New Study about Virginity Pledges

[beansprouts]

Then, perhaps, I'm just not that convicted where virginity is concerned. My husband is a decent, good man, who had partners before we were married (I don't know how many, but I do know of four). He never treated the girls shabbily, they got thier calls in the morning, and their dinners and all that entails. They broke it off. His conviction, that women are not mere holes with which to enjoy himself, was one he stuck by. While he friends thought he might be gay, because he refused trains, etc. He stood by them (his morals/convictions/whatever, not his friends, that would've been...). I am more concerned that my sons see women/girls as fellow human beings and treat them accordingly. I am more concerned that they realize the responsibility sex entails. I do not want them to fear sex or to place it on some pedestal. I don't want them to see it as the Holy Grail of adulthood. I don't want them to get married so they can have sex. I do not want more importance placed on something that is fun, enjoyable and bonding, than I believe it merits.

 

I think now you are saying what you mean, and I do see your perspective.

 

For many of us here in this discussion, premarital sex was not such a benign activity. For nearly half of us it began with abuse as a child, peer pressure as a teen, and a desire to simply "be loved" (and not be seen as "wierd") followed by the inevitable pain of rejection. Many of us have faced the "unintended consequences" and have now brought all those scars and baggage into our marriages. Many of us have had to heal before we can truly be one in heart, soul, mind as well as body with our spouse. We have been there, and we quite understandably want better for our own children. We are just trying to figure out how to help them to succeed where we ourselves failed miserably.

[lionfamily1999]

I think now you are saying what you mean, and I do see your perspective.

 

For many of us here in this discussion, premarital sex was not such a benign activity. For nearly half of us it began with abuse as a child, peer pressure as a teen, and a desire to simply "be loved" (and not be seen as "wierd") followed by the inevitable pain of rejection. Many of us have faced the "unintended consequences" and have now brought all those scars and baggage into our marriages. Many of us have had to heal before we can truly be one in heart, soul, mind as well as body with our spouse. We have been there, and we quite understandably want better for our own children. We are just trying to figure out how to help them to succeed where we ourselves failed miserably.

Bold statement: Exactly. I do not want my sons to place such a high cost on sex for exactly that reason. I labored under the dirty, used meat, mentality for quite some time. Should their lives fall into the same ruts of so many I have known, I would rather they take the pragmatic approach of my father* than the self-abusive approach of me. I would rather they see others, for whom sexual exploits are based in a self-hate scenerio, as my husband does.

 

*my grandmother paid for her sitter with my father iykwim. As an adult, he says, '**** happens, what're you going to do? It was not MY crime, I was not at fault.' He does say that people seemed to TRY to make him feel guilty as an adult. That all those people that made sex sound so dirty and wrong (outside the holy bonds of marraige and sometimes even within those bond), always seemed to be talking to him. Finally, he decided they were all wrong. Sex is sex. What happened to him, was not dirty or wrong, insofar as he was concerned. He remained innocent. That taint and dirtiness was only on those people that took advantage of his deranged mother.

[Pretty in Pink]

I do not want them to fear sex or to place it on some pedestal. I don't want them to see it as the Holy Grail of adulthood. I don't want them to get married so they can have sex. I do not want more importance placed on something that is fun, enjoyable and bonding, than I believe it merits.

 

Maybe I am beginning to understand you know, though I still don't see why you would differentiate between boys and girls (though maybe you don't and just came across that way in your original post). I guess the difference between us, then, is that you do not believe sex merits the importance or reverence that I believe it merits.

 

Both dh and I believe that God created sex as a sacred union to be shared by man and wife. We do not believe that falling in love justifies pre-marital sex. We do not believe that those who choose to engage in pre-marital sex are 'bad' people or that they are in danger of losing their salvation (as we do not believe that salvation can be lost). We do believe in original and imputed sin. We do believe that all men are fallen and susceptible to sin. You can wrap it up in pretty bows, take your girlfriend out to dinner, tell her you love her, hold her hand and open doors for her, etc. but pre-marital sex is still a sin according to our faith. Chivalry does not negate wrong.

