We discovered a video response to our Abstinence Episode on YouTube. Hal Chaffee is a firm believer in abstinence, and he makes some points.
Feel free to discuss in the comments section, and many thanks to Hal for letting us share his work.
Sex is more fun when you share!
I think it’s my first message on this blog, that I’ve been folowing for a while now.
I’d like first to congrat Hal for the “self control” he has performed, being abstinent unitl marriage. But I don’t agree on the poin “we value sex”.
I value sex too, and I’ve been waiting a lot of time before having my first relation. I was totally in love. But I DO think that you need to practice, before getting good feelings. I mean, evoeryone acts on a different way when having sex. Someone likes things that otherone doesn’t like. Finding a person that matches your “sex behaviour” is really important. I would never take the risk of marrying someone I never slept with.
I definitely need to practice my English, but I hope you understood what I meant
(I love this show)
Hal supports our statement that more people will want to do you if you aren’t doing it.
Sex is like buying a car. You wouldn’t buy a car without test driving it first would you?
Hal,
You state your beliefs in a very calm and reasonable manner but I simply cannot disagree with you more.
First, your choice to be abstinent until marriage is exactly that, a choice. You seem an informed and reasonable person, and you and your wife made a decision. But that choice is not an informed one for teens who are being taught abstinence only sex education.
Abstinence education does not promote choice, it sets up abstinence as the only ‘correct’ choice and promotes ignorance regarding sexual development. I work as a teen librarian and I’ve talked to young adult patrons who barely understand their own biology because of the intentional vagueness and misinformation given in abstinence education. Choices should be informed.
You talk about wanting purity from your wife. Do you really believe that if she was with another partner she would have been sullied or less worthy of your love and respect? Purity is a very loaded word. Is a rape victim or abuse survivor “impure”? That’s going to an extreme, I know. But what about someone who was simply socially pressured into sexuality, are they forever “tainted” by those choices?
Which gets to the deeper question, that sexuality is somehow dirty or fallen by nature. I just don’t accept that at all Hal. The love between you and your wife is no greater or more pure because of your abstinence than the love between my girlfriend and I because we are intimate. Sex is a wonderful part of love, it can express feelings without the cumbersome nature of words. If anything, I’m sorry you had to wait so long to discover that.
The father of an ex-girlfriend of mine once said “If my children are fully grown adults who are skittish about sex or feel that their bodies are shameful or that sex is a dirty thing, then I have failed as a father”. He wanted his daughter to be happy, healthy and comfortable in her own skin. Shame and impurity have no place there Hal.
I’m very happy that you and your wife were able to find each other and wish you long and joyful lives together.
I think that holds far more true if you are a woman.
i’m down with hal expressing himself, and i do agree that some of the portrayals of abstinent teens (the downs syndrome parody in particular) in the MTSS episode are offensive. still, let’s not pretend that the “abstinence message” is being persecuted. the president wants to throw $204 million at it next year. so hal – you do what you gotta do – but anyone who thinks they have the right to force their values and beliefs on young people everywhere…well, i wish them all the worst/best MTSS can dish out.
Hal,
you stated your point in a clear and concise manner, but…
did you even go through puberty, hal? or was your sexual development
spontaneous? the teenage libido is a powerful drive, since biologically we are ready to procreate during and after puberty.
that drive we cannot combat unless, hal, you may have been the king of masturbation as a teen, but i seriously doubt that you did nothing
sexual until you were married. btw, heavy petting and groping still counts as sex, even if you didnt “get off”
so please remember, celibacy until marriage is a wonderful notion and belief, but its a pipe dream in modern times with the media overlords forcing sex down our throats like horrid medicine. we simply cannot deny what we are. sex is a primal force, and Beastiae sumus ut non beastiae simus. so hal, its not okay to assume that todays youth will not try to be free from sex, but its nearly impossible to do so.
Hal sounds a bit prejudice against those that don’t wait. Look. Most of the women I know wait to sleep with men they truly care about and feel chemistry with. Just because sex isn’t within the sacred bonds of marriage doesn’t make it any less sacred, thank you very much. (To be honest, I’ve always viewed the idea of marriage as superfluous.. especially with its ties to church and law that, to me, demeans the value of two people’s connection to each other.)
Speaking of being offended, I think the tone of Hal’s voice when he compares his pure wife to the women that “sleep around” was bordering on the offensive.
I will say, however, that Hal has a point about the episode. I thought more attention would be paid to the other side of the coin; men (like Hal) and women (his wife) who attach different values to their sexual interactions. It also seemed like you (the show at large) characterized those that abstained in a light that your typical teenager would scorn. Hardly the frank, double-edged sword I was used to seeing Nikol wield.
Yours,
Rebecca L.
ps. I would like to point out that I, personally, have nothing against those who abstain.. or those who don’t. It’s a personal choice. Hopefully it’s not a stupid choice, but that is up to the individual.
I want to reply to this is in a meaningful open-minded conversation, but my brain just isn’t forming the right words right now. This jist of what I want to say is, there is two ways to abstinence. The wrong way “GOD FORBIDS YOU TO HAVE SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE!” and the proper giving all the facts way. BUT ALSO teach how to protect yourself if you do find yourself in such a position (no pun intended).
I think this show has done a good job of getting the message across. Keep up the good work ladies!
Animals don’t practice abstinence. So why should humans? Sex is not “special”. That “specialness” is a social construction. It’s completely illogical. When I find out that someone is abstinent, they go down a few pegs in my level of respect for them.
Thanks, Hal, for you comments. However, what about those people, (myself included) who don’t believe in the “sanctity” of marriage? Marriage tends to be a religious institution, and one I don’t subscribe to.
In a way, I understand your want to secure “purity”, but as another poster said, what makes a person who has had sex previously “impure”?
Then, there’s the whole kerfuffle involving say, someone, who has waited until marriage before engaging in sex and eventually getting a divorce due to circumstances outside their control, or indeed, being a widow or widower. Are these people “impure”? I understand your want to have that, but it is a preference, and not a rule.
Let’s say, Flying Spaghetti Monster forbid, that you die in a year. (I’m not wishing ill toward you, this is just an example). Would you wish your wife to live sexless and loveless for the rest of her life, considering her lack of “purity” at that point?
I understand and appreciate your view, but realize that complete information is probably neither harmful, nor will it cause the “heartache and pain” that you state they will. If one were to censor the idea of sex at that age, (and believe me, I’m not one to dive in suddenly. I waited for over a year to have sex with my first girlfriend, much to her chagrin, even though we were both virgins, until I felt we were ready), I think it would cause more heartache and pain than lack of information by omission.
Finally, I want to address the fact that you seemed to jump the gray gap entirely by stating you appreciate the fact that your wife waited for marriage, instead of “sleeping around with lots of guys”. Where does the person who had sex once or twice fit in? No offense, man, but you sound very defensive, and I’d bet dollars to donuts that you’re a church-going man. No worries or offense intended on that, but realize that no matter what you believe, there’s someone who doesn’t believe that with the same fervor.
Thanks for all your wonderful comments!
Who can deny that sex is safest in a life-long committed relationship?
Sexual desire is natural and God given. Human begins are designed to have sex. But, on the same token, human beings were also given the profound ability to exercise dominion over their strong bodily urges (unlike animals, sir). It is not okay to have sex simply because your body desires to have sex. This idea has led to our problems of rape and sexual abuse.
