http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/06/08/Marriage-Young-Americans-Arent-Even-Shacking (http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/06/08/Marriage-Young-Americans-Arent-Even-Shacking)
The societal question, she said, is whether those single 20-somethings stay that way into their 30s. A Gallup poll from 2013 suggests that young adults may not be avoiding marriage altogether, but are just pushing it back. In that survey, 56 percent of Americans aged 18 to 34 said they were unmarried but did want to tie the knot at some point. Only 9 percent in the same age group said they were unmarried and wanted to stay that way. The most common reasons people listed for not being married yet included having not found the right person, being too young or not ready to get married and money concerns.
I'm skeptical about how they may have asked the questions. But it does kind of look like marriages are just being pushed back into later in life--the thing is, though, the trends can't particularly indicate how much people could expect the younger generations now to remain unmarried and not living together in the future.
It seems like singlehood is becoming more and more normal . . . so does this mean, singles are kinda/sorta less lonely in a manner of speaking? ::lookaround::
The society we live in strives to destroy the concept of the nuclear family. We have sitcoms and movies designed to glorify the feminine characters and even children sometimes while making the husband and father seems... bumbling, we have a judicial system incredibly bias and unfair against men (specifically when it comes to child support), feminism is on the rise while traditional masculinity is looked down on and slandered even, etc etc etc...
The article you posted probably went to both sex and tried to stay neutral, but I honestly understands why a young man, even a man in his 30s, would want to push back, if not avoid altogether, a commitment when this society has shown it will easily make his life heck by doing so. It's a shame, but it's the plan of the higher ups, and it's working pretty well. I know a lot of women sees it too and they're just as sick of it.
The article you posted probably went to both sex and tried to stay neutral, but I honestly understands why a young man, even a man in his 30s, would want to push back, if not avoid altogether, a commitment when this society has shown it will easily make his life heck by doing so. It's a shame, but it's the plan of the higher ups, and it's working pretty well. I know a lot of women sees it too and they're just as sick of it.
Yeah, I was thinking that some of the men were pushed into saying "I just haven't found the right person" construed from "I don't want to get slaughtered in family court in the fairly likely event she tries to divorce me." IOW some interviewer was all "well he just needs to find a woman he could trust, then he'd get married."
I have heard just a multitude of guys take the warnings of divorced men: you think you're on a desert island in your suffering from what the courts do to you.
I have to give a LOT of women credit though: many of them DO care about men enough to care about that, and that's the best hope for things turning around
especially with so many MEN being such a huge part of that problem.
For sure. A godly woman is a gift of God, as the Proverbs say (I think the Proverbs), which is why I wouldn't advise believers to possess a similar mindset. Even if their wife does leave them and seek to dismember their lives, the Lord takes care of His own, and He does honor the righteous. What I would like to see is more men stand up and say they are sick of it, as well as the women with them, that'll make an impact. You can only progress so far by being a victim. It would be hard and difficult, it would be a long trek, and you would have great opposition against feminism, but it isn't impossible. But then again... if you have a guy that was raised more by his mom than by his father...
For sure. A godly woman is a gift of God, as the Proverbs say (I think the Proverbs), which is why I wouldn't advise believers to possess a similar mindset. Even if their wife does leave them and seek to dismember their lives, the Lord takes care of His own, and He does honor the righteous. What I would like to see is more men stand up and say they are sick of it, as well as the women with them, that'll make an impact. You can only progress so far by being a victim. It would be hard and difficult, it would be a long trek, and you would have great opposition against feminism, but it isn't impossible. But then again... if you have a guy that was raised more by his mom than by his father...
Yeah . . . are you saying you've never heard of men's rights movements and "mgtow" (which tends not to include women, though)? I'll admit much of it is unsavory, but that's what happens when the discussion has to be isolated and focused as a result.
The camp that's equally offensive to me than the most overt feminists are the Christian "biblical gender roles" figures who are telling men to "man up" and "gee I wonder why men aren't acting like men the way we think" but demonstrating to be disgraceful cowards who don't even acknowledge the existence of feminism.
How can you be pro-masculinity but not anti-feminist? Or apart from semantics, how can someone deny the anti-masculine and anti-male West and take a stand against it in defense of men before proposing to have any right whatsoever to give men directives? That is despicable--speaking of "be a man," lacking the courage to take a stand against feminism and opponents of men/masculinity in general is a mark of someone NOT qualified to do any leading and teaching.
