collegebound91

So am I the only person who identifies as Christian, but isn't planning to wait? Although, to be fair, I do identify more as an Agnostic than a true "Christian", since I don't really agree with organized religion.

Anyway, I used to say I would wait until marriage, but as I got older and started dating, the idea just seemed less...realistic. I abstained from it in high school, but now that I'm off to college, I'm not going to run from a sexual relationship. I'll just be safe. I don't know, I just don't feel like it's such a huge deal like everyone makes it out to be. But I do respect people's right to make that choice.

Alix2012

@tokdoc - But why is it ideal? I don't tell Dr.Laura what to put in her vagina, and I hardly expect her to tell me what's ok to put in mine. If you want to be virgin and wear a special ring because you think god is telling you, go ahead, that's cool. But please don't tell the rest of us what's "ideal" for our relationships or what to do with our bodies. And if you take birth control daily and also use condoms correctly whenever you have sex, any baby produced is nothing short of a miracle.

Besides, Dr.Laura has mentioned "ex-gay groups" that try to convert homosexuals into hetereosexuals, and I'm afraid I can't take her seriously after that, despite any degrees she might have. I take her about as seriously as I take Dr.Phil, maybe less seriously because this "religious" woman also had nude photos leaked of her online (oops, satan must've made her do it!")

Also, you keep mentioning that sex causes the partners to be even more attached - I agree, and that also means 2 partner's not having sex aren't as attached, so you're going into marriage with a less intimate relationship...actually when it comes down to it, how are your relationships with a significant other any different from relationships with friends?

tokdoc

Collegebound-It's great that you've waited to this point. I'm sure you realize that when people use the term "safe sex" that it's only "safer". STDs can be transmitted despite the use of condoms and, of course, other BC methods offer zero protection in the disease area. And since birth control is somewhere between 50% and 98% effective, depending on the method and diligence in use, there is a decent chance that pregnancy can result (which is a BIG DEAL). All of this in addition to the fact that (I'm repeating myself now) sex promotes an inappropriately intense level of emotional bonding (inappropriate because sex speeds up the relationship process geometrically). This makes it very difficult to separate from a partner who you would otherwise realize isn't a good match. I know all this throws a wet blanket on some of the excitement of the college experience, but the consequences of "recreational sex" heavily outweigh the benefits, even though that's so hard to see when you're eighteen.

Yankee Belle

Here's an article from 1993 saying that the Jews started the radical idea of no sex outside of marriage. The author, Dennis Prager, states that it had a civilizing effect on men and therefore society. The claim is that women are better off when men are monogamous inside marriage. Take it as you like, but I found it interesting considering the problems our society has due to the loosening of sexual mores over the past 40 years or so.

tokdoc

Alix, I think my reply to Collegebound addresses some of your post. Dr. Laura isn't telling you what to do at all. She offers advice to folks who call her show and read her books, thereby soliciting her opinion. It's a still a free country, but freedom to do things doesn't mean it's the right thing. And, Dr. Laura has explained in detail the incident you mention with the photos (taken when she was in her twenties and an ardent feminist with no moral compass). She's expressed her great shame over this mistake and hopes to inspire young people today to better behavior-something she learned the hard way. Certainly, when one knows better, one does better...right? Her hard-earned knowledge and wise advice surely don't make her a hypocrite.

cdover

Exactly. She has a doctorate degree in physiology and although she obtained a MFCC certificate after her doctorate degree, that license is now invalid (even when it was valid, she never obtained a state license and, therefore, it was and still is illegal for her to call herself a psychotherapist).

Again, she is a smart woman. And there are many benefits to sex abstinence. But, IMO, I do not think the teaching of abstinence is effective in this day and age. This is especially true when 'moral' people like Dr. Laura haven't quite lived an idealistically moral life either. The American Medical Association found that teaching a non-comprehensive sexual education actually increased birth rates amongst teens (as well as increase oral and anal infections from STDs).

Could this possible mean that a life of abstinence before marriage for teens these days is so hard, that in order to have the ideal born-into-wedlock child, we should actually inform them about sex? Hey, I don't know, I'm no expert. But you should read this. It is not as detailed as I would like it to be, but it is written by a person with the right qualifications.

As a side note, Rush Limbaugh also has a hugely popular radio show. I don't know if that means he is a qualified expert on immigration and the like.

tokdoc

cDover-Of course Dr. Laura held a valid California license. It's not legal see patients without it. In California therapists can let their licenses go to "inactive" status (not invalid) if they are not seeing patients. It would be hard not to credit her as an expert in this area. You sound so hostile. Is it because I referenced Dr. Laura-the bane of the left?