The idea that teenagers can’t control themselves for a few years until they are married is absurd. The reason they don’t control themselves is #1 because they don’t want to, and #2 because we live in a sex-saturated culture that exploits teenagers’ sexuality to make a buck.
But I’m not saying that teenagers must practice abstinence. It’s their choice what they do. I simply promote the safest way to have sex. I also provide myself as an example that it can be done.
- Hal
Yeah Hal, and I’m going to say that the only reason they made that episode is because teenage girls are ALREADY having sex, and they sent emails asking for the episode.
Hal, I hate to think that you would call me a bad person because I sewed a few wild oats when I was younger. I WANTED to be a bit promiscuous. I was proud of my tight, young, smooth body that all the other guys were attracted to. And I was attracted to them as well. I had a great time getting to know myself sexually with the people that I decided to share that part of myself with.
Ain’t nothin’ wrong with some pre-marital bangin’, Hal. You know, once upon a time, there was no such thing as marriage, and people weren’t monogymous… Maybe it’s engrained (more so than abstinence) within the human mind to want to go out and have some sex. It’s important in development, and it’s FUN! And besides, what if you and your wife are no longer sexually interested in each other in the future because you didn’t bother to take the time to find out what really satisfies you?
There is so much excitement, and pleasure, and fun, and emotion, and sometimes even humor that comes with sex and I feel you deprive yourself of a wonderful chance to really get to know yourself when you practice abstinence because you feel you have to.
So, now that I’m the ripe old age of 25, I have settled down. I have an amazing boyfriend (I introduce him as my other/better half), and we have AMAZING sex. One of the reasons that there is so much passion and attraction between us (going on 3 years later…) is because we share similar sexual tastes. We had both had the opportunity to get to know our likes and dislikes, and to develop sexually. We were TRULY ready for each other when we found one another.
Hal, I wish you the best of luck, but abstinence is NOT for everybody. This episode was made so those who go out and choose sex have some base information. They know to always
1. USE A CONDOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2. Have sex with someone you like and trust
3. Talk with your partner about likes and dislikes
4. And HAVE FUN!
People are always going to get hurt, Hal, but I feel like keeping people in the dark on non-abstinence sex-ed is MORE harmful than bad break-ups, or akward back-seat sex.
Oh, and Hal,… You’re a hottie! I would have tried really hard to get you to give it up… ;-P
Looking at the comments here, it seems that most people are taking completely different sides to this, whereas my personal opinion is somewhere in between. At 22 I’m still a virgin because I haven’t found someone I’m willing to share it with, but I’m not planning on waiting until my wedding night either. Yes I believe that sex should be something special, whilst still realising that it is a primal force backed up by the modern media. In many ways it is because of this pressure that abstaining can be a good thing. If I’m not going to be any good my first time, I’d rather it be with someone who I know understands it’s first time, and isn’t going to mock me for it.
At the end of the day, I also believe it should be the choice of the individual, and not something that should be dictated by society/religion/governments/anyone else, and I that was also the message I got from the podcast. The characters depicted in the podcast seemed tome to be so satirical that no one watching would actually take them seriously.
Hal,
This comment
“It is not okay to have sex simply because your body desires to have sex. This idea has led to our problems of rape and sexual abuse.”
is simply factually inaccurate and more than a little offensive.
Rape and sexual abuse are actions derived not from sexual openness. Sexual abuse is not simply a matter of sexual desire, it’s an outgrowth of deep mental illness. Someone who sexualizes children is not acting out of simple lust.
Rapists do not act out of simple biology. It’s cliche but true all the same, rape is a crime of power. Rapists want to demean their victims, control them and subject them to their will. This isn’t a desire for sexual release, it’s a need to debase another.
An open approach to sexuality does not lead to an increase in sexual abuse or rape. Some of the most repressive religious regimes on earth, where ‘purity’ is enforced by will of law, see enormous amounts of sexual crime. It just goes unreported.
I said your comments could be seen as offensive, because in essence you are saying that sexual desire leaves the door open to rape and abuse. This teeters far to close to the “loose girls are asking for it” argument for me. An argument that has prevented millions of victims from stepping forward, an argument that shames the victim of an assault and damages their sexual identity, their person hood, often irreparably. I speak on this topic from a very personal place Hal, and would advise you to get informed about the facts when it comes to sexual assault and abuse, for the sake of any young people in your life.
On the purity, does having sex makes someone less pure ?
Not having sex leading to purity implies that sex is unpure, or dirty. I think sex between two people who love eachother is one of the most beautifull things that exists.
The no sex before marriage thing is so you can give yourself to only one person, the person that you will stay with forever, mr/mrs right.
The problem with that is that you dont know who mr/mrs right is, you can only assume he/she is it, and hope he/she doesnt turn his/her back on you after you’ve decided. Marriage doesnt change that, it only gives you a bit more security (or so you think).
If you think a legal document is going to change the odds of him/her leaving you, you are wrong, If you think a vow before god will change the odds of him/her leaving you, you are wrong. (The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%) The only thing that will keep your partner by your side is love.
Naturally, before you have sex with someone you should really take days, weeks, months, or maybe years before you decide you are up for it. (please note YOU should decide whether YOU want it, dont let others make that decision for you)
My personal experiance with this;
)
When I met my girlfriend, I was a virgin, she wasnt.
I had deep down always regretted the fact that she had sex with others before me.
There was real love between me and her though, so we had sex within the first month of knowing eachother.
That was 2 years ago, now we are still together, still madly in love. (and still having sex
I would like nothing more than to spend my entire life with her, though I do think that like many relationships, ours could also fall apart. I hope it never comes to that, and I believe it will never come to that, but still, 41% of americans believe in it so much that they are willing to spend alot of money, time, and effort, in uniting themselves in what later would be called a sad waist of time.
Saving yourself for your partner (and have him/her do it too) untill marriage must be a beatifull thing, and I would like that my first time would be with my wife too. Though I think, it wouldnt be realistic to try, and I would be denying myself fun.
TL:DR version
My stance on no sex before marriage can be summed up in one sentence:
Not “no sex before marriage”, but “no sex before love”.
We’ve been talking about our Abstinence Episode for a while because we wanted to revisit it. I am so glad this conversation is happening.
I am personally rather tired of sex being treated as if it is not a natural part of human behavior.
Just so everyone knows upfront, I will always keep identities of emailers private, but I need to share something with you that I feel is related to this topic in an all too real way.
I have gotten more than one email from girls who are already sexually active, yet they will not get a pelvic exam because it is “icky.” What, pray tell, is so icky about it? (Shut it, Scott. I know how you feel about vaginas!) Through this idea of “purity” I feel that we are misleading kids into thinking that parts of their bodies are impure by default, especially if they have already sullied that body part with that horrible, gross act of sex.
Hal, you are very fortunate to have the life that you do. You are showing plenty of people that it is possible to stick to a conviction. Just don’t undermine the conviction of others to have safe, educated sex and not see each part of their bodies as just as lovely as the rest.
Not to get all Whitney Houston (early Whitney, not crack is whack Whitney) but I think everyone here can agree that the one conviction that matters the most is loving yourself and your body, no matter if you choose to have sex or not.
I am really proud of how calmly and intelligently Hal got his point across. I don’t agree, but it’s better than many reactions I’ve seen to this show.
Thank you, Garret, for responding in an equally responsible manner. I am so proud of how intelligent people are being here!