I read an article the other day where it said that the average age to marry in the uk is mid 30's now. However, most couples will live together for several years and even have children before they marry now. However most who live togather and dont split up do marry eventually. All the single people I know, men and women, are very much wanting to meet someone and get married and have children, and going by the fact that dating sites are thriving, I dont see any signs that single men dont want to meet someone and get married, or that more single people are happier now to remain single than they were. Its a natural thing to want to meet a partner,something that God has put in us, and that desire is there in most single people.
The article is secular by nature, that said I do not doubt that the data is correct, however these people that are refraining from commitment are certainly not refraining from sex, which leads us to today's generation and their attitudes toward sex, they feel for the most part that it's perfectly okay to share with each other as long as responsibilities are being met, but why bottleneck the opportunity to explore their sexuality in a commitment?
Anyhow, my point is that the data is blurred. People are having their cake and eating it too.
Of course the data says nothing about "casual sex." This is an era where people forget the love that's associated with sexuality and the concept of self-respect for avoiding joining oneself without a life-partner bond to someone.
It is indeed a tragedy that people essentially don't know what marriage and sexuality actually are, whether they're married or celibate. Without that bond it's a degradation of oneself. The condition of marriage in this culture is profoundly wounded and looks less and less appealing to more and more people, and yes, they don't know what to do with their sex drive. :(
I am all in favor of capital punishment for ALL pre- and extra- marital sex.
: DaveW Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:00:37
I am all in favor of capital punishment for ALL pre- and extra- marital sex.
It would certainly shift the tides for these young Americans avoiding relationship/marriage.
: Alan Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:22:58
: DaveW Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:00:37
I am all in favor of capital punishment for ALL pre- and extra- marital sex.
It would certainly shift the tides for these young Americans avoiding relationship/marriage.
And it would make America worse than Iran and their imposing of Sharia law capital punishment.
It is impossible to legislate and legally enforce so as to insure absolute compliance, common sense, morality, or human decency.
So instead we....kill them?
: Alan Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:22:58
: DaveW Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:00:37
I am all in favor of capital punishment for ALL pre- and extra- marital sex.
It would certainly shift the tides for these young Americans avoiding relationship/marriage.
If the young women started to refuse sex outside marriage, I bet there would be a stampede for men to commit. ::eek::
OF course if men arent committing, then women arent either. So many women today in the UK are putting their jobs/careers first, and then one day waking up age 40 and realising that its almost too late for them to find a man and get married and have children.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:51:17
: Alan Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:22:58
: DaveW Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:00:37
I am all in favor of capital punishment for ALL pre- and extra- marital sex.
It would certainly shift the tides for these young Americans avoiding relationship/marriage.
If the young women started to refuse sex outside marriage, I bet there would be a stampede for men to commit. ::eek::
Agreed, the fact that sex is so liberally accepted outside of marriage creates an entirely different mindset, especially for men.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:51:17
If the young women started to refuse sex outside marriage, I bet there would be a stampede for men to commit. ::eek::
But that carries as the same quandary now. Men and women, boys and girls, are all able to refuse sex outside of marriage now. But many don't.
We can't legislate and force them to say no. And we're certainly more civilized than to kill them for saying yes.
It's an issue, premarital sex and all that drama that comes with. And yet on the grand scale it is a non-issue because the whole can't be controlled and stopped from doing what the individual and their free choice decides. All we can do is exercise and impart our own sense of morality. Everyone else can do what they want. As we know.
: Buster D Body Crab Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 11:12:42
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 10:51:17
If the young women started to refuse sex outside marriage, I bet there would be a stampede for men to commit. ::eek::
But that carries as the same quandary now. Men and women, boys and girls, are all able to refuse sex outside of marriage now. But many don't.
We can't legislate and force them to say no. And we're certainly more civilized than to kill them for saying yes.
It's an issue, premarital sex and all that drama that comes with. And yet on the grand scale it is a non-issue because the whole can't be controlled and stopped from doing what the individual and their free choice decides. All we can do is exercise and impart our own sense of morality. Everyone else can do what they want. As we know.
yes thats why I said 'if' buster.
To be sexually pure, a man or woman would have to be completely sexually inactive until marriage. Usually, marriage isn't practically possible until 20s or 30s, especially today.