 

FTR, neither dh nor I saved ourselves for marriage. I got pregnant at the ripe old age of 17. We both had several partners before our marraige. He was raised in a Christian home with the only chastisement about sex outside of marriage coming from the pulpit; his family never discussed such things. I was raised to "wait for the right person" with no religious or moral boundaries attached. I would not trade my oldest ds for the world, but we both wish we would have saved that part of ourselves for each other.

[Mad Jenny Flint]

I just want to say that I enjoyed thoroughly reading everyone's responses to this thread, and was really gratified to see that, with a few minor exceptions of catty remarks, people here are treating each other with respect and fairness.

 

My views on this come from a more moral center, rather than a religious one. I was prompted to have another "checking-in" kind of discussion with my 14 yo son today due to this thread, and I wanted to say thanks to all who posted thoughtful and deliberate remarks. Great discussion.

[Pretty in Pink]

I am sorry, it seems we are all posting at the same time and I do not see your responses until after I have posted. I do not mean to sound as if I am attacking you or jumping down your throat. I am sorry it came across that way.

 

I am confused by your position because you seem to be making what I perceive to be contradictory statements. I may not agree that pre-marital sex is healthy or beneficial but I can certainly understand that POV. What I don't understand, and what I was asking you to clarify, was 1) the differentiation between boys/girls (telling girls to wait, telling boys not to wait) and 2) the dichotomy you presented when you said you disagree with the mindset that it is somehow unhealthy or abnormal to save oneself for marriage yet you also said that male virgins creep you out. Is that not subscribing to the mindset you say is wrong?

 

I just find it rather ironic that people who would buck society and the 'norms' would be so against a thought process that ran contrary to their own.

 

We all bring our own baggage into these conversations and I am sorry if mine has caused me to be rude. It was never my intention. :grouphug:

[beansprouts]

Bold statement: Exactly. I do not want my sons to place such a high cost on sex for exactly that reason. I labored under the dirty, used meat, mentality for quite some time. Should their lives fall into the same ruts of so many I have known, I would rather they take the pragmatic approach of my father* than the self-abusive approach of me. I would rather they see others, for whom sexual exploits are based in a self-hate scenerio, as my husband does.

 

*my grandmother paid for her sitter with my father iykwim. As an adult, he says, '**** happens, what're you going to do? It was not MY crime, I was not at fault.' He does say that people seemed to TRY to make him feel guilty as an adult. That all those people that made sex sound so dirty and wrong (outside the holy bonds of marraige and sometimes even within those bond), always seemed to be talking to him. Finally, he decided they were all wrong. Sex is sex. What happened to him, was not dirty or wrong, insofar as he was concerned. He remained innocent. That taint and dirtiness was only on those people that took advantage of his deranged mother.

 

I think you are saying that problems arise when we present sex as being something "dirty" and "wrong". I do agree with this part. In fact this is something from my own experience which I had to unlearn so I could enjoy my dh. From my perspective God created sex for procreation AND He created it to be enjoyed. Sex within a marriage is a holy and sacred act that binds a couple together in ways beyond the physical. It is the way that two can truly become one - if there is nothing else between them... Perhaps focusing on the positives is the way to find balance and best help our children succeed at waiting.

[Pretty in Pink]

I think you are saying that problems arise when we present sex as being something "dirty" and "wrong". I do agree with this part. In fact this is something from my own experience which I had to unlearn so I could enjoy my dh. From my perspective God created sex for procreation AND He created it to be enjoyed. Sex within a marriage is a holy and sacred act that binds a couple together in ways beyond the physical. It is the way that two can truly become one - if there is nothing else between them... Perhaps focusing on the positives is the way to find balance and best help our children succeed at waiting.

 

:iagree:Yes, focus on the positive aspects of saving oneself for marriage, rather than adding unnecessary negative connotations to the act itself.

[Scarlett]

As for my sons, I have to say I'm horribly uncomfortable discussing it. Why? Because I admit that hearing about adult men that are virgins creeps me out a bit. I don't know that I want my boys to wait, if only because of the stigma that is attached to it.

 

I about choked on my coffee when I read this. Does it creep you out to hear about the sex lives of adult men in particular or just when they are virgins? Because honestly I don't really want to hear a man tell me if he is a virgin or not unless I am considering him as a husband. However, for a man to BE a virgin if he is unmarried is not creepy. It astounds me that anyone would think that.

