is 18 here. But you can leagally have sex before then bu not with someone 18 or over.

Excuse me Prez, I hate to have to correct you but that is not correct. The legal age of consent for an unmarried person is 18. It is illegal for anyone under that age to have sex. Another one of those totally unenforceable laws.

[DesertFox]

People are more -- MUCH more -- than the other animals.

[PrezLeefun]

ok Unk I'll take your word for it. I'll ask my Law teacher the nitty gritties of it when school starts up again.

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

The age of consent varies by state.

[DoctorDoom]

Oh really? If that's what I think it means, the first post-pubertal pupa that tries to do that with any of my granddaughters is going to be playing with his own balls as he tries to untie them from around his neck.Tell it like it is, WC! COUNSEL the little creeps into quivering masses of protoplasm.

[Wolfcounsel]

I won't kill them too bad. I am cruel but fair.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I won't kill them too bad. I am cruel but fair.

Too funny, Wolfie! Sounds JUST like something my Bubba would say in defense of his little Bubbette, LOL. There's a little dude been sniffin' round, getting his little sister to call my daughter then wanting to talk to her. Bubba's been busy as of late polishin' up his shotgun -- told Bubbette, next time the friend calls HE'S answerin' the phone, LOL.

[someone036]

ok Unk I'll take your word for it. I'll ask my Law teacher the nitty gritties of it when school starts up again.

How old are you?

[PrezLeefun]

I am 17

[someone036]

I am 17

Ooh only 3 years older than me!

[PrezLeefun]

I thought you knew that.

[someone036]

I thought you knew that.

I forgot. Now that you told me, I remembered that you've told me before.

[PrezLeefun]

ahhhh you're cute someone! lol

[Little Bit Farm]

Well I am a no sex before marriage person, and I agree with whoever said that we are coddling our kids too long. I was married at 19, and I've been married for 21 years. Our kids are irresponsible because we give them no responsibility. We expect nothing from them. My son is twenty, and is fixing to marry a lovely 18 year old. I tell my kids that if they can support their wife, and their wife's parents agree, they can get married whenever they are ready. In my opinion people who are married too late, are sullied, too independent, and wasting their childbearing years. Most of the time they have been in several sexual relationships. That is NOT what I want for my kids. It makes no biological sense for a person's body to be ready to bear children, and then be told to wait 15 years, and NOT have sex.


Little Bit farm

[someone036]

ahhhh you're cute someone! lol

lol that did sound a little weird. what I said.

[DesertFox]

Prez and someone, I'm gonna ask that you pass personal stuff via pm, if you will. A personal note or two in a forum here or there is one thing, but you guys have almost turned this thread into a "personals" column.

[DeclinetoState]

"Funny many here feel that children under 18 shouldnt even contemplate marriage." --Rink


I know many children over 25 also.:laugh:

Here's one who's in his (her? its?) late 40s:

http://www.histar.com/mornings/starchive/2002/11/images/michael_jackson.jpg

[PrezLeefun]

ewww DOS thats just nasty sont post his face!

[DeclinetoState]

Nope, 17 is just the proper age to have sex. Old enough to handle the responsiblity of raising a child and still young enough to enjoy it.

C'mon, how many of you were born out of wedlock?I see. You're just jacking your jaws.

Seems that's not all norm's been jacking, if you know what I mean.

[star2589]

What is the legal age to have sex in America? I know it's 16 here, but I've never heard what it is in America.

it varies from state to state. 18 is the oldest, but 16 and 17 is typical too. I think in a few states its as low as 13.

[medved]

I believe I've already spilled it.

At the age of 18, when both kids are capable of supporting themselves, taking care of a roof over their heads, paying their own bills, wiping ther own butts, et cetera, and they are married to each other, then that is a good time. Younger adolescents need not apply for the above.