Either way, then, to be sexually pure, people are going to have to learn to live like monks and nuns for a long time anyway. And if someone could pull it off through their mid-twenties, would it be much harder to stick it out and do without through the long haul?
Personally I wish it were possible for people to get married really young if they wanted. It's like Paul said: because so much immorality, everyone should be married (1 Corinthians 7:2). We have problems with immorality? Hook the kids up with marriage! Otherwise, teach celibacy. That's basically the implied proposal anyway. -_-
: Cally Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 14:25:50
To be sexually pure, a man or woman would have to be completely sexually inactive until marriage. Usually, marriage isn't practically possible until 20s or 30s, especially today.
Either way, then, to be sexually pure, people are going to have to learn to live like monks and nuns for a long time anyway. And if someone could pull it off through their mid-twenties, would it be much harder to stick it out and do without through the long haul?
Personally I wish it were possible for people to get married really young if they wanted. It's like Paul said: because so much immorality, everyone should be married (1 Corinthians 7:2). We have problems with immorality? Hook the kids up with marriage! Otherwise, teach celibacy. That's basically the implied proposal anyway. -_-
I know a couple of teenagers in the USA age 15 and 16 who have just got married. Is that young enough? As someone who married at 19, I think even that is too young, but that's only my own opinion based on the fact that few teenagers are mature enough to even think of marriage and all it entails. Divorce is also very common when the couple married as teens.
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
I don't believe in marriage being treated like some holy grail for maturity or financial success. Some are gifted with celibacy, others not. "It is better to marry than burn with passion," not, "oh, well, burn with passion until you 'mature' or find worldly success." No way.
Besides, marriage is about suffering with another person through the ups and downs of worldly/material/career success, and about sticking together even as people change. How many people stay exactly the same person for 50+ years? Doesn't more "maturing" happen through a lifetime and growth in wisdom and such?
Instead, if you burn, get married. And since pretty much everyone agrees that there IS a problem with sexual immorality in the modern world (maybe more than ever): get everyone married quick. ;-)
1 Corinthians 7! In the meantime, men are not getting the right teaching regarding sexual purity. The ministry they should get is Proverbs 6:26 which would train a man to see a prostitute or porn star as a degrading insult TO HIM. But who protects the dignity of a man in today's world?
Then there is the issue of people "burning with passion" for others while involved in a relationship, very likely another deterrent to get involved in relationships today.
Then there is the issue of people "burning with passion" for others while involved in a relationship, very likely another deterrent to get involved in relationships today.
It's complicated. I've written about this before, but I think part of the reason for Paul's reasonable reaction of getting people marred quickly is so that a skewed idea of sexuality doesn't form. Of course infidelity is as old as the hills, but if people marry to make a mental association of sexuality with a relationship early on, then that's what should help prevent it.
Again, Paul's statement: because there's so much immorality, everyone should get married. I'm sure that isn't a lot of people's idea of romance--to marry for that reason--but that was Paul's wisdom.
: Catholica Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:30
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
Which countries have a Christian majority? I mean truly Christian?
I dont agree, many believers still wait for marriage till they have sex, despite birth control. IF they arent believers they are going to have sex whatever.
: Cally Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:52
I don't believe in marriage being treated like some holy grail for maturity or financial success. Some are gifted with celibacy, others not. "It is better to marry than burn with passion," not, "oh, well, burn with passion until you 'mature' or find worldly success." No way.
Besides, marriage is about suffering with another person through the ups and downs of worldly/material/career success, and about sticking together even as people change. How many people stay exactly the same person for 50+ years? Doesn't more "maturing" happen through a lifetime and growth in wisdom and such?
Instead, if you burn, get married. And since pretty much everyone agrees that there IS a problem with sexual immorality in the modern world (maybe more than ever): get everyone married quick. ;-)
1 Corinthians 7! In the meantime, men are not getting the right teaching regarding sexual purity. The ministry they should get is Proverbs 6:26 which would train a man to see a prostitute or porn star as a degrading insult TO HIM. But who protects the dignity of a man in today's world?
So you think its ok for children of 15 to get married? Children who sill have 3 years of school left? Why do you think that such a high number of teenage marriages fail? A 15-16 year old hasnt a clue what marriage means or entails. They are still growing up, not even completely physically mature in some cases.