Also, I think the comparison to Rush Limbaugh is weak. In any case, you sound very much against the idea that kids would be better off if they waited to have sex for as long as possible, ideally until marriage. I wonder why. Certainly it's possible. As I mentioned above, past generations managed to wait with much greater frequency, perhaps because pre-marital sex was generally frowned upon. Societal attitudes are the key here, I think.

dshinka

So am I the only person who identifies as Christian, but isn't planning to wait? Although, to be fair, I do identify more as an Agnostic than a true "Christian", since I don't really agree with organized religion.

--

Not agreeing with institutionalized and organized religion doesn't make one agnostic or vice-versa... those are two independent things. I'm not sure what the non-protestant definition of being a Christian is, but the protestant one, started by Martin Luther is "salvation by faith [or belief] alone [as oppose to works/actions]." In other words, one has to believe in Jesus and repent of one's sins to be "saved" from hell... I don't like organized religion, either, the way I've seen it implemented because it doesn't teach us to think critically, and the denominations, instead of admitting they could be wrong in their interpretations, are adamantly arrogant. For example, although born and raised a southern baptist, I'm starting to have doubts about the whole trinity thing - the phrase isn't in the Bible and wasn't coined until centuries after Christ - so the early believers didn't believe in a trinity... But anyway, all that being said, I believe we're supposed to fellowship on a regular basis with other Christians and so I still go to church - I just keep my complaints to myself since I believe sowing seeds of discord in the church is also wrong...

dshinka

Here's an article from 1993 saying that the Jews started the radical idea of no sex outside of marriage. The author, Dennis Prager, states that it had a civilizing effect on men and therefore society. The claim is that women are better off when men are monogamous inside marriage. Take it as you like, but I found it interesting considering the problems our society has due to the loosening of sexual mores over the past 40 years or so.

--

Well if you have the premise that the Jews are indeed God's chosen people and that is was something sovereign that told them this, this shouldn't be surprising. God is infinitely wise and would know that extra-marital sex would be detrimental to a society...

While I agree with your conclusion, I would like to know some specific examples of how increased sexual activity has caused societal problems...

cdover

It used to be legal for her to see patients as a counselor, not as the "licensed therapist" she calls herself.

I'm not hostile to that idea. Let me quote myself for your reference:

I was complaining about the inefficiency of the present teaching of abstinence.

In any case, you can interpret what I have said as hostility towards Dr. Laura. I think being hostile against one person for their opinion is better than being hostile to millions of people for who they are.

tokdoc

cDover-You'll just have to take my word for it ('cause I am one) that in California a licensed person can call themselves a therapist or a counselor. The terms are interchangeable. MFCC (marriage, family, child counselor) has now been replaced by MFT (marriage and family therapist).

Also, Dr. Laura is not hostile at all toward gays. She takes a number of calls from gay people about issues of concern to them. Some of her statements have angered the gay community as a whole, not that she was inaccurate, but not as sensitive as she should have been.

Muscle7

YouTube - George Carlin - Religion is ********.

AeroEngineer3141

I'm Roman Catholic and I don't plan on waiting.

Muscle, posts like yours don't contribute at all. At the very least have the intelligence to come up with an argument of your own.

tokdoc

Muscle-I fear that we've diverged a bit too far from topics that are appropriate and helpful here. But, just fore record, Carlin's rant is no more tolerant than the religions he decries. You guys really need to stay off those lefty sites

collegebound91

dshinka- I suppose agnosticism isn't the best phrase, but I never know how else to put it? And I still live with my parents (I don't move until late August), so I still go to church too. There's a slight chance I may even continue to go in college; however, my opinion of church (mine in particular) has been very soured in the last few years... So who knows? And interesting point about the Trinity.

And tokdoc- I realize that no method is 100% foolproof, but, as Alix2012 stated, if used correctly, it's very hard to get pregnant with condoms and BC. It happens, but rarely. Also I'll get tested, and make sure whomever I'm with does too. I'm not planning on sleeping with every guy I date; I'd rather stay in a monogamous relationship. And yes, I know that sleeping with someone creates a new emotional level with your partner, but isn't that the point? You love them and you want to really be with them?

I haven't known too many people who've entered a sexual relationship with someone who isn't a "good match" for them, and refused to leave it, just for the sex. They seem to operate the same way--it's not working out, you quit and move on, just like you would if you weren't sleeping together.