The problem with this argument is simple. It’s impossible to be properly informed on both sides. If you’re abstinent, you won’t understand exactly what non-marital sex brings. If you aren’t abstinent, you’ll never understand what disciplined abstinence brings. There’s no way to learn about these topics except by experimentation, and, sadly, the two are mutually exclusive by nature.
There’s really no right answer. It’s all personal preference.
On the subject of sex and purity, I always liked this quote:
“Love is pure; and when that is missing, your trying to become pure through the sublimation of sex is mere stupidity. The factor that purifies is love, not your desire to be pure. A man who loves is pure, though he may be sexual; and without love, sex is what it is now in your lives - a routine, an ugly process, a thing to be avoided, ignored, done away with, or indulged in.”
It comes off a bit harsh at the end. But I think it’s a good message. Sex is neither pure or impure on it’s own; the important thing is to love your partner.
I wish he had given a middle ground between total abstinence until marriage and promiscuity, because that’s where most of us are. I’m uncomfortable with the idea that “virgin equals pure,” because I don’t see anything impure about having sex with someone you love or care about. And even if we are talking about casual sex, well, who’s to say that’s impure, especially when you don’t know the person or the feelings behind whatever road they chose to take.
NIKOL!!! You know me so well.
I’m totally with you on this one though. All men and women should have a YEARLY full physical exam, sexually active or not!
We only get one chance to keep ourselves healthy!
Schedule an appointment with your doctors today!
I feel that his statement was a bit radical in the sense of terms he used, which makes me question his religious reference.
Maybe you should make a video on religion and sex.
I myself am a teen. We do indulge in superior thinking my fellow seniors! We have brains and we do use them. Think of yourself when you were a teenager. Were you constantly braindead? If so, mankind has drastically jumped a hurdle in the evolution process.
Hal is admirable in that he was willing to take a position in a calm and reasoned manner, and to take the risk of putting not only his name but his face behind his opinions. You sure won’t see me on YouTube!
However (you know there was something, didn’t you?), I’d like to say that I wish people would stop being quite so easily offended. I saw the episode, and I didn’t think anyone was saying that people who don’t have sex are dorks. Please (and when I say please I mean PLEASE) bear in mind this is a comedy show. While it has many educational aspects, its own disclaimer admits that it’s primarily for entertainment. There will be goofiness. There will be nerdiness. And people are just too damned eager to be offended. Berke Breathed, in the eighties (yes I’m old shut up) coined the phrase “offensensitivity” to describe what is fast becoming a neurosis (no I’m not a psychologist or psychiatrist or therapist and you know what I mean so why are you changing the subject shut up) in the USA.
Is it offensive? More importantly, in my view, was it intended to offend? If there was no intent, much can be let slide. Not all, but much. If not, why would your Christian god be so willing to forgive? (No I’m not Jewish that isn’t the only option shut up.)
Have Fun.
AWESOME! I am glad to see different views here. abstinence is hard, I couldent and didnt. I’m married with a kid of my own now, and I hope she can find a middle ground between abstinence and promiscuity.
I agree that sex and religion would make a very interesting show!
I totally agree with Hal. On the finer points, of course abstinence is a choice. No one who has premarital sex should feel condemend or dirty, at least not from me. I think what Hal means by “impure” is the whole idea of lost innocents- which of course not everyone agress with. It is possible to deny that maybe Hal has a point that premarital sex can be hurtful? Think of all the hurtful and devastating things that can happen to someone who has had sex before marriage (even if it unintentional, rape etc). With STD’s, pregnancy, abortion, rape, and emotional and psychological distress that can occur from such instances- it is not pushing it to say that premarital sex may not be the best choice. It so much easier to have sex i agree, but I think the benefits outweigh the control it takes to stay abstinent. Think about this for a second: If you are going to have a substancial relationship with someone involving sex woudlnt you want to know that the person you are with (that you hopefully love) hasen’t been with a crap load of people??? I know a lot of guys who would get jelous or disgusted by the idea that THIER woman was with many other guys. Living in culture and times that we do, we are constantly surrounded by sexual images, music, movies etc. No doubt its hard to stay away from such things, but it IS NOT impossible, and Hal is a perfect example of such a thing. Just because someone dosent choose to have the self control and stay abstinent does not mean someone else can. Of course many will argue that Iam being rude saying that the issue of “self control” is irrelevent or that it dosent apply. I disagree, if people (including me) had more self control this world would be a better place.
Garrett States, “Sexual abuse is not simply a matter of sexual desire, it?s an outgrowth of deep mental illness.” First i have to ask where you got this information from. I have to say that 3 years of studying psychology have never yealded this information, as far as i know sexual abusers are not mentally ill, true they are twisted and perverted but not mentally ill. I do thank you though for your respectful manor of raising such quesitons.
Lastly, Its much easier to name call and tear people down than it is to actually listen to thier arguement and discuss it in a respectable fashion. Thank you to those of you who respectfully commented on this site and for being able to have your own opinions while disagreeing with Hal. I hope that those reading this would know that i respect all of your ideas and opinons even if i wholeheartedly disagre- i know that i live in a world where not everyone has the same opinion.
Dude, is your wife grim or what?
Seriously though, you suggest that you don’t want to worry about your wife comparing you to other guys. This suggests to me that you have quite a few sexual issues surrounding shame and fear. I would suggest that if you didn’t have such a repressive attitude towards sex, you wouldn’t have these hang ups.
Sex is a natural part of life. Like eating, it should be done in moderation according to your appetite. Starving yourself of sex is a sign of disease, just like anorexia.
There’s nothing respectable about abstinence. I DON’T respect your choice. It’s made from fear. Stop being afraid and get laid.
I had been sexually active before I met and married my wife. She was a virgin when we married.
I don’t feel defiled or dirty or impure or anything like that. But I know the reason she waited was because she wanted to share her body with only one person for the rest of time. Even though I know she loves me unconditionally; I have to admit that there are days that I wish I could have given that to her.
People who subscribe to any belief system, such as Hal’s (and mine) Christianity , see life through that particular “lens”. Just the same, people without a particular belief system see life through a different lens. But it’s still a lens. A lens is simply a tool that lets us see things in focus.
I’m not preaching abstinence. And I’m not trying to convert anyone to bible thumping church goers. I just think everyone needs to make sure that their lenses aren’t smudged. If you don’t want to get pregnant, or deal with abortion or STD’s then do what it takes to stay safe.
This is an Honest question:
How many women out there (who are not virgins themselves) truly want a virgin man as their partner?
Rachael:
I’d cite the DSM IV, link at the bottom, in diagnosing pedophilia and sexual abuse as a mental illness. “Perverted” and “Twisted” aren’t psychological terms that I’ve ever encountered, apt though they might be in this instance. In addition to pedophilia as a mental illness, neuroscience is more and more indicating that it is a physical one as well.
Beyond pedophiles you have adults who are attracted to partners under the legal age of consent, often called preferential sexual offenders. These individuals often suffer from a wide spectrum of socialization issues, depression, anxiety and were, as the stereotype holds, often abused themselves and never received proper treatment.
Their sexual behavior is a manifestation of their much deeper problems. Sexuality in society doesn’t cause these people to behave this one. In fact, one could argue that the shame-based, sex-negative approach to sexuality in society is a factor in producing these individuals. The more open and honest our approach to sexual identity the more comfortable victims would be with coming forward and the more open treatment options would become.