I never mentioned worldly success, but here in the UK you cant afford to have even a very small home until you are both in full time work unless you have very rich parents, so there is a need to wait till you have left school/college and have work before you leave home and marry. It doesnt kill anyone to wait a few years, many people and couples do.
I guess that we all get the same teaching as each other as regards purity.
: Alan Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 16:24:11
Then there is the issue of people "burning with passion" for others while involved in a relationship, very likely another deterrent to get involved in relationships today.
yes. If people are used to having many sexual partners, how will they manage to then be faithful to one? Probably why so many cheat. Of course marriage should mean faithfulness, unselfishness and commitment, not very popular in today's world.
: Cally Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 16:33:54
Then there is the issue of people "burning with passion" for others while involved in a relationship, very likely another deterrent to get involved in relationships today.
It's complicated. I've written about this before, but I think part of the reason for Paul's reasonable reaction of getting people marred quickly is so that a skewed idea of sexuality doesn't form. Of course infidelity is as old as the hills, but if people marry to make a mental association of sexuality with a relationship early on, then that's what should help prevent it.
Again, Paul's statement: because there's so much immorality, everyone should get married. I'm sure that isn't a lot of people's idea of romance--to marry for that reason--but that was Paul's wisdom.
Many will then regret marrying so young, because they didnt get to 'sow their wild oats', so it doesnt always solve things.
And the modern world is messed up for how it stunts a human being's natural maturity, i.e. being stuck in school for far too long.
The culture is very fundamentally messed up. But looking at the full biblical standard, it was normal for people to marry very young. It was also doable to have some amount of autonomy at a young age, apparently, at many other points in history.
However you slice it, 1 Corinthians 7 stands: "it's better to marry than to burn with passion." Apparently it does "kill" a lot of people to wait a few years in the modern world, hence Paul advocating for people to get married ASAP in his day ("because there's so much immorality") even in the context of his belief that it was good to remain unmarried.
Proverbs 6:26: "For by way of the harlot a man is brought to a piece of bread." I have never once heard that passage preached, emphasized, or expounded upon in the context of porn problems; it's a message of love to a man to feel indignant on his own behalf at the idea of a woman pretending to love him when in reality she's treating him like an object: a meal ticket. Even a single man who wants to get married (but can't for whatever practical reasons) can be trained to see that; torture as it may be only to be forced to burn with passion for reasons beyond his control, he can take hold of the self-respect not to allow himself to be reduced to a piece of bread.
I WOULD wonder why Proverbs 6:26 isn't preached despite the frenzy over men's sexual purity . . . but I don't, really. It's part of a larger pattern, and it's part of men's larger problem: NOT to swallow lies that a man is but a performance object (the summation of just outward results), but has innate value to be supported, protected, and healed.
: Cally Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 18:06:18
And the modern world is messed up for how it stunts a human being's natural maturity, i.e. being stuck in school for far too long.
The culture is very fundamentally messed up. But looking at the full biblical standard, it was normal for people to marry very young. It was also doable to have some amount of autonomy at a young age, apparently, at many other points in history.
However you slice it, 1 Corinthians 7 stands: "it's better to marry than to burn with passion." Apparently it does "kill" a lot of people to wait a few years in the modern world, hence Paul advocating for people to get married ASAP in his day ("because there's so much immorality") even in the context of his belief that it was good to remain unmarried.
Proverbs 6:26: "For by way of the harlot a man is brought to a piece of bread." I have never once heard that passage preached, emphasized, or expounded upon in the context of porn problems; it's a message of love to a man to feel indignant on his own behalf at the idea of a woman pretending to love him when in reality she's treating him like an object: a meal ticket. Even a single man who wants to get married (but can't for whatever practical reasons) can be trained to see that; torture as it may be only to be forced to burn with passion for reasons beyond his control, he can take hold of the self-respect not to allow himself to be reduced to a piece of bread.
I WOULD wonder why Proverbs 6:26 isn't preached despite the frenzy over men's sexual purity . . . but I don't, really. It's part of a larger pattern, and it's part of men's larger problem: NOT to swallow lies that a man is but a performance object (the summation of just outward results), but has innate value to be supported, protected, and healed.
Sorry but it doesnt kill anyone to wait a few years for sex, millions do it, and if a couple have to wait for whatever reason before they can marry, it enables them to get to know each other really well without the complications of sex before marriage.