 

I talk to my ds8 ALL of the time about remaining chaste and pure and saving himself for marriage so that he can share that special bond with his wife and only his wife. I sure hope no one tells ds that is is creepy to remain a virgin until marriage.

[lionfamily1999]

I am sorry, it seems we are all posting at the same time and I do not see your responses until after I have posted. I do not mean to sound as if I am attacking you or jumping down your throat. I am sorry it came across that way.

 

I am confused by your position because you seem to be making what I perceive to be contradictory statements. I may not agree that pre-marital sex is healthy or beneficial but I can certainly understand that POV. What I don't understand, and what I was asking you to clarify, was 1) the differentiation between boys/girls (telling girls to wait, telling boys not to wait) and 2) the dichotomy you presented when you said you disagree with the mindset that it is somehow unhealthy or abnormal to save oneself for marriage yet you also said that male virgins creep you out. Is that not subscribing to the mindset you say is wrong?

 

 

 

We all bring our own baggage into these conversations and I am sorry if mine has caused me to be rude. It was never my intention. :grouphug:

They creep me out. That's just it. They do. I wonder, immediately, what is wrong with them. It's not a concious act, it's not as though I sat down and went through a myriad of reasons. It's my reaction. period

 

I do not believe that not having sex is unnatural, unhealthy, etc.

 

I was a little sensitive after so many jumping to the conclusion that my sons were going to be skanky dogs. I used you to answer them all, and take out my frustrations and anger that anyone would assume my sons would be anything less than decent, civil men. My apologies.

 

I mentioned only boys, because the stigma itself is more attached to men than women (although girls are gaining). If my daughter were to remain 'pure' then there is an excellent chance she could find a young man who would appreciate it. I do not believe the odds are the same for my sons.

[lionfamily1999]

I about choked on my coffee when I read this. Does it creep you out to hear about the sex lives of adult men in particular or just when they are virgins? Because honestly I don't really want to hear a man tell me if he is a virgin or not unless I am considering him as a husband. However, for a man to BE a virgin if he is unmarried is not creepy. It astounds me that anyone would think that.

 

I talk to my ds8 ALL of the time about remaining chaste and pure and saving himself for marriage so that he can share that special bond with his wife and only his wife. I sure hope no one tells ds that is is creepy to remain a virgin until marriage.

Then be astounded at the majority of people in American society today.

 

I plan on taking out billboards now. Yes, I am all about training other people's kids in my beliefs. That's why I homeschool, because I want everyone to believe as I do. You got me. All that work, and my plans are thwarted. Darn. Back to the drawing board.

[lionfamily1999]

I think you are saying that problems arise when we present sex as being something "dirty" and "wrong". I do agree with this part. In fact this is something from my own experience which I had to unlearn so I could enjoy my dh. From my perspective God created sex for procreation AND He created it to be enjoyed. Sex within a marriage is a holy and sacred act that binds a couple together in ways beyond the physical. It is the way that two can truly become one - if there is nothing else between them... Perhaps focusing on the positives is the way to find balance and best help our children succeed at waiting.

Yes and no. Because abuse takes the form of sex in many situations, I do not want my sons or daughter to think that sex is okay or good. I do not under any circumstances want them to equate that act with some sort of bond. I want them to understand, as my dad does, that the act that was perpetrated has no effect either on their moral standing or spiritual pureness/goodness/whatever. I do not want sex to be the prize at the end of the race.

 

I want them to have a pragmatic, matter of fact approach to sex. It is enjoyable, when done with precautions, respect, and love. I want them to see it as something to be done, in its proper time and place.

[Scarlett]

Then be astounded at the majority of people in American society today.

 

I plan on taking out billboards now. Yes, I am all about training other people's kids in my beliefs. That's why I homeschool, because I want everyone to believe as I do. You got me. All that work, and my plans are thwarted. Darn. Back to the drawing board.

 

Ouch.

[beansprouts]

They creep me out. That's just it. They do. I wonder, immediately, what is wrong with them. It's not a concious act, it's not as though I sat down and went through a myriad of reasons. It's my reaction. period

 

I do not believe that not having sex is unnatural, unhealthy, etc.

 

I was a little sensitive after so many jumping to the conclusion that my sons were going to be skanky dogs. I used you to answer them all, and take out my frustrations and anger that anyone would assume my sons would be anything less than decent, civil men. My apologies.