DSM IV: http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/pedophiliaTR.htm
CMEC Report:
http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC70.pdf
Hal’s got some major balls for his video response. Nikol, Guy, Brittany (marry me), and everyone involved in MidwestTeenSexShow have major balls. So do all of you readers, for commenting here.
Making choices means taking risks. Standing up for yourself, voicing your opinions - whatever they may be, is not easy. But it sure is rewarding. Look how proud Hal is. I know I’m proud of who I am, despite being in the minority of what society tells us is right and wrong.
So, wheeeee… cheers to us, and our balls.
It makes me shudder everytime I hear the word “pure” used to discribe someones sexual history or lack there of. Particularly since this term is almost always made and used to be a value of women. This term in no other way reduces someone to an object. Which always reminds me of purity balls….please view these websites for the lowdown.
this one being ‘directed’ towards the female population
http://feministing.com/archives/004966.html (copy and paste)
and this one being ‘directed’ towards the male population
http://feministing.com/archives/006375.html (copy and paste)
I think everyone should wait until they meet someone who they strongly believe and feel (at that time) is the right person to have sex with. One should not objectify their body by giving how many or how few people they have had sex with a value. The only thing that matters is how it makes you feel at the time, never forgetting too about how to practice safe sex.
So what do you do if your a lesbian…..?
I love how he left out that little tid bit.
I just want to point out, those who decry the association of purity with virginity are ignoring the fact that he’s talking about his wife he’s now married to. Obviously, she is not still a virgin.
He’s not saying there is anything unnatural about sex either. He’s not saying it’s dirty. By using the word “purity” he is simply associating the most intimate act two people can enter into with the exclusion of all (living) others.
If you don’t have a spiritual idea of marriage, if you don’t see sex as being the factor which distinguishes marriage from all other relationships, if you don’t have a spiritual idea of your own body and see yourself as merely a sum of chemicals, abstinence obviously doesn’t make sense. But that doesn’t discount the opinion of those who believe there is something spiritual within marriage and within themselves.
But clearly you can’t attribute to abstinence either the notion that sex is inherently impure (we’re not gnostics) or that widows are “defiled” (it’s “til death do you part”) or any other nonsense.
People come out hard against abstinence I think in part because it is something you can never get back. Of course those who have lost their virginity would argue against it because if they were wrong, what could they do about it?
The truth is, he makes a compelling argument entirely from his own experience which no counter-claim could conquer. He and his spouse can trust each other that they’ll keep their hands to themselves because they did until now. They have no need to practice because they have the rest of their lives to “practice” together. There is no concern about sexual compatibility because the developement of their sexual understanding and preferences happen together. These are all his experience, and we can’t say it’s not true without calling him a liar.
It seems most of the argumentation here is on account of the fact that he used the word purity. Perhaps a better word would be innocence. Either way, this is very threatening since nothing we can do can bring back the purity we’ve lost. Who can remove the stains and the guilt of our regret?
Rachel -
While you (and Hal) make some valid points, your comments about the risks associated with premarital sex reminded me of something Dan Savage likes to point out, which is that risks are a part of all areas of life, and that sex seems to be the only area for a lot of people where acknowledging certain risks becomes an excuse to characterize the whole behavior as reckless. People do a lot of things for fun or pleasure that have the potential to cause them harm (skiing, eating cake, etc.), but as long as people do those things in an informed, responsible manner, the risks are minimized and become acceptable for most people. Sex (even outside of marriage) can be extremely enjoyable, and extremely beneficial both physically and psychologically, and I think those considerations deserve to be weighed just as much as considerations about possible negative consequences deserve to be.
Hal,
you misunderstood us completely
God created man, he gave us free will, and yet he instilled in us the whole survival instinct mode. What I was saying was that during puberty I like many red blooded boys were sex crazed fiends, and not understanding why, until i put a college education under my belt and then married my gorgeous wife whom knows that i am in your terms, Hal, “less than pure” and i accepted that shes been around the block a few times too. but my point is that you cannot deny the link between sex and our survival urges and that it confuses teens along with the evil (notice how vile and live are anagrams of evil) media portraying the human body as an object to be used until it grows old and tossed aside for the next bombshell or the pop stars who flaunt their post teenage sexuality to sell cd’s. to be blunt, sex is sex, but making love to the one you love is awesome, so hal, people should be able to choose how to live, Dum vivimus vivamus!! and besides hal, sex takes practice!!
“I know a lot of guys who would get jelous or disgusted by the idea that THIER woman was with many other guys.”
I’m really not sure to start with this comment because they misogyny inherent in it is so great that I’m actually sort of speechless. I know that as a metaphor this requires some work but do we think that learner drivers are the best kind? Do we idealize a lack of knowledge in any other aspect of our lives? Knowing want you want from sex takes time, I’d rather know that the person I wanted to spend the rest of my life with was sexually compatible with me and knew what they were doing which will prevent a lot of heart break and fear, something I don’t see mentioned often. Seeing as we’re using anecdotes as data here let’s talk about a the fact that the two people I know who waiting until marriage to have sex both had very unhappy sex lives as neither of them knew what they wanted or should ask for and both have since been divorced.
I’m also slightly upset by the number of comments here to the effect of “people should have sex but not be sluts” as it still shows a basic level of shame and fear over what’s happening. I say that if someone wants to have 20 sex partners a year or remain abstinent until marriage then let them do what ever they want, but teach them about their options and to respect themselves and other people and then let them decide. It isn’t sex that hurts people, it’s a lack of education. When you teach teenagers that abstinence is the only way you give them a healthy dose of shame when a lot of them don’t make it, props for those of you who have because you wanted to rather than because you were told you have to but it’s still not for everyone. One size does not fit all.
You know what really stops STDs and teen pregnancy and has been proven to time and time again? Education. Birth control.
“If you don’t have a spiritual idea of marriage, if you don’t see sex as being the factor which distinguishes marriage from all other relationships, if you don’t have a spiritual idea of your own body and see yourself as merely a sum of chemicals, abstinence obviously doesn’t make sense. But that doesn’t discount the opinion of those who believe there is something spiritual within marriage and within themselves.”
Oh really? I’m a spiritual person, I’m a Christian in fact, I have a spiritual idea of myself and my body that means that I want to celebrate it. I am unmarried and have had sex and I’m not dead, or traumatized, or pregnant or have an STD so I’m not entirely sure what you’re implying.
I want to address the purity issue that everyone is bringing up.
Purity, to me, means to be uninvolved with sexual things. My wife is no longer ‘pure’ in that sense. Neither am I. Is there anything wrong with not being pure? No. Does it mean you are less of a person if you are not pure? No. It just means you are now involved with sexual things.
Would I have married a girl who had had sex before? Sure I would, if she was the right person. I would have rather her be a virgin, but I still would have married her.
And Garrett, you are totally wrong. You are in control of your own body. There is NO excuse for rape or abuse. I don’t care what kind of “mental problems” a person might have.
Listen to what you’re saying though… Sexual things? Sexual things?
So, once we’ve indulged our sinful selves in “sexual things” we’re no longer pure?
To address an issue Hal, is to make people feel better.
“I simply promote the safest way to have sex.”
Y’know, I’ll give him that. That’s true.
Other than that, I second everything Garrett said.
Hal:
Firstly, my regards for coming forward and speaking your mind. This isn’t exactly a receptive audience, and I respect that.
That said, I totally disagree with you.
You said: “Purity, to me, means to be uninvolved with sexual things.”
Sex and purity are not related. At all. They are entirely UNrelated. There is no correlation between the two whatsoever.