The thing you really DON'T want is women having to wait until they're 25 - 35 to start having kids. That's the thing which ends up with population spirals and government "elites" inviting the third world in to take up the slack. 17 - 18 For women, 18 - 20 for men should be about the norm. Even if that means the government subsidizing kids getting married and starting families at that age to some extent I like that idea better than the idea of losing our country to the globalists and the la Raza/Atzlan crowd.

[Primitive]

No sex until marriage.

I agree. Sexuality is sacred and should only be within marriage. People are selfish and want that self gratification not realizing how serious sexuality is. Sex is for two people, male and female only, who are willing to make the commitment of marriage...not a legal government marriage, but marriage granted by God who wills us to be truely happy. The two married people who do have sex should love each other so much that they would die for one another...if someone is not willing to be married to, and to die for the one they desire intercourse with, than they do not need to be having sex at all.
It has nothing to do with the laws of the government making an "age of consent". Government is a device of man...Age has nothing to do with a person's maturity. I know people who are 45 or older and still have the mentality of high school student...they have good knowledge, but lack wisdom.

[Tumblehome]

People are old enough to have sex when they are developed enough to create offspring without causing harm to themselves, their offspring, or the community. What age that is depends very much on the culture that they live in. In some communities that age will be very young. In others it will be very old.

[Nutrider99]

I always believed that it was improper to have sex until you were married. Unfortunately, I later found out that there is virtually no sex AFTER you are married, so therein lies the problem.

People should not be allowed to have sex until they graduate high school. If I wasn't getting any, they shouldn't either! Once you are old enough to drink (physically, anyway), old enough to marry and old enough to kill (in war), you SHOULD be old enough to deal with members of the opposite sex.

Of course, if I had daughters, they would have to practice the barrier method of birth control. This meaning that I would be the barrier and when they reached puberty they would be homeschooled until they were old enough for college.

[shoemoodoshaloo]

No sex until marriage.

Marriage doesn't mean anything. Any irresponsible, trashy couple can get married, at 18 even. Does that mean they are ready for sex? No. Marriage is just a name. It's the union between the people that is special.

Now to the topic question: I think there is no right age. It's all about mental age, which is different in everyone. At 30 year old could be less fit for sex than I am (17.9 yrs ), but a 16 year old may be more responsible than me. It's a case by case basis, which is why no laws could govern it correctly.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Now to the topic question: I think there is no right age. It's all about mental age, which is different in everyone. At 30 year old could be less fit for sex than I am (17.9 yrs ), but a 16 year old may be more responsible than me. It's a case by case basis, which is why no laws could govern it correctly.

A person of the "right mental age," a "responsible" person, would not have sex until they were married -- that is the mark of the right mental age showing responsibility. We, human beings, are more than just mere animals -- we are capable of mastering our emotions, hormones, desires, and lusts, for our greater good and the greater good of humanity. THAT fact has been devalued in our society by "The Great Lie." The Great Lie is the one that is told over and over now days -- if "you" think it's okay, then do it, there are no absolute rights and wrongs, and everything is subjective, it is merely a new twist on an old tale (one told by a serpent long ago).

The question is not about an age of sexual maturity, it's about when is sex "okay." It is ONLY okay within the confines of marriage -- anything else is merely a personal desire to justify lust and immoral behavior. MHO

[UnkHiram]

Marriage doesn't mean anything. Any irresponsible, trashy couple can get married, at 18 even. Does that mean they are ready for sex? No. Marriage is just a name. It's the union between the people that is special.

Now to the topic question: I think there is no right age. It's all about mental age, which is different in everyone. At 30 year old could be less fit for sex than I am (17.9 yrs ), but a 16 year old may be more responsible than me. It's a case by case basis, which is why no laws could govern it correctly.

That is such a huge cop out that it is barely worth responding to. You are not ready for sex until you are an adult. Period.

[Melz]

Marriage doesn't mean anything. Any irresponsible, trashy couple can get married, at 18 even. Does that mean they are ready for sex? No. Marriage is just a name. It's the union between the people that is special.