 

I mentioned only boys, because the stigma itself is more attached to men than women (although girls are gaining). If my daughter were to remain 'pure' then there is an excellent chance she could find a young man who would appreciate it. I do not believe the odds are the same for my sons.

 

She's just being honest. The truth is I struggled with the same thing. My pastor's son married about two years ago, and I know he was a virgin until his wedding night. I was surprised by my own feelings over the issue. Society teaches us that there is a wierdness about men not "sowing their wild oats" just as it teaches us that girls who have sex are trash. Both are completely wrong attitudes.

[Pretty in Pink]

I was a little sensitive after so many jumping to the conclusion that my sons were going to be skanky dogs. I used you to answer them all, and take out my frustrations and anger that anyone would assume my sons would be anything less than decent, civil men. My apologies.

 

 

No hard feelings here :grouphug: You, dare I say all, of us here on these boards are present, active and involved parents and I believe our children will all be the better off for that.

[PiCO]

Many of those I know who did not wait for marriage deeply regret their decision. I don't know anyone who waited who regrets that.

 

My experiences are more like SpyCar's. I did not wait for marriage, and I do not regret my decision at all. I know women who did wait for marriage who are extremely dissatisfied sexually.

 

I know women who waited and women who did not, and I think the women who did not wait in general have more satisfying relationships. (Not to say that all women who waited are unhappy- I know some very happy couples who waited.)

 

When the time comes, I will recommend my daughters live with a man before marrying them, to ensure they are compatible "room-mates" as well as compatible sexually.

[dirty ethel rackham]

 

Another thing that occurred to me, though, is that many who wait will "fall to temptation" in college. I work on a college campus, and drinking is a huge issue across the nation. Statistically, sexual activity on campuses, even Christian colleges, happens while these kids are intoxicated. This leads me to think that it would be wise to take a broad view when teaching self-control, that it is bigger than just about sex.

 

Absolutely!!

[lionfamily1999]

My experiences are more like SpyCar's. I did not wait for marriage, and I do not regret my decision at all. I know women who did wait for marriage who are extremely dissatisfied sexually.

 

I know women who waited and women who did not, and I think the women who did not wait in general have more satisfying relationships. (Not to say that all women who waited are unhappy- I know some very happy couples who waited.)

 

When the time comes, I will recommend my daughters live with a man before marrying them, to ensure they are compatible "room-mates" as well as compatible sexually.

In 'Kingdom Come' (an excellent movie), one of the women tells another, those that wait, regret their lack of experience and those that don't, regret their experience. I think, either way, there are some issues, for some people. There's also a song (can't remember title or band) that begins, 'son, it's better to regret something you have done, than something you didn't do.' I don't subscribe to that opinion, as a matter of fact, my opinion is the exact opposite (better to regret not doing something, than regret something already said and done). But I do think it is a good example of how the inverse of statements are true for as many people as the statements themselves are true for and that the truth lies more in their life experiences than anything else.

[lionfamily1999]

She's just being honest. The truth is I struggled with the same thing. My pastor's son married about two years ago, and I know he was a virgin until his wedding night. I was surprised by my own feelings over the issue. Society teaches us that there is a wierdness about men not "sowing their wild oats" just as it teaches us that girls who have sex are trash. Both are completely wrong attitudes.

who?

 

I got lost a few miles back ;)

[tibbyl]

My experiences are more like SpyCar's. I did not wait for marriage, and I do not regret my decision at all. ... When the time comes, I will recommend my daughters live with a man before marrying them, to ensure they are compatible "room-mates" as well as compatible sexually.

 

I agree wholeheartedly! Sexual compatibility is far too important in a relationship to take a gamble on.

 

There is no substitute for living with someone to get to know them. You have the opportunity to see them without their party manners.

 

Of course, living together is something I would recommend only if both parties' goal is a long term or life term relationship.

[Retired]

I agree. However, the trick will be establishing a healthy conscience while having the child still feel comfortable approaching Mom or Dad if they make a mistake. Obviously I strongly support abstinence, but ultimately my goal is to make my children accountable to God. A pledge made to me puts me between them and God by adding an element of "I let Mom and Dad down" which I fear could keep them from coming for help when they need it most.