Not sure there is a frenzy is there? Not that I have noticed anyway.
Re education, kids leave school here at 17 or 18, I don't call that too old. Some go onto uni till 21, still very young.
chosenone, you are only arguing with Paul, I'm afraid.
Paul was simplistic wasnt he. Yes he said that if we are tempted sexualy we should marry, but I am not sure what those who are single are supposed to do, drag someone in off the street and force them into marriage? Of course, most marriages then were arranged, so I guess they sort of were done 'to order', but that isnt the case now and many young people who would love to get married just havent met anyone, and in the uK where Christians are very thin on the ground, and churches in general pretty small, its pretty hard to meet anyone. However the rules still apply dont they, and many people go without sex for long periods of time and many more who have met someone, will wait till marriage.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
: Catholica Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:30
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
Which countries have a Christian majority? I mean truly Christian?
You missed the point, which is that the widespread Christian acceptance of artificial contraception has *fueled* the increase of sex outside of marriage.
If a person was truly Christian, they would still say that artificial contraception was inherently sinful, just as
every single denomination did prior to the Lambeth Conference in 1930.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
I dont agree, many believers still wait for marriage till they have sex, despite birth control. IF they arent believers they are going to have sex whatever.
I believe that many believers do wait til marriage to commit the marital act. I'm not arguing that. However when the people in authority stop saying the truth about artificial contraception, which is that it is inherently evil, then people have just one less barrier helping them resist a temptation they might have to commit fornication or adultery, which is the likely and possible conception of a child. Artificial contraceptives enable those relationships to be more likely to remain hidden, and thereby more likely to be practiced by people without the natural consequences. AND Christian majority countries who authentically believed that artificial contraceptives are immoral are more likely ones to outlaw their sale. Without that witness, Christians and non-Christians alike have less barriers from the natural law to help them decide to do the right thing, which is to reserve the marital act for marriage, which is what God intended it for. And God also intended that act to be always *possibly* fruitful resulting in the conception of children. That fact is written right on our bodies.
: Catholica Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 12:40:19
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
: Catholica Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:30
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
Which countries have a Christian majority? I mean truly Christian?
You missed the point, which is that the widespread Christian acceptance of artificial contraception has *fueled* the increase of sex outside of marriage.
If a person was truly Christian, they would still say that artificial contraception was inherently sinful, just as every single denomination did prior to the Lambeth Conference in 1930.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
I dont agree, many believers still wait for marriage till they have sex, despite birth control. IF they arent believers they are going to have sex whatever.
I believe that many believers do wait til marriage to commit the marital act. I'm not arguing that. However when the people in authority stop saying the truth about artificial contraception, which is that it is inherently evil, then people have just one less barrier helping them resist a temptation they might have to commit fornication or adultery, which is the likely and possible conception of a child. Artificial contraceptives enable those relationships to be more likely to remain hidden, and thereby more likely to be practiced by people without the natural consequences. AND Christian majority countries who authentically believed that artificial contraceptives are immoral are more likely ones to outlaw their sale. Without that witness, Christians and non-Christians alike have less barriers from the natural law to help them decide to do the right thing, which is to reserve the marital act for marriage, which is what God intended it for. And God also intended that act to be always *possibly* fruitful resulting in the conception of children. That fact is written right on our bodies.
You are condemning billions of Gods much loved children by saying what you did, which is something that He will probably be pretty angry about. ::eek::
All the Bible says is be fruitful and multiply, it doesnt say how may children we must have or that we cant limit the number we have.
Those who dont know God will have sex outside marriage anyway, regardless of contraception, as they always have throughout history. Those who do, have to make that decision to obey him or not. ::shrug::
: chosenone Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 14:59:20
: Catholica Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 12:40:19
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
: Catholica Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:30
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
Which countries have a Christian majority? I mean truly Christian?
You missed the point, which is that the widespread Christian acceptance of artificial contraception has *fueled* the increase of sex outside of marriage.
If a person was truly Christian, they would still say that artificial contraception was inherently sinful, just as every single denomination did prior to the Lambeth Conference in 1930.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
I dont agree, many believers still wait for marriage till they have sex, despite birth control. IF they arent believers they are going to have sex whatever.