Now to the topic question: I think there is no right age. It's all about mental age, which is different in everyone. At 30 year old could be less fit for sex than I am (17.9 yrs ), but a 16 year old may be more responsible than me. It's a case by case basis, which is why no laws could govern it correctly.

Maybe nowadays, marriage doesn't mean anything to some. Is it just a name to you? To society? It has become that. It has become a name because gays want to re-name marriage and call "civil unions" their sort of marriage. Is that the same thing? Those in Morman communities who "marry" 12 or 30 wifes, some of them their own daughters. Is that marriage?

Marriage is just a name or word because this society has let it become that :(. I don't know how it happened (heck I am only 32, it was trivial before I was born even.)...but yeah. It's just a name. A word.

Your post is not wrong per se. It is just sad. So long ago, people didnt marry for sex, and they don't now. But don't demoralize it into something that "everyone can do" just because everyone does it. So much of what are married nowdays is shameful to the entire institution of marriage as it is meant to be before God.

[grannygirl]

The problem with sex and kids has nothing to do with age. Too many kids todayare coddled, mommy and daddy give them everything. Yes, many do work, but living away from home isn't an option. I'ed like to see these kids wait until they can support themselves and NOT depend on mom and dad.

I'ed like to see them wait for marriage, but too many go into it with the attitude, "if it doesn't work, oh well!" Then, there's that possibility of bringing children into it? Oh Please! They need to get a firm grip on life, first!

[CzechPrince]

I beleive people should wait until marriage, religously and morally. My grilfriend and I have already decided that, and she is not Catholic, she is Presbyterian (In name, she rarely goes to church but will go with me occasionally.)

On the other hand, it's peoples' choice to have sex. If they feel their relationship is mature and loving enough to handle it, good for them. I beleive ours is as well, but we are choosing to wait, and I know it will be worth it when the time comes for our honeymoon. :gar: :smirky:

[shoemoodoshaloo]

Your post is not wrong per se. It is just sad. So long ago, people didnt marry for sex, and they don't now. But don't demoralize it into something that "everyone can do" just because everyone does it. So much of what are married nowdays is shameful to the entire institution of marriage as it is meant to be before God.

Long ago people married for land, stature and dowry. Marriage has always been abused.

Now, let me respond to each of you.

Homeschool: IMHO the confines of marriage is bullshit. If I have sex the day before I'm married is it wrong? But then the next day when I'm married it is somehow right? I know to you (being more religious to me) this makes sense, but it means nothing to me. It is no different than saying I am a child the day before my eighteenth birthday, but an adult the next day. I didn't change overnight. I was mentally an adult before my 18th birthday, or I am still not mentally an adult while I'm 18. It's different for everyone. Take me for example. I'm almost 18, but have already finished my freshman year of college where I lived away from home (400 miles) for the entire year. My friends who are 19 work at Denny's and didn't even finish high school. Am I somehow less mature? Am I less ready for the world? Am I not responsible yet? Will that somehow change in 3 weeks? Because of an insignificant date? I think the label of married isn't important. What is truly important is when two, happy, responsible, loving, dedicated people can live together and raise a family.

My parents have raised me and stayed together for 28 years. They never were married for reasons unbeknownst to me. My buddy's parents were married and then divorced. Which family do you think was better for a kid to grow up in? Marriage is just a word. It's the couple that is important. You guys know this, cmon.

Unk, your bare response barely deserves a rebuttal, so I'll keep it short. Your views are flawed. You say that adults are the only ones who should have sex? Many adults shouldn't have sex at all, and many kids could handle it better than adults. Alot of adults are stupid too and you know it. <!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o:preferrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/> <v:formulas> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/> </v:formulas> <v:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> <o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/> </v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='width:11.25pt; height:11.25pt'> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:/DOCUME~1/Kaluse/LOCALS~1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_image001.gif" o:href="http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif"/> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]-->:rolleyes:<!--[endif]-->

Melz: Yes marriage is just a word. Does it bother you that much? If marriage were so special, it wouldn't be broken so often? What's the divorce rate at now? I don't know, but I'm sure it's shocking. When the bible talks about marriage as a wonderful thing, I don't think it means the ceremony. I don't think they mean the honeymoon. I think it means that the unification of a man and woman for the rest of their lives is beautiful. I agree. But, don't confuse a great couple with a marriage. They don't always come hand in hand. Sadly. Start appreciating what marriage means, not the word itself. A marriage without love is not a marriage at all. Unless you read the bible literally.