 

Not that I pretend to have all the answers AT ALL, I am just entertaining some thoughts.

 

 

:iagree:

[lionfamily1999]

Same here. I don't regret it. Why should I? I would have regretted it if I had gotten pregnant or an STD. I don't connect sex and morality. One has to be mature enough to protect themselves and deal with the consequences if they get pregnant. Otherwise, I don't see the big deal.

 

I don't have a problem with young people being told to wait for the sake of being mature enough to be responsible for their bodies and the consequences of their choices. However, to tell a kid that they should wait because sex is evil is really really wrong in my book and I wouldn't appreciate a school teaching such things.

I didn't regret it. My girl is a joy, even if her mother was too young (that's me).

 

The, sort of, advantage to being a young mother myself and wife to an ill. child of a young mother, is that my children have no illusions at all that children are only had within the bounds of marraige. They know the reality.

[Carol in Cal.]

...women who 'wait' are kind of stuck with the men who will accept that, and that to a large extent, the older you get, the more likely it is that only the men who are not that interested to start with would be willing to wait.

 

So that might account for some dissatisfaction among 'waiters'.

 

It doesn't address the moral issues, though, and for me those are most important.

[Pretty in Pink]

However, to tell a kid that they should wait because sex is evil is really really wrong in my book and I wouldn't appreciate a school teaching such things.

 

I agree. I cannot imagine telling my child that sex is evil. :confused: I would be livid to know a school was teaching such things. Then again, I can't get behind the things that are being taught in many sex ed classrooms today. I hope parents always have the option to opt their child out of sex ed if they participate in public schooling.

 

I didn't regret it. My girl is a joy, even if her mother was too young (that's me).

 

The, sort of, advantage to being a young mother myself and wife to an ill. child of a young mother, is that my children have no illusions at all that children are only had within the bounds of marraige. They know the reality.

 

I see what you are saying. I will never regret my son even though I was far too young at the time he was conceived. I do wish I had preserved that part of myself for my husband, but then I would not have my ds, so there's that. You are right though, there is no disallusion or confusion in our home about the fact that children can be conceived outside of marriage.

 

I know there are parents who confuse children by not being completely honest with them regarding sex, who shame children into believing sex is, in and of itself, sinful. How sad for those children. I pray that I communicate clearly and honestly with my children about sex regardless of how awkward those conversations feel (to me at least, my ds does not seem to shy away from asking questions in this department, and I don't think he's picked up on my discomfort yet).:lol:

[percytruffle]

I wonder if part of the problem also is that we pressure children to delay marriage. I see no problem with my young adults falling in love, marrying, and supporting each other through college. In fact I think that could help them to remain strong in an immoral environment.

 

 

I agree. Most of the teachers I work with at the Christian school married during college and have only been with each other. They are all very happy and have great relationships and families. I have never heard any of them voice concern about missing out on anything. They have shared many pleasant memories of their first years together.

[Zelda]

I wonder if part of the problem also is that we pressure children to delay marriage. I see no problem with my young adults falling in love, marrying, and supporting each other through college. In fact I think that could help them to remain strong in an immoral environment.

 

This is a great point and I think it goes to this whole movement toward a society that feels that failure is not an option. You know, because failure makes us feel bad. So we lower the bar until we can easily step over it and then we throw a party for ourselves. We've moved away from the idea of pairing up at a younger age and weathering the storms of marriage so that we could have less divorce. In exchange we got a society that celebrates promiscuity and places an outrageous importance on sex raising it to a level that actually makes most people feel like they are doing it wrong because in their own lives it doesn't take on that level of import.

 

Its wild that now teen pregnancy is only a failure if you've appeared to make a commitment to avoid it. The same group that acknowledges that teen sex is such a temptation that we should just accept its likelihood are the same ones who point fingers of blame at teens whose families still tried to avoid it. Our progressive society has decided that its only a failure if you bothered to try.

[Spy Car]

For many of us here in this discussion, premarital sex was not such a benign activity. For nearly half of us it began with abuse as a child, peer pressure as a teen, and a desire to simply "be loved" (and not be seen as "wierd") followed by the inevitable pain of rejection. Many of us have faced the "unintended consequences" and have now brought all those scars and baggage into our marriages. Many of us have had to heal before we can truly be one in heart, soul, mind as well as body with our spouse. We have been there, and we quite understandably want better for our own children. We are just trying to figure out how to help them to succeed where we ourselves failed miserably.