I believe that many believers do wait til marriage to commit the marital act. I'm not arguing that. However when the people in authority stop saying the truth about artificial contraception, which is that it is inherently evil, then people have just one less barrier helping them resist a temptation they might have to commit fornication or adultery, which is the likely and possible conception of a child. Artificial contraceptives enable those relationships to be more likely to remain hidden, and thereby more likely to be practiced by people without the natural consequences. AND Christian majority countries who authentically believed that artificial contraceptives are immoral are more likely ones to outlaw their sale. Without that witness, Christians and non-Christians alike have less barriers from the natural law to help them decide to do the right thing, which is to reserve the marital act for marriage, which is what God intended it for. And God also intended that act to be always *possibly* fruitful resulting in the conception of children. That fact is written right on our bodies.
You are condemning billions of Gods much loved children by saying what you did, which is something that He will probably be pretty angry about. ::eek::
It is true that when people call evil "good" God gets angry. That is exactly what happened, by and large, when non-Catholic Christianity said that artificial contraception is no longer sinful.
: chosenone Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 14:59:20
All the Bible says is be fruitful and multiply, it doesnt say how may children we must have or that we cant limit the number we have.
It is true that it doesn't say how many children we must have or that we can't limit them. But Onan was killed by God for what he did, which is artificially frustrate the procreative nature of the reproductive act. And by that God reveals his own "opinion" about artificial contraception.
Think of the things that artificial contraception (and it's follow-on step-sister, abortion) makes "easier" by removing the natural consequences thereof:
Pornography
Child Sexual abuse
Adultery
Fornication
Sex Slavery
Government enforced population control
When there are natural methods that, when used prudently, can morally limit the number of births in a family, why use artificial ones?
It's just like the original sin. God created things to work one way, and men mangle that and abuse it to satisfy their own immoral desires.
Why exactly is it that we promote marriage so?
Last I checked, the Bible spoke highly of those who remained single.
Why exactly is it that we promote marriage so?
People almost never listen to me when I say this (as far as I can tell) by answer is that people expect it to fulfill way more relationship needs than it is designed to meet. We have maybe a page's worth of the Bible talking about marriage with so much more talking about a church and interactions between the body of believers which is pathetically realized in the world today. Marriage is treated way too much like the "all your eggs in one basket" relationship when more work and focus should be done on truly making the church conform to the spirit in which it's described in the New Testament.
Marriage IS a wonderful thing without a single innate error in it. But unfortunately it can be an idol to many which damages its good purposes.
We are made for marriage, designed for marriage and to have children. A few have the gift of singleness, but they are few and far between(in fact I have never met one). Nearly all of us have a desire to meet someone and marry.
God Himself says its not good for man to be alone, and few want to be. The desire to be with another person is God given.
The church is our spiritual family, but marriage must always come first. So for a woman her husband and children are her first ministry and for a man his wife and children are. After that comes the wider family, the spiritual family and friends.
: Catholica Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 15:22:41
: chosenone Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 14:59:20
: Catholica Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 12:40:19
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
: Catholica Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:30
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
Which countries have a Christian majority? I mean truly Christian?
You missed the point, which is that the widespread Christian acceptance of artificial contraception has *fueled* the increase of sex outside of marriage.
If a person was truly Christian, they would still say that artificial contraception was inherently sinful, just as every single denomination did prior to the Lambeth Conference in 1930.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
I dont agree, many believers still wait for marriage till they have sex, despite birth control. IF they arent believers they are going to have sex whatever.
I believe that many believers do wait til marriage to commit the marital act. I'm not arguing that. However when the people in authority stop saying the truth about artificial contraception, which is that it is inherently evil, then people have just one less barrier helping them resist a temptation they might have to commit fornication or adultery, which is the likely and possible conception of a child. Artificial contraceptives enable those relationships to be more likely to remain hidden, and thereby more likely to be practiced by people without the natural consequences. AND Christian majority countries who authentically believed that artificial contraceptives are immoral are more likely ones to outlaw their sale. Without that witness, Christians and non-Christians alike have less barriers from the natural law to help them decide to do the right thing, which is to reserve the marital act for marriage, which is what God intended it for. And God also intended that act to be always *possibly* fruitful resulting in the conception of children. That fact is written right on our bodies.
You are condemning billions of Gods much loved children by saying what you did, which is something that He will probably be pretty angry about. ::eek::
It is true that when people call evil "good" God gets angry. That is exactly what happened, by and large, when non-Catholic Christianity said that artificial contraception is no longer sinful.