[Thunderclasp]

I agree with being 18. I believe sex should happen when two people love eachother, and in my eyes younger people have a misleaded concept of "love" when in reality the only thing they know is being horny. :nutkick:


Thunderclasp

[ChrisLDuncan]

Here's the right age...MARRIAGE. If you do it before you are sentenced to a life of burrning and agony in HELL.

[Thunderclasp]

Here's the right age...MARRIAGE. If you do it before you are sentenced to a life of burrning and agony in HELL.

:bsflag:
Well, at least in this case I'm glad I'm not a Believer lol. Not to nit-pick either, but you spelled burning wrong.


Thunderclasp

[Melz]

:bsflag:
Well, at least in this case im glad im not a Believer lol. Not to nit-pick either, but you spelt burning wrong.


Thunderclasp

That is the general concept of atheists. You get to choose what makes you happy along the way. No responsiblity, no one to please but yourself. If it's all about you though, do you make the rules in your life? Does this "me me me" attitude extend to other aspects in life, such as crime, human treatment of others, etc? Where does your "me only" attitude stop? What is it based on? I sure as heck don't want to know where it developed from after reading what little you have posted so far. But I am sure where that attitude will take you, and I hope someone gives a crap about you enough to worry for you when you there.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Well, at least in this case im glad im not a Believer lol. Not to nit-pick either, but you spelt burning wrong.
Thunderclasp

Well, one must be careful pointing out the sties in thy brother's eye considering the logs sticking out of their own.

I'm is capitalized and is a contraction requiring an apostrophe indicating the missing "a" in the word am. There is no such word as "spelt."

[Thunderclasp]

That is the general concept of atheists. You get to choose what makes you happy along the way. No responsiblity, no one to please but yourself. If it's all about you though, do you make the rules in your life? Does this "me me me" attitude extend to other aspects in life, such as crime, human treatment of others, etc? Where does your "me only" attitude stop? What is it based on? I sure as heck don't want to know where it developed from after reading what little you have posted so far. But I am sure where that attitude will take you, and I hope someone gives a crap about you enough to worry for you when you there.

I don't remember ever saying I was an Atheist, just so you know there are other beliefs that don't have a god than Atheism. Also, I do believe that in the book of Christianity (or whatever religion you do follow) allows people to do as they choose, as the Bible is up to interpretation. I follow the same rules that you do, other than God's rules. I do, or do not do, things that I feel are right for me, not things that I do to please God for hope to get to some Heaven. If I don't think killing is good, I don't do it. If I think that sex at 18 without marriage is fine, then I would allow myself to do it.

In reality me and you aren't so different, I do some things to please myself just as you do, except because of your belief you have to please one more person. So instead of you having a "me me me" attitude, you have a not so different "us two us two us two" attitude.

Let's not try to conclude so many things from such little written.


Thunderclasp

[Melz]

I don't remember ever saying I was an Atheist, just so you know there are other beliefs that don't have a god than Atheism. Also, I do believe that in the book of Christianity (or whatever religion you do follow) allows people to do as they choose, as the Bible is up to interpretation. I follow the same rules that you do, other than God's rules. I do, or do not do, things that I feel are right for me, not things that I do to please God for hope to get to some Heaven. If I don't think killing is good, I don't do it. If I think that sex at 18 without marriage is fine, then I would allow myself to do it.