 

It breaks my heart reading this Cindy. To you or anyone else who might be in this situation I wish you healing and peace.

 

Bill

[lionfamily1999]

I don't want to suggest a child should be a regret. That didn't come out quite right. But lets face it, it is easier to have a child under certain circumstance than it is under other circumstances.

I miffed that all up, didn't I?

 

That wasn't how I meant it at all. I'm very sensitive where teenage pregnancy is concerned and how it is treated as a topic during discussions. I only meant that some of the possible consequences of teenagers engaging in adult activities (like sex), are not really regrettable, so to speak... okay, hopefully there's some clarity in all that mess. If not, suffice it to say, I'm sorry I came across that way.

[LBC]

As I'm reading all of these interesting comments, I'm reminded of when I went to Egypt for a few months in 1990. Virginity is a huge issue for the women there. They are so afraid of losing their virginity that they won't ride bikes or use tampons. Often, men will follow the tradition of waving a blood stained handkerchief out the door on the wedding night to show the "purity" of their wife. One girl I met there was engaged, and had been for quite a long time (it was difficult to get married because finding an apartment was almost impossible in Cairo, so engagements were long). She said that if her fiancé suspected that she was not a virgin (which she was), he would not marry her. I couldn't believe it. This was the Christian community in Egypt, not the Muslim community. I want my children to wait, but I'm very thankful that we don't live in a place that shames them if they don't.

 

Lori

[percytruffle]

I want my children to wait, but I'm very thankful that we don't live in a place that shames them if they don't.

 

Lori

 

Amen to that.

[lionfamily1999]

This is a great point and I think it goes to this whole movement toward a society that feels that failure is not an option. You know, because failure makes us feel bad. So we lower the bar until we can easily step over it and then we throw a party for ourselves. We've moved away from the idea of pairing up at a younger age and weathering the storms of marriage so that we could have less divorce. In exchange we got a society that celebrates promiscuity and places an outrageous importance on sex raising it to a level that actually makes most people feel like they are doing it wrong because in their own lives it doesn't take on that level of import.

 

Its wild that now teen pregnancy is only a failure if you've appeared to make a commitment to avoid it. The same group that acknowledges that teen sex is such a temptation that we should just accept its likelihood are the same ones who point fingers of blame at teens whose families still tried to avoid it. Our progressive society has decided that its only a failure if you bothered to try.

I would have to say the roles of parent and spouse have taken a severe beating as a result. Even when you succeed you fail, in the present climate. The idea that parenthood is some horrible situation you can't get out of for eighteen whole years is so counterproductive and leads to resentment in people that might otherwise have ENJOYED their children. At the same time, being someone's spouse and enjoying being their spouse, happily being their spouse, even when you disagree, even when you argue, even when you want to wring their neck, becomes a 'failure' because you refuse to 'stand up for your rights and individuality'. A fear that the self is lost in the family unit has lead people to attempt to maintain self (see excessive attention given to 'me' time, etc.) to the detriment of the family unit, especially the marital unit. The need to be a strong individual, self-reliant, independant, etc. has lead to a loss on the grounds of compromise, understanding, codependancy, and the ability to rely on your spouse.

[Nicole M]

I guess I just have a more positive view that they will find someone, get married and be happy. Funny how that happens sometimes.

 

This is important, and I don't want it to be lost in this thread. Remudamom is on to something here.

 

If we think that we can decide on a "syllabus" or a code to teach our children about sexuality, and if we think that the sum total of what they actually learn about sexuality will be contained in that code, we are deceiving ourselves. Sexuality is so basic, so profound, so much a part of our identity that we cannot help but constantly communicate about it in our ordinary lives. What our children pick up from us about their bodies, their sexuality may not be what we intend to communicate. I don't have any data to back this up, but I firmly believe that the best that we can offer our children is authenticity and brutal honesty with ourselves. What do I truly believe about my body? What are my most basic, unspoken truths? No matter what we say, this is what our children will learn. Children are not stupid and they can and often do figure that stuff out before we do. Remudamom's basic assumption is that her children will marry and be happy, and I'm willing to bet that the chances are awfully high that they will.