: chosenone Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 14:59:20
All the Bible says is be fruitful and multiply, it doesnt say how may children we must have or that we cant limit the number we have.
It is true that it doesn't say how many children we must have or that we can't limit them. But Onan was killed by God for what he did, which is artificially frustrate the procreative nature of the reproductive act. And by that God reveals his own "opinion" about artificial contraception.
Think of the things that artificial contraception (and it's follow-on step-sister, abortion) makes "easier" by removing the natural consequences thereof:
Pornography
Child Sexual abuse
Adultery
Fornication
Sex Slavery
Government enforced population control
When there are natural methods that, when used prudently, can morally limit the number of births in a family, why use artificial ones?
It's just like the original sin. God created things to work one way, and men mangle that and abuse it to satisfy their own immoral desires.
Onans sin was nothing to do with contraception or masturbation(as some would say)
We will have to agree to disagree on the contraception aspect, I dont see it a sin in anyway, and nor do most R catholics judging by the fact that most of them in the west seem to have very small families.
Even if you use the so called 'natural' methods, you are still seeking to stop a baby, so I can never understand why that is ok???
: Wycliffes_Shillelagh Sat Jun 20, 2015 - 00:46:19
Why exactly is it that we promote marriage so?
Last I checked, the Bible spoke highly of those who remained single.
Two clear reasons that I can think of, which are the propagation of the human race, and also the relationship of marriage is an earthly sign and visible example showing the relationship between Christ and the Church.
: Catholica Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 15:22:41
: chosenone Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 14:59:20
: Catholica Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 12:40:19
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
: Catholica Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 15:39:30
The increase of sex outside of marriage in countries with a Christian majority has been fueled by the acceptance and allowance and even promotion of artificial contraception by Christian congregations.
Which countries have a Christian majority? I mean truly Christian?
You missed the point, which is that the widespread Christian acceptance of artificial contraception has *fueled* the increase of sex outside of marriage.
If a person was truly Christian, they would still say that artificial contraception was inherently sinful, just as every single denomination did prior to the Lambeth Conference in 1930.
: chosenone Wed Jun 17, 2015 - 17:42:21
I dont agree, many believers still wait for marriage till they have sex, despite birth control. IF they arent believers they are going to have sex whatever.
I believe that many believers do wait til marriage to commit the marital act. I'm not arguing that. However when the people in authority stop saying the truth about artificial contraception, which is that it is inherently evil, then people have just one less barrier helping them resist a temptation they might have to commit fornication or adultery, which is the likely and possible conception of a child. Artificial contraceptives enable those relationships to be more likely to remain hidden, and thereby more likely to be practiced by people without the natural consequences. AND Christian majority countries who authentically believed that artificial contraceptives are immoral are more likely ones to outlaw their sale. Without that witness, Christians and non-Christians alike have less barriers from the natural law to help them decide to do the right thing, which is to reserve the marital act for marriage, which is what God intended it for. And God also intended that act to be always *possibly* fruitful resulting in the conception of children. That fact is written right on our bodies.
You are condemning billions of Gods much loved children by saying what you did, which is something that He will probably be pretty angry about. ::eek::
It is true that when people call evil "good" God gets angry. That is exactly what happened, by and large, when non-Catholic Christianity said that artificial contraception is no longer sinful.
: chosenone Fri Jun 19, 2015 - 14:59:20
All the Bible says is be fruitful and multiply, it doesnt say how may children we must have or that we cant limit the number we have.
It is true that it doesn't say how many children we must have or that we can't limit them. But Onan was killed by God for what he did, which is artificially frustrate the procreative nature of the reproductive act. And by that God reveals his own "opinion" about artificial contraception.
Think of the things that artificial contraception (and it's follow-on step-sister, abortion) makes "easier" by removing the natural consequences thereof:
Pornography
Child Sexual abuse
Adultery
Fornication
Sex Slavery
Government enforced population control
When there are natural methods that, when used prudently, can morally limit the number of births in a family, why use artificial ones?
It's just like the original sin. God created things to work one way, and men mangle that and abuse it to satisfy their own immoral desires.
Catholic Christianity has problems of its own. Such as teaching a doctrine of demons that forbids its clergy to marry. Sexual sin with children is the result.
Two clear reasons that I can think of, which are the propagation of the human race, and also the relationship of marriage is an earthly sign and visible example showing the relationship between Christ and the Church.