In reality me and you aren't so different, I do some things to please myself just as you do, except because of your belief you have to please one more person. So instead of you having a "me me me" attitude, you have a not so different "us two us two us two" attitude.

Let's not try to conclude so many things from such little written.


Thunderclasp

Well you said you are a non believer, most non believers are atheists. Unless you are a non believer only in the God I believe in but you are a believer in a higher power? Which would not exactly make you a non believer.

And no the Bible is not up to interpretation. Some people may believe so, and you can have discussions with said people about the many things you can conclude and interpret from the Bible. But I am not that person, I believe that what the Bible says is how it is. I don't pick and choose what suits me within the Bible. I don't get to follow the rules which please me, ignore the ones which inconvenience me. And it sounds like you indeed make up rules as you go, following your own rules, doing what makes you happy. I am glad you feel that freedom, I can only hope you eventually find the Lord after all this free-living runs its course.

[Thunderclasp]

In my mind, I see Atheism as a closed book mindset. God doesn't exist, don't care what you think, etc. I don't quite share that same mindset.

Ive grown up around many religions, and I've never allowed myself to completely close my mind. I carry a mindset closer to that I don't exactly believe in God, but if He does exist then that's just the way it is. I don't preach what I think, I do what I feel is good for those that I can effect, so I don't necessarily allow my actions to be indirectly influenced by a Higher Power.

If God wants me to believe, or finds it his duty to punish me for my beliefs, I feel that I deserve an all due respect tap on the shoulder by Him. If He finds it good and well to punish me without showing me the possibility of His existance, then I guess the intelligence He gave me to use is nothing but useless.


Thunderclasp

[ChrisLDuncan]

Well hell is always the option for people who do not want to wait, oh hell it's the ONLY option. If one of my kids ever had pre-maritial sex I would beat the living hell out of them. I have daughters and they know marriage is the right time for sex because I nurture the hell out of them, and trust me by the time I got done with the strap, the paddle, and the cane they'd be begging for death.

[Thunderclasp]

Well hell is always the option for people who do not want to wait, oh hell it's the ONLY option. If one of my kids ever had pre-maritial sex I would beat the living hell out of them. I have daughters and they know marriage is the right time for sex because I nurture the hell out of them, and trust me by the time I got done with the strap, the paddle, and the cane they'd be begging for death.

Hell's many meanings lol, the good, the bad, the ugly. And not to offend your parental skills, but you shouldn't be so forceful of your beliefs on your children, it's their life, not your's. I'm no fan of religious people pushing their beliefs of what other people should do.


Thunderclasp

[CzechPrince]

Here's the right age...MARRIAGE. If you do it before you are sentenced to a life of burrning and agony in HELL.


Who are you to decide whose going to hell and whose not?

[Keb]

My parents have raised me and stayed together for 28 years. They never were married for reasons unbeknownst to me.Not to offend but it seems your parents have influenced your view towards marriage and not necessarily in a positive way.


If God wants me to believe, or finds it his duty to punish me for my beliefs, I feel that I deserve an all due respect tap on the shoulder by Him. If He finds it good and well to punish me without showing me the possibility of His existance, then I guess the intelligence He gave me to use is nothing but useless.

He's shown you plenty, Thunderclasp but you might not be listening or seeing. Are you waiting until all your theological ducks are in a row? Or are you waiting until you have the exact doctrines you'll accept and believe? Instead of telling God what YOU want Him to do, try letting go of your pride and ask Him how to come to His will. By acknowledging His sovereignty over yourself, you will most likely change your heart.

[aaron11]

Kids in earlier times married early because people died early. IIRC what Paul Johnson said in his superb book Birth of the Modern, until the Industrial Revolution 3-4ths of all kids died in their first year of life. Life expectancy after the age of five was on the order of 40 years -- for men. Most women died in childbirth, victims of the ignorance of germs and the importance of hygiene. With survival itself such a monumental struggle, it made perfect sense to marry young.