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone here is not doing that. I just think that we cannot underestimate what kind of impact, separate from our words and intentions, that we have on our children. Sexuality is not tidy, and, for many of us, words, oaths, codes of behavior, are all very external to our experience. They cannot capture and often can't even point to the profound mystery, the beauty of our being.

[Harriet Vane]

However, to tell a kid that they should wait because sex is evil is really really wrong in my book and I wouldn't appreciate a school teaching such things.

 

Jumping in to the discussion late and only having read 3/4 of the posts . . .

 

I am a Christian who believes in waiting until marriage for sex. However, I would also be livid if a school was teaching that sex is evil, and I do not personally know anyone who would teach that.

 

As a Christian, I would teach NOT that sex is evil, but that it is a wonderful gift intended as a blessing and a joy in the marriage relationship. I don't think it is accurate to represent this perspective as saying, "Sex is evil." Equating sex with evil is absolutely not what the Bible says, nor is it what most Christians think.

[Zelda]

My experiences are more like SpyCar's. I did not wait for marriage, and I do not regret my decision at all. I know women who did wait for marriage who are extremely dissatisfied sexually.

 

I know women who waited and women who did not, and I think the women who did not wait in general have more satisfying relationships. (Not to say that all women who waited are unhappy- I know some very happy couples who waited.)

 

When the time comes, I will recommend my daughters live with a man before marrying them, to ensure they are compatible "room-mates" as well as compatible sexually.

 

I find it very odd that there seems to be a link between sexual happiness in a marriage and prior sexual experience. I find it equally strange that sexual happiness with a person prior to marriage guarantees it 10 years later. I think its entirely possible that delaying sex until marriage can create a marriage with the typical ebbs of flows in all aspects of the relationship all of which require some work and commitment by both parties.

 

Our world is full of examples of people who tore it up before marriage still end up being unhappy with their sex life. What's that about?

[beansprouts]

I want my children to wait, but I'm very thankful that we don't live in a place that shames them if they don't.

 

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you!!

 

I would also ask that we not make the mistake of shaming or making them feel "wierd" if they do.

[Haiku]

Yes, unfortunately pledges of any kind don't seem to mean much to people these day.

 

I don't think that has anything to do with it.

 

What I want to know is, how old were these kids when they took this pledge? (The article doesn't mention this.) When I was 13 I thought sex was gross and said I would never do it. My 14 year old says the same thing. Obviously it is untrue that sex is gross, and had someone come along and tried to hold me to that idea when I was older, it would have been ludicrous. Having kids who don't understand what they are doing make pledges is not going to work, imo. I don't even let my kids younger kids pledge allegiance to the flag for that reason.

 

Tara

[beansprouts]

I don't think that has anything to do with it.

 

What I want to know is, how old were these kids when they took this pledge? (The article doesn't mention this.) When I was 13 I thought sex was gross and said I would never do it. My 14 year old says the same thing. Obviously it is untrue that sex is gross, and had someone come along and tried to hold me to that idea when I was older, it would have been ludicrous. Having kids who don't understand what they are doing make pledges is not going to work, imo. I don't even let my kids younger kids pledge allegiance to the flag for that reason.

 

Tara

 

I wondered the same thing. I have talked quite a bit with my dd already, but it is easy for her at 9 1/2 to know the "right answers". It is when they begin to experience real desire that right and wrong can get a little hazy.

[lionfamily1999]

I don't think that has anything to do with it.

 

What I want to know is, how old were these kids when they took this pledge? (The article doesn't mention this.) When I was 13 I thought sex was gross and said I would never do it. My 14 year old says the same thing. Obviously it is untrue that sex is gross, and had someone come along and tried to hold me to that idea when I was older, it would have been ludicrous. Having kids who don't understand what they are doing make pledges is not going to work, imo. I don't even let my kids younger kids pledge allegiance to the flag for that reason.

 

Tara

Maybe it's all the pledges we are told to make AS children that lead to the idea that pledges are trifles?

[Spy Car]

Maybe it's all the pledges we are told to make AS children that lead to the idea that pledges are trifles?

 

That's the point I was trying to make.