Jesus and Paul both esteemed celibacy, and of course so does the Catholic church for clergymen staying celibate.
Tell me how Catholic wives have at least one baby every nine months for the entire duration of their fertile years and maybe your argument could begin to have credibility; as it is, however you slice it, people avoid an excess of children, whether by contraception or avoiding sex during marriage to any extent at all. If you argue against contraception on the basis that people should be making as many babies as possible in marriages, then the course of action is clearly to make as many babies as possible.
: Cally Sun Jun 21, 2015 - 15:42:11
Two clear reasons that I can think of, which are the propagation of the human race, and also the relationship of marriage is an earthly sign and visible example showing the relationship between Christ and the Church.
Jesus and Paul both esteemed celibacy, and of course so does the Catholic church for clergymen staying celibate.
Tell me how Catholic wives have at least one baby every nine months for the entire duration of their fertile years and maybe your argument could begin to have credibility; as it is, however you slice it, people avoid an excess of children, whether by contraception or avoiding sex during marriage to any extent at all. If you argue against contraception on the basis that people should be making as many babies as possible in marriages, then the course of action is clearly to make as many babies as possible.
In Catholic understanding, "grace builds on nature". Which means that God works both through the natural and on the natural.
The body of a woman is an amazing creation of God. When a baby is born, God created a natural time where the woman remains infertile. This period of infertility is then extended even longer when the woman feeds her baby with her body. This by itself means that women are not going to have babies every nine months.
But then each month there are periods of infertility: during the monthly cycle of menses, and then for a few days, and then for another week prior to the menses, give or take. God created natural periods of infertility each month.
As God's stewards of nature, we are able to use nature for the benefit of our families and the kingdom. And that can mean using knowledge of the God-given periods of fertility in order to try to achieve pregnancy. or to utilize the periods of infertility in order to delay pregnancy for a time, when serious reasons exist for doing so. All within the normal bounds of holy matrimony, according to God's moral law.
Andre, what you're alluding to is still engaging in sex but utilizing knowledge to prevent pregnancy, doesn't really seem all that different than using other methods of birth control.
: Alan Mon Jun 22, 2015 - 13:38:37
Andre, what you're alluding to is still engaging in sex but utilizing knowledge to prevent pregnancy, doesn't really seem all that different than using other methods of birth control.
Well thats exactly my point, its still avoiding a pregnancy and sounds very hypocritical to say thats ok and other methods arent.
Either you just have sex period and do nothing at all to avoid a pregnancy, or you think its ok to prevent one.
Is everybody here single? Because I've seen some names here that are posting in marriage forum too.
Anyway, about the OP, not really surprising. Kids are into hooking up now with no strings. Hit it and quit it. This way they get the pleasure that satisfies their passions and without the tie down. And that lets them pursue their education, career, or whatever they want without having to answer to someone at home just because they sleep together now and then.
: Spirit Filled Mon Jun 22, 2015 - 18:44:13
Is everybody here single? Because I've seen some names here that are posting in marriage forum too.
Quite right. Most of us here in this thread are married. That is allowed in the rules of this forum.
Anyway, about the OP, not really surprising. Kids are into hooking up now with no strings. Hit it and quit it. This way they get the pleasure that satisfies their passions and without the tie down. And that lets them pursue their education, career, or whatever they want without having to answer to someone at home just because they sleep together now and then.
Welcome to the moral travesty that is 21st century Western culture.
Just when I had it together the duck tape failed
I
hate it when that happens .....
This is for singles only. Can those who are married please remember that and not post here?
: Spirit Filled Mon Jul 06, 2015 - 15:28:17
This is for singles only. Can those who are married please remember that and not post here?
Married people are allowed to post here if the thread is relevant to all people. Please remember that all of us have been single and have family members or friends who are single. Many contributing to this thread are married, in fact there arent many singles here so they may not be much of a discussion otherwise. ::shrug::
PS I am female and not male as you mentioned in your report.
Sorry about the mix up on your sex status.
This forum is described as being for singles. If the titles don't matter and these type forums are free for all that's OK too. Women can cross into the men's section, singles into the married, and all that I guess.
Thanks for letting us know.
Its in the rules, married people are allowed to state an opinion in this section. Remember we have all been single once. If you have something you want to say, you are also allowed to post in the married section.