I deeply dislike the word ‘purity’, for pretty much the same reason as Lady In Tweed above. If ‘purity’ must have a meaning, it should be ‘the practice of loving kindness’. Not the practice of abstaining from sex.
To repeat my quote above:
“A man [or woman] who loves is pure, though he [or she] may be sexual… trying to become pure through the sublimation of sex is mere stupidity.”
I argue that when you relate sex and purity, you’ve entirely failed to understand either subject.
“I’m a spiritual person, I’m a Christian in fact, I have a spiritual idea of myself and my body that means that I want to celebrate it. I am unmarried and have had sex and I’m not dead, or traumatized, or pregnant or have an STD so I’m not entirely sure what you’re implying.”
By calling yourself a christian; you imply that you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ not just as a good way to live. But as the the BEST way to live. As the term christian translates as “Christ Ones” (or people who follow Christ).
To announce yourself a christian and then proudly proclaim a way of life that is contrary to Jesus’ teaching (being sexually active outside of marriage) only serves to clearly illustrate that while you may be a christian by self-description; your lifestyle does not bear that out.
Your life is yours to live how you please. But by having sex outside of marriage you confirm to other christians that God’s perfect plan doesn’t apply to you and in reality you are your own god. By having sex outside of marriage and proudly proclaiming your christianity; you confirm in non-christians the hypocrisies they already despise in christians.
Are you really doing yourself or anyone else any favors?
UbiquitousChe
Purity is one of those words that we christians tend to fling about too often. I’m sorry for that.
I just ask that you keep Hal’s comments of purity in context. Hal’s context for this conversation is one of a christian perspective.
To the christian; purity is related to EVERYTHING. What we think, what we do, how we do it, how we treat God, how we treat others, and how we treat ourselves. I say that knowing that by biblical standards; I am not pure. No one is. But even though I fall way short of purity; I still aspire to it. Not out of some bizarre expectation on unattainable perfection. But because I love Jesus and I love the people around me.
When there’s real love; then there is the knowledge of when relationships are true and sex is right. From the christian point of view; the only REAL love is love that is unconditional and everlasting. Marriage is the public affirmation of that kind of love. That’s why sex only in the marriage relationship matters.
Hal is right. I know from personal experience. My wife and I were virgins at our wedding. We knew we turned each other on and waiting was no longer a reasonable option. Practicing to get it right is fun and absolutely safe when you do it only with your life partner. Our brain chemistry programs us for emotional bonding and commitment with sex. There is a spectrum of sexual contact with a prospective mate and it is foolish to jump to a step if you know you don’t want to do the following step.
Don’t hold hands with someone you would not want to put your arm around.
Don’t put an arm around someone you wouldn’t kiss.
Don’t kiss someone you wouldn’t want to fondle.
Don’t fondle someone you wouldn’t want to have sex with.
Don’t have sex with someone you wouldn’t want to have babies with.
When you’ve reached that point you might as well get married; you know you turn each other on and you want to be together for a long time. We’ve been together over 50 years, long ago found how to please each other, have probably made love over 10000 times, and it is never the same twice. Anyone who finds uninhibited monogamous love boring simply lacks imagination.
Sue,
If you were replying to me I have to first off say that I am not a guy and I am not married either. I do not have sexual issues or shame or fear of having sex. Of course sex is a natural part of life. It is just my personal belief that people should wait until marriage- but I will not press this on people because it is their choice. I am not starving myself by not having sex, I am merely waiting for the feast to begin- and when it does WATCH OUT because it will be amazing!!! You bag on me for my personal opinion yet you don?t even know me. I am not afraid to have sex, it?s not something to be afraid of only something to look forward to. Don?t worry Sue, one day I will get laid!!!
Scott,
Thank you!!!
Brad,
I am a virgin and I seriously want the first time I have sex to be with a man I love who is also a virgin! I think it would be really weird for me to be a virgin but my partner has been with other people, that way it will be awkward, funny, amazing, and pleasurable for both of us and we can learn to pleasure each other together.
Garrett,
Thanks for writing back, I find this discussion very interesting. I looked at your link as well as my DSM-IV-TR. While this is classified as a disorder, I have to point out that at one time the DSM also classified homosexuality as a disorder also- which I think most people would agree that it is of course not a disorder or a mental illness. You say, ?These individuals often suffer from a wide spectrum of socialization issues, depression, anxiety and were, as the stereotype holds, often abused themselves and never received proper treatment,? and Garrett I agree. I also know that just because someone is abused does not give them an excuse to turn around and do it to others, I agree with you that it shows much deeper problems. I think that people who have such disorders of mental illnesses if you will, often are held unaccountable. With a little self control a ?pedophile? can choose not to act on his thoughts or desires. You also stated that, ?The more open and honest our approach to sexual identity the more comfortable victims would be with coming forward and the more open treatment options would become,? and I believe that this is a very very good point. Thank you for writing back and intelligently engaging in this discussion.
Justine,
I have to apologize for whoever (even me) has used the word ?pure? about you to make you feel unworthy or devalued. I doubt it was Hal?s intention for the word to be used in such a way. When I use that word it is not meant to lower the value of someone. Please except my apology on behalf of those who have caused you pain. I think Jorge take on the topic of purity is good. Thanks?
Jorge,
Thank you for you words!!!
Devon,
I agree risks are apart of everyday life. True there is harm in overeating, over-consumption of alcohol or drugs, but the topic that this whole site addressees is that of SEX. Just because your informed and responsible does not mean that you cannot still get hurt, true the risk is minimized but the fact is that there is still RISK. No one will argue that sex outside of marriage is enjoyable, its meant to be enjoyed. Of course it is up to each person to weight the benefits of having sex to the negative affects. In the end each person has to make their own choices, and in the end they must deal/live with the consequences also. It is my conviction and belief that staying abstinent until marriage is the healthier choice!
Lady in Tweed,
I feel that I have already addressed the issue which you find fault with, and therefore will not address them again. I will however encourage you to read what the bible has to say about premarital sex, since you call yourself a Christian. I must say that I am glad that you are unhurt, but I also have to ask you to back up what you say with scripture since you proclaim yourself to be a Christian. Read Matt 15:19, Romans 13:13, 1 Corinthians 6:12 & 6:18, Galatians 5:19- these are just a few examples?Thank you.
For any of you who are interested, here is a website that addresses out sexual culture and sexual issues along with religion. www.syrogers.com
Hal:
You misunderstood. I’m not excusing those who engage in sexual abuse, rather I’m saying that you are incorrect in stating that our sexual desires are what cause abuse.
Say someone suffered from OCD and comulsively washed their hands or took a half-dozen showers a day. The disease has warped a healthy desire (to keep clean) into something destructive. Abusers are often claim they truly love their victims, not understanding that their dysfunction has led them to act out in deeply wrong ways.
I agree that even the most compulsive abuser has a choice, to seek help. The stigma of mental illness however is compounded with societal attitudes about sexuality to make seeking help that much harder. Politicians use pedophiles as an easy score (moral panic wins the day) come election time and pass laws that push them further and further to the fringes of society, which unlike treatment only increases the chances of re offense.
Sorry to get so divergent. Being sex-positive does not mean you condone abuse, quite the opposite. We’re trying to open up society so that people make more informed choices and aren’t acting out of fear.
So it is when you write “I don’t care what kind of mental problems” you’re coming across, to me at least, as ignorant. I’ve worked with young adults who’ve been the victims of abuse and who have, in turn, abused others. I do care very deeply about the mental problems that they face.