It doesn't today. We know things about human beings now that no one knew in earlier times, things about the psychology of the human animal. I don't mean what psychologists tell us; I mean what people our age can see with our own eyes and figure out ourselves from experience of living. My observation is that women don't have the confidence they should have to be independent operators until their early 20's at the earliest. Men have the confidence early but not the knowledge and experience necessary to earn a decent living to support a family, and that happens in the late 20's for most men.

I didn't used to oppose sex before marriage. Knowing what I now know, my views have changed. What I do oppose is bringing kids into the world before you or your partner know enough about yourselves to be able to make a decent life with each other, which is the basis of a decent family. Since making babies and nurturing mutual commitment is what nature intended sex for, that logically means no sex before marriage.

In this day and age you never of hear the role of sex in cementing commitment between a man and a woman. But that's what marriage used to do -- he didn't get any until he took her as his wife, and she saved herself for him. Being the source of sexual pleasure for each other cemented the bond -- hence "the tie that binds."

By cheapening sex thru making its ready availability socially acceptable, we have cheapened marriage; in cheapening marriage we have cheapened the family; and in cheapening the family we have cheapened life itself, since marriage was the guarantee of a stable family that literally launched the future and stabilized civilization by keeping an eye to that future.

All this, by pure logic and without any invocation of God, shows that we need strongly to encourage pre-marital virginity and post-marital fidelity. Jesus understood these verities when He spoke of the wrongness of "lusting in your heart." Marriage requires strong commitment, and commitment to anything means simply not allowing yourself to think outside the lines required for that thing to survive. You ignore the temptations by disciplining yourself to turn your thoughts elsewhere when they begin to stray. Self-discipline is the basis of all commitment.

Among His many other attributes, Jesus was a heckuva psychologist.

This is as dead on as it gets, i didn't take a wife until 28. Every teacher, baby-sitter, or parents of other children, can attest to the difference in our sons "general" attitude and behavior...He is both more mature and "stable" then most of the kids he schools with. Much the same as my Wife and I are in our Marriage...Which is why I agree 100% with DF...

[Thunderclasp]

He's shown you plenty, Thunderclasp but you might not be listening or seeing. Are you waiting until all your theological ducks are in a row? Or are you waiting until you have the exact doctrines you'll accept and believe? Instead of telling God what YOU want Him to do, try letting go of your pride and ask Him how to come to His will. By acknowledging His sovereignty over yourself, you will most likely change your heart.

It just doesn't make sense for me to bow down to someone I don't even think is there and wait for Him to say His "Hello's". If He wants me to believe in Him, then He has every power in the world to do so. If He doesn't want to interfere with my freewill, He shouldn't expect me to do His biddings.

He just seems like a hipocrit to me. He allows people to do what they want, and punishes them if they don't do what He wants. Then again, I guess the intelligence He gave me wasn't supposed to be used to think logically, was it? He works too mysterical for me... lol.


Thunderclasp

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

This is as dead on as it gets, i didn't take a wife until 28. Every teacher, baby-sitter, or parents of other children, can attest to the difference in our sons "general" attitude and behavior...He is both more mature and "stable" then most of the kids he schools with. Much the same as my Wife and I are in our Marriage...Which is why I agree 100% with DF...

:ditto: to what aaron said, about what DF said. I was 26 before my son was born, and I see other children around our kids ages and their parents are practically young enough to be MY children. It's like watching babies raise babies. I feel I can trace many things back to the fateful decision my mother and father made when I was 13 in allowing me to date, such as the reason they have only two living grandchildren, instead of three.

[Thunderclasp]

I see other children around our kids ages and their parents are practically young enough to be MY children. It's like watching babies raise babies.

So true now-a-days. I know 13 year old's who have done sexual things already (my one female cousin included), and kids even younger than that who know all about it, even the intricate things! Man, when I was 13, I think I was still watching Transformers and Thundercats, and thought girls still had cooties. :smirky:


Thunderclasp

[medved]

I believe I've already spilled it.