You speak of your faith. If Christ walked among us today you’d more likely find him keeping company with those struggling with mental problems than those who sit in judgement.
Scott:
Point taken. This topic is getting a little contentious, isn’t it?
Then again, it’s a contentious topic. I understand Hal - and several others - on this thread are coming from the Christian perspective. I’m not so ignorant on the Christian perspecive myself. The thing is, I disagree with the Christian perspective. Quite strongly, in fact.
The difference in our perspectives is more ancient even than written record. Christians - in fact, all the monotheistic religions, not to mention the Aristotelian tradition of philiosophy - believe in moral absolutes. I do not. That does not mean that I do not believe morality exists. Quite the contrary. There are many kinds of action that are moral. I simply do not believe that there is one absolute definition or point of reference for them. A moral action is moral depending only on the context and the perspective, nothing more.
These are two very, very conflicting views. So when I rebutt against yourself or Hal, I understand full well where you’re coming from. How could I not? It is where you’re coming from that I’m arguing against in the first place!
Oh SHOOT! I forgot about God… He’s probably pissed, in’t he?
“Your life is yours to live how you please. But by having sex outside of marriage you confirm to other christians that God’s perfect plan doesn’t apply to you and in reality you are your own god. By having sex outside of marriage and proudly proclaiming your christianity; you confirm in non-christians the hypocrisies they already despise in christians.
Are you really doing yourself or anyone else any favors?”
For someone whose accusing me of hypocrasy and sin you’ve just stumbled into one of the bigest ones yourself. What on earth makes you think you’ve been given the right by God to judge me or declare me unchristian? I’ve been raised to this and my parent taught me to think for myself which means that I’m aware that a great deal of the bible has been historically influenced towards male dominance and treating women as property, female chastity is a part of this. This is NOT to say that I think everyone who CHOOSES this is wrong merely that we must be aware of the historical impact of our actions. The bible has been altered over time by selective translation and todays modern christians are often guilty of picking and choosing passages for there moral absolutes without considering them in context. The bible says a lot of things that we gloss over or ignore : do you tell rich Christians that they’re hypocrits on a regular basis because I can tell you Jesus had some very specific things to say about them. I have with a great deal of thought and attention to my views on what Jesus was saying chosen a path that you don’t aprove of, that doesn’t make me unchristian that just means that I don’t automatically ascribe to the churchs dogma (something else Jesus had strong words on) and interpretation of certain facts. Is there a risk that sex will be elevated abouve your relationship with God, which is the most serious sin? Yes. But the same is true of any pleasure, eating, wearing nice clothes, buying new technology and so on. God didn’t want us to lead pleasureless lives she just doesn’t want us to get hurt, but there are many ways of being hurt by your own path that you don’t acknowledge.
“I must say that I am glad that you are unhurt, but I also have to ask you to back up what you say with scripture since you proclaim yourself to be a Christian. Read Matt 15:19, Romans 13:13, 1 Corinthians 6:12 & 6:18, Galatians 5:19- these are just a few examples?Thank you.”
PLease see above for my arguments of social context and the control of women, which for the record Jesus didn’t subscribe to. The early churches had female leaders and were also socialist in that they held all their goods in common, I don’t see modern churches rushing to tell us we adpot these frankly much healthier values as well. I appreciate that we have a difference in opinion over this but I am getting rather sick of being judged by other Christians when judging is itself a sin.
For more information on my views I suggest getting hold of a copy of The Church and Chinese Whispers (http://www.greenbelt.org.uk/shop/talks/) or reading up on Ikon, a church who have had a great impact on me spiritually : http://wiki.ikon.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Ikon:Community_Portal
@UbiquitousChe
It’s good to see people sharing their ideas and disagreeing without going to the “I’m right and you’re wrong so shut up!” well.
“I simply do not believe that there is one absolute definition or point of reference for them. A moral action is moral depending only on the context and the perspective, nothing more.”
So if there are no absolutes, and everything depends on context and perspective; then why be a christian and profess a faith where there are absolutes and the only perspective that matters at the end of the day is God’s?
@Scott the Homosexual
If you were God and you knew everything. And you knew everything that happened and everything that was going to happen; would anything really take you by surprise? And if nothing really takes you by surprise; do you really get all the pissed about anything? I think God looks at us like children. Some of us are strong willed. Some of us just don’t enough to do the right things. But if we’re children and God is the ultimate parent; then He continues to love us, teach us, correct us, and accept us. Unconditionally.
At least that’s the God I know through the Bible
@UbiquitousChe - It wasn’t you that claimed to be a christian. It was Lady in Tweed. Feel free to disregard my question.
“I simply do not believe that there is one absolute definition or point of reference for them. A moral action is moral depending only on the context and the perspective, nothing more.”
So you already know the argument, right?
So slavery could be argued as moral. Genocide and Ethnic cleansing could be argued as moral. Polygamy could be argued as moral. Bleeding the earth dry of all its natural resources could be argued as moral.
I’m not trying to equate abstinence with slavery. I’m just saying that not having moral absolutes is a slippery slope that justifies many incomprehensible acts in human history.
I am a great fan of “The Midwest Teen Sex Show” and while I don’t think the way in which their message is presented actually reaches what they believe to be their core audience, it is extremely entertaining, well written, and acted.
I do think however, that the themes that run through all the episodes of “TMTSS” such as parody and satire have been completely lost on Hal. I could provide point and counterpoint to Hal’s arguments, but it seems futile when he missed the point entirely and quite frankly this would be more trouble than it is worth. I would instead recommend to Hal that he look up parody and satire in a dictionary and then re-watch the episode. He might then realize that both points of view were presented (humorously yes) and that a retort was not needed.
UbiquitousChe,
You wouldn’t happen to be from ‘cross the pond, would you? When I read things in print, my mind incorporates words used with context, punctuation, grammar (or lack thereof), etc… My point being, I always have an inner monologue that voices what I’m reading (internally mind you… don’t judge).
When I read the stuff you write, you sound British (English?). Just wondering… Am I right?
“I simply promote the safest way to have sex.”
Hah. Tell that to my aunt.
Wait– you can’t. Her husband gave her HIV, she seroconverted before she knew, and now she’s dead. Her pastor told her she hadn’t been healed because she hadn’t prayed hard enough.
Knowledge, condoms, and conversational comfort with sexual topics keep us safe. “Monogamy” (surveys show the majority of people cheat), marriage, and “purity” do not keep anyone safe.
I know that you’ll say: “That was the wrong way. It won’t be like that for me. That’s the exception, not the rule.”
Do you think she thought it would work out that way for her? She was brilliant, but humans f–k up all the time. Humans who want to believe they live in a fairy tale f–k up and try to pretend it never happened. Humans who don’t have sex get hit by a bus and die without knowing one of the best things about life.
Don’t smugly say “hey, I’m just advocating the best way. you screwballs can gamble as you please,” pretending you’ve found the solution, the safe way to live. You haven’t. No one has. People have sex (it’s practically the only constant), their “control” shed for a second, then suddenly someone, perhaps your “pure” wife or someone else who repressed their sexual curiosity, knows what their partner thinks about “sleeping around” and says nothing. Maybe they pray.
______________________________________
I think Hal misheard the slogan. *Masturbation* is the only safe sex. Hand jobs from other guys are relatively safe too, which I mention only because Hal trips my ‘dar and I’ve known plenty of gay boys who pretended closetedness was piety until they had to face the truth.
I don’t understand the immediate correlation of abstaining until marriage for sex and worry free sex. I am sorry but even with the best of intentions waiting till marriage is not going to prevent people from cheating or other things that can be highly damaging sexually. Safe sex comes from making informed decisions and responsible decisions, be that pre or post marriage.
scott,
i agree with you 100%
so heres my take on this whole panel dissection of purity, sex and the human condition
(btw scott, if you havent noticed god is mad at us all, whats why my babies cry 2 hrs before i have to wake up for work, only to fall asleep again as im leaving for work)
1. rape, sexual abuse, incest, etc.:
Psychosexual disorders, brought on by a myriad of factors, if you want a gritty portrayal of how bad the human psyche can split rent Cybil, read Lolita, shakespeare’s The Rape Of Lucrece, or why not volunteer like i did at a rape crisis hotline. enough said on that
2. Purity:
back to my first post, Hal, again i ask you and you have yet to reply, it wasnt a personal attack, but to validate a few points and clear the air, did you like 100% of all boys starting from age 13 and up, when you were entering puberty, in fact, masturbate?
if you did, by the “sexual things” statement you made, then you are not pure, but please do not lie or deny that you did masturbate, cause its healthy….
3. God:
yes he created the sanctity of marriage for that purpose, but if anyone has read anything beyond the bible, i.e. christian scholars and such, then you would know that in order to be able to get married in those times the man had to build the house and own the land. and there was instances of infidelity and pre marital sex in the bible, god made us human, but it takes people to fill the shoes (btw, im glad i wasnt a virgin on my wedding night, saved us the whole awkward virgin newlyweds night scenerio) and scott, please dont forget that all consuming biblical verse that seems to absolve us, yet makes us repent those lonely nights with that special movie… We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of the Lord.
so remember that you cannot separate love and sex, sex is good, it cures depression, headaches, gets rid of those nasty pounds, and in hals outdate view should only be done in the sanctity of marriage, i still disagree hal, but i honor your opinion and invite you to the 21st century, can i ask you all a serious question? please answer in your posts and replies…
During the 60’s and 70’s and the free love generation, how different would this whole comment forum be if were were back in the eras of the wars, bell bottoms, discos, woodstock, etc., would we all be arguing this point like this?
Regarding the difficulties (emotional, social, etc.) of premarital sex that Hal mentions, and others mention in the comments (”It is possible to deny that maybe Hal has a point that premarital sex can be hurtful?”), I’d like to point out that post-marital sex can be hurtful, too. And the consequences at that point can be even worse. Like, say, 50 years of bitterness and sexual frustration. Coming from a fundamentalist community, I’ve had the displeasure of seeing it up close and personal. What a disaster. Hal is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Run far away, and don’t waste your time on people who think you’re less “pure” if you’ve had sex.
Amusingly, there are verbal ticks in the video that I recognize from my childhood: turns of phrase I haven’t heard in awhile that are stock in trade on the revival circuit. Makes my skin crawl.
This is a great podcast, both for education and entertainment, but I don’t usually post. But Saint Augustine (you know him, right, Hal?) had something interesting to say about this subject.
“Multi quidem facilius se abstinent ut non utantur, quam temperent ut bene utantur.”
It’s cool; I don’t speak Latin either. It translates roughly to, “for many people, it is easier to abstain [from sex] than it is to exercise moderation and do it correctly.”
Emphasis on the “many people” part. I would go a step further and say “most.” Am I implying that it takes a stronger will/mind/heart/etc. to actually tread the line between a draconian concept of “purity” or the “special” nature of sex and the most basic animal urges? Eh, sure, why not?
Most people have already made any point that I would have regarding your conceptions of “purity” or otherwise.
You seem like a reasonably intelligent man, Hal, but even you would have to admit that you’re not the most open-minded individual (casual dismissal of mental illness? How compassionate and Christ-like). You obviously have extremely strong concepts of sexuality that are closely tied to conservative social custom and religious doctrine. There’s not a lot of room for moderation in either of those areas, but those of us who don’t subscribe to either often DO find a comfortable median between promiscuity and prudishness. All it takes is a little intelligence, a little patience, a little curiosity, a LOT of love, and a willingness to detach oneself from dogmatic thinking.
Eh…that last one is going to be a problem for some of you, I suspect. Good luck with that!
Scott the Homosexual:
I read “Oh SHOOT! I forgot about God… He’s probably pissed, in’t he?” at work and cracked the hell up. I got a few funny looks. Good line, good line. I’m stealing it.
As for the nationality thing: No, I’m not English. I’m fron New Zealand. Granted, they’re both piddly little islands where nothing ever happens and it rains all the time, so I guess it’s /almost/ England.
When I was a kid at school I was always taught to write English like the English, and I guess that stuck.
The other Scott:
“It’s good to see people sharing their ideas and disagreeing without going to the “I’m right and you’re wrong so shut up!” well.”
I agree with the above sentiment wholeheartedly. This is actually turning out to be a good discussion. On the other hand, we’re getting waaay off the topic, so I’ll try to keep this short and sweet.
Your claim: “I’m just saying that not having moral absolutes is a slippery slope that justifies many incomprehensible acts in human history.”
I disagree. Not having moral absolutes isn’t the same thing as not having morals. A moral absolute is like when a parent says to their child, “Do not drink alcohol!” The moral framework I ascribe to says, “Do the right thing.”
What ‘the right thing’ is will vary depending on the context and the perspective. Sometimes, doing the right thing will mean not drinking. Most of the time, doing the right thing will mean having one or two but keeping your wits about you. Sometimes, when you’re in a safe environment with people you know well and you can trust, it’s okay to get a trashed so long as you don’t do it too often.
It’s not always easy, but if you’re sincere and do your best to determine the right thing for the given situation you can’t go too wrong.
Your other point, about slavery. You’re technically correct. From the point of view of certain societies - most of them now ancient and buried - slavery is (or was) moral. In their context and from their perspective, it is (or was) moral to own human beings. The Greeks did it. The Romans did it. The ancient Egyptians definitely did it. That’s how it was - and in some places today, that’s how it is.
Where we part ways is when you assume that, just because slavery is validly moral for such societies, that we need to give up our perspective to accomodate theirs. We don’t need to abandon our disgust and our outrage at such practices. I think that we can make a pretty strong argument against slavery. And simply accepting that from their point of view slavery is moral doesn’t mean we can’t take action against them. It just means that we can’t take action against them ‘because they’re evil’. If we feel that action truly is called for, we can still take action ‘because we think they’re wrong and action is called for’.
Does this leave room for abuse? Yes, it does. But so do moral absolutes. The KKK believed in moral absolutes. The Crusaders believed in moral absolutes. The Spanish Inquisition believed in moral absolutes - read a translation of the Malleus Malificarum sometime. Moral absolutes are just as open to abuse as simple contextual morals. In fact, I argue that they are /more/ open to abuse, since the contextual morality approach has careful reflection and consideration built in at the start. Absolute morals are the point where fanaticism begins. I find them dangerous and silly and unneccesary to the fucntioning of a moral society. We are better off without them.
You don’t need a book of rules to do the right thing.