At the age of 18, when both kids are capable of supporting themselves, taking care of a roof over their heads, paying their own bills, wiping ther own butts, et cetera, and they are married to each other, then that is a good time. Younger adolescents need not apply for the above.

Seems reasonable enough. Just make sure that any "guest workers" in the country, legal or otherwise, are held to the same standards. You see, if you don't do that, then you are putting our own youth at a competitive disadvantage in our own country, and you're not going to like the results or consequences.

The basic reality is that humans are biologically programmed to want to marry and have children at 17 - 22, and not at 35. The problems many european countries are having are mainly caused by not recognizing such facts.

Moreover, if the choice actually comes down to subsidizing our own young people to some extent in order for them to live normal lives or being increasingly swamped by third worlders, I'd prefer the former choice.

Germany is down to a reproduction rate of about 1.3 at present. That's a problem we don't need.

[DeclinetoState]

I don't remember ever saying I was an Atheist, just so you know there are other beliefs that don't have a god than Atheism.


ThunderclaspYes, there's Buddhism and communism.

Is this person (http://parallel.park.org/UnitedStates/bill-portrait.gif) too emotionally immature to have sex? What about this person (http://webweekly.hms.harvard.edu/archive/2003/4_14/ted_kennedy_front0085.jpg)?

[PrezLeefun]

yep both.

[PrezLeefun]

um this sounds like ChrisD. has given us a visit from another email address...

[DesertFox]

Let me add another thought to all this. You know, God made us all, including the deviants and weirdos. Society has to protect itself against them, but in trying to think along with God in even allowing such critters to come along, I wonder if there isn't a reason for their presence. I think there is, and some of my thinking along these lines runs counter to what I earlier posted.

You have the center of mass of mankind. These are the folks who make civilization work, the guys and gals who raise their families and try to do what's right as best they understand it.

Then you have the folks on the periphery. Pert near all the great artists have been on the periphery. Camille Paglia says, and I think I agree, that it takes a mutilated ego to produce really great art, because a person in agony struggles to communicate what he's seeing that others don't see until he shows them how. That's what great art does -- shows us another way to see. It's not always beneficial, but we're better off knowing than not because if we know of an evil, we can guard against it. Ignorance usually -- not always, but usually -- assists evil in gaining its ends.

What all this is leading towards is the idea that the people who have one foot in the main circle of mankind (the mainstream) and one foot in those nebulous, not-accepted circles have a role to play in our self education. I'm thinking mainly of prostitutes. Not all prostitutes stand on corners and shout at potential customers. In fact, most are Heidi Fleiss-type call girls and are all but invisible. You'd never guess the gal next door made extra money on the side by servicing johns during the day.

I think there's a place for such people -- on the margins, to be sure, and always to be looked at askance and not-really-approved-of, but allowed to operate so long as they stay on the margins, recognizing themselves as social outliers and respecting the need of the mainstream to maintain standards of decency. I think prostitutes attract people, mainly men, who still have things to figure out about themselves. Also, there's something not-quite-right about a woman who likes casual sex, or sex with many men at a time, or what-have-you. Woman's biological function is to reproduce the species, and sex-for-its-own-sake takes away from what should be a woman's primary drive -- to raise a family. The prostie should recognize this about herself and not flaunt it, because she needs society to continue working just as we all do, and the generalized sexual licentiousness that she enjoys always leads to society falling apart if it becomes the norm.

Is this hypocritical? Only in a superficial view. It seems to me realistic to recognize that there is indeed a place for everybody, but that everybody has to understand that we all need moral decency, based on the sexual exclusivity of marriage and all that supports it, to keep civilization going. So long as prostitution remains on the side, looked down upon and kept out of sight, it will be found by those who really need it for whatever reason; and won't contribute to ruining young people who, in the main, want what all decent people want -- to have a lifelong partner with whom to raise a good family in the mainstream.

I don't expect many here to agree with me on this.