I so agree with Hal! Purity is vitally important, especially in women! After all, if a woman has had more than one partner, not only is she probably comparing her current lover to ones she’s had in the past, she is very likely able to differentiate between a good lover and a bad one. As far as I can see, that could only lead to unhappiness and discontent. I think the current societies that enforce purity, especially when they focus that enforcement on women, are so much better off! Sure, female circumcision is dangerous, painful and traumatic but the women who have had this done are much better able to remain pure and that does raise their value to society as a whole and men in particular. Sex outside of marriage has so many drawbacks that I think the societies that mandate only married sex and enforce it by doing things like stoning people to death qualify as the only civilized countries on the planet today. Everyone knows that when two virgins get married the sex is always the best anyone is able to achieve. It makes complete sense to me that if you love someone enough, even if it’s a guy who finds oral sex immoral, you will eventually be able to achieve complete union in the marriage bed. I applaud Hal for taking his stand on this issue. He was very articulate and reasonable. As a matter of fact, I believe he might have a future as a public speaker. I do think that he’d do well to learn to speak Arabic, however. His thoughts on purity, and especially female purity, will find a much wider audience in countries like Saudi Arabia or Algeria.
Hal -
You make a valid point but so does everyone else. When I got married I had only been with one man, him. He however had had previous sexual partners and would constantly throw out the phrase, “How would you know if it could be better, you’ve never been with anyone else.” And he was right. I got married at 21 and for the whole of my marriage I was made to feel like “less” because I didn’t know more then he did.
Turns out we were not sexually compatible, great friends but horrid mates and married. And I was devistated. I had waited until I was with the man I thought I would be with forever, and found myself with 2 kids, divorced and no concept of what good sex was. And while I have no plans to tell my daughters to run out and bang every boy they meet I, as their mother, feel it’s very important for them to realize that sexuality is part of who they are, and something they need to explore so they know what they are comfortable with and what they are not.
Sex is great, and can be better with a loving caring partner, but I think that you might want to re-evaluate your comments about “The idea that teenagers can’t control themselves for a few years until they are married is absurd. The reason they don’t control themselves is #1 because they don’t want to, and #2 because we live in a sex-saturated culture that exploits teenagers’ sexuality to make a buck.” Control comes with self awareness and confidence, and to have either of those you need to know what you like, dis-like, want, and need threw your own personal exploration, frank conversation with people you trust, and just living life.
Polly: You’re a Goddess and I love you. That was excellent!
Lady in Tweed,
I seriously hope that you dont feel like i was judging you. I wholehartedly acknowledge that each person has the right to decide for themselves what is true. It dosent really affect me whether or not you believe sex outside or marriage is okay or not. I am not judging you, rather I am merely posing questions. True within the church there are many sins that christians overlook daily, and yes judgement is one of them. If you really knew me you would know that because Iam proabably one of the worst sinners, i would not have the audacity to judge others (not to say that i never have, but an much less likely to do). Those who are Christins (i believe) should be able to sharpen one another (as iron sharpens iron so one man sharpens another), and if by posing the question that your idea of sex before marriage is wrong then why not? At the end of the day all Iam doing is asking you to rethink your decesion, and at the end of the day you decide they are truth- how can i bash you for that. True i may still disagree, but as a brother/sister in christ isnt it okay to question each others doctrines…
I mean no ill will, take me for my word, and again I encorage you to take it back to the bible and to God!
Thanks
Just a quick opinion; The ‘loser’ not having sex isn’t so much a negative mockery of people who haven’t/don’t have sex, but jut to make people laugh at themselves becaue they know they’re not a loser like that, and mocking what the ‘cool kids’ would view them as. Does that make sense without contradicting myself?
okay,
so is hal or anyone going to comment on my hard work on this topic? fine i will stop sugar coating the things ive said.
1. hal your sexual beliefs are puritanical and highly outdated, so much so that even the quakers, mormons and Amish say “Calm down my son, live a little”
2. to the nice men and ladies debating the purity and sexual equity, please further support your points by reading ” The Feminine Mystique, Meriam at 35, Memoirs of a Geisha (personal favorite), Fanny Hill, etc. my point is to broaden the resource spectrum because i do not believe hal has lived an outgoing life.
3. to reiterate my entire part of this debate: Humans are animals,
2 steps removed, we have only 3 basic needs, society and achievement was based on fulfilling those needs in a quick and timely manner, One of those needs is to procreate (to hal: that means to breed) it is our most primal and basic, alongside eating and surviving. It should never be looked down on as immoral, unless its used in a harmful and illegal manner. Hal and everyone,
Did you know that 9 out of 10 scientists have said that if your parents didnt have any kids, you probably will not either?
4. sex crimes - are not entirely about sex!! rape is about control and power. did you know that a whopping 10% of sex crimes are of women vs men, women children?
so ill finish with this, seeings how no one is paying attention to my side of the fence…please answer my questions in the last post, hal and everyone (btw polly, funny)
Hey guys,
First of all, I love the show. Effing brilliant. Second, I believe people have the right to do whatever they want. Abstinence is a fine belief. So is safe sex. But I want to give out another point. It can be REALLY hard not to have sex. Growing up gay, my affections for others had be kept inside so people wouldn’t act odd towards me. Straight kids have chances to express their sexuality just by talking about a hot girl or how “cute that boy is”. I couldn’t do that. When I came out at the much too young age of 12, everything exploded. Because my sexuality was out there, I was talking about sex all the time. And it annoyed people. And finally when I had the chance to actually have sex, I wanted more. And more. And more. Sometimes I still spill out every once and a while. And the truth is, I’m only 15. So it’s hard. If you’re abstinent, more power to you. On the other hand, sex is fun and hard to avoid. And I don’t “beg” for sex. I don’t pay any attention to sex in the media. And yet it happens to me. So if it happens to me, it happens to other teens like me. Abstinence I can say, or at least in gay kids, is pretty abnormal. I have sex. And I’m fine. I have a fun time with life, I go to the best art high school in the nation and I just got a part in a local Broadway play. I’m normal. Sex is normal. Amen.
Jeff
Tacoma, WA
Wow. This convo is wonderful. Truly truly brilliant. “Get ‘em thinking and theres no limit on what they can achieve.” Thank you all. Right or wrong, this is the most compelling discussion I’ve ever encountered, (and I once went on stage to show why God probably doesn’t exist, against a group who firmly believed that he (I’d say, she/it, but this wasn’t that kind of group).
This is brilliant.
“Those who are Christins (i believe) should be able to sharpen one another (as iron sharpens iron so one man sharpens another), and if by posing the question that your idea of sex before marriage is wrong then why not?”
Rachel, I firmly believe that Christians should be able to sharpen each other in fact I believe that good honest debate is missing from a lot of churches and this leads to all sorts of problems. I certainly wasn’t saying that you shouldn’t pose the question rather I was reacting to a previous commenter who had said that my beliefs made me unchristian and directing my anger wrongly at you. I reacted this way because so many people who practice abstinance take it upon themselves to inform me that my decission is wrong and are not willing to debate or accept other points of view as you are so I apologize for jumping to conclusions.
As for taking it back to the bible I encourage you to look into some of the context issues that I have raised as I believe that in my own way I am working directly from the bible!
Che- I am not a Goddess, blasphemer! I am a weaker vessel and my husband’s helpmate.
Hal- Your brave choice to speak out about this has really inspired me. It makes me wonder why famous people who decided to remain pure until they were married haven’t been more vocal about it. President Bush could share with us how, as a male cheerleader with a drinking problem in college, he was able to remain a virgin. I’m sure he wouldn’t be shoving abstinence-only sex education down the throats of the