 

It's not that I believe a parent shouldn't teach children values, because that is an essential role of parenthood, but pressuring children to take oaths they are most likely not going to be able to keep only undermines the importance of keeping ones word.

 

And putting a child in a position where might break their sacred vow to a divine power (one they have a sincere belief in) seems like an especially damaging position in which to put the child.

 

It surprises this admittedly non-religious person that some who I fully trust are persons of great faith have seemed to dismiss the gravity of breaking ones word to their God so lightly. I would think this would weigh heavily on a person.

 

If it's forgivable to lie to God then where is the line of unacceptable behavior drawn? Another honest question.

 

Bill

[lionfamily1999]

That's the point I was trying to make.

 

It's not that I believe a parent shouldn't teach children values, because that is an essential role of parenthood, but pressuring children to take oaths they are most likely not going to be able to keep only undermines the importance of keeping ones word.

 

And putting a child in a position where might break their sacred vow to a divine power (one they have a sincere belief in) seems like an especially damaging position in which to put the child.

 

It surprises this admittedly non-religious person that some who I fully trust are persons of great faith have seemed to dismiss the gravity of breaking ones word to their God so lightly. I would think this would weigh heavily on a person.

 

If it's forgivable to lie to God then where is the line of unacceptable behavior drawn? Another honest question.

 

Bill

The way you put it, it almost seems as though the authority of parent is transferred to the authority of God, in that aspect, before the child reaches the point where the act itself (sex) is even a clear notion. IOW, I know that you'll know I can't be everywhere, so here is God, promise Him, because He is everywhere.

 

Why don't people do anti-drug pledges then? I mean, drugs are things kids can avoid, they won't reach a point in maturity when their veins start to itch or they beat their heads against walls to get 'high'. That would be an easier pledge, and probably much more beneficial in the long run.

[beansprouts]

It surprises this admittedly non-religious person that some who I fully trust are persons of great faith have seemed to dismiss the gravity of breaking ones word to their God so lightly. I would think this would weigh heavily on a person.

 

If it's forgivable to lie to God then where is the line of unacceptable behavior drawn? Another honest question.

 

 

FWIW I am still not convinced that it is wise to make such oaths.

 

For starters, one misconception among non-Christians is that we worship a God of condemnation. We don't. We stand condemned already due to our own choices. Our God is offering redemption, but we need to be willing to lay down our silly pride, admit when we have done wrong, and accept His forgiveness. Now I think you are right in the sense that when a sin has been committed *and* an oath has been broken, it is that much harder for us to repent. However, God's grace is sufficient to cover both of these sins as well as all future ones.

 

The other misconception is that because we believe in God's grace we feel we can commit any sin we want and just ask for forgiveness. The reality is that as Christians, we consider God to be our Father "Abba" which means something like "Daddy" whom we love and desire to please. We want His will for our lives, and we try very hard to do what is right. Even though we fail (daily, even hourly) our Father appreciates it that we try and encourages our efforts just as we do with our own children. He wants us to succeed, and will help us if we ask Him. I trust Him and obey even when I don't understand why because I know He knows just a little bit more than I do.

 

So with respect to making promises, it is kind of the same as when my four year old promises me that if I buy him a candy bar he will never ask me for anything ever, ever again. He has neither the maturity, the wisdom or the self-control to maintain such a promise. In fact he will probably forget ever having made it as soon as the chocolate is in his hands. He will break the promise, and I will forgive him for it. My guess is when we make promises to God He pretty much just rolls his eyes most of the time.

[Peek a Boo]

wow-- long thread :)

 

as to the OP article.... I am very hesitant to accept as credible a study that revolves around the word of a bunch of teens. I remember way too many teens lying either way depending on the questioner or their mood. This is probably one of the most unscientific forms of studies out there. It's not even worth the paper to print it out.

 

I'm not big on 'pledges' either.

lionfamily1999 --the D.A.R.E. program is still alive and going strong. we're not involved tho ;)

 

and SpyCar -- in a nutshell, the unforgivable line is in rejecting Christ. I'll let others clarify and elaborate. i need a nap after a looong drive home crammed in a van w/ 5 kids, a dog, and a dh, lol.....

 

Sexual compatibility is far too important in a relationship to take a gamble on.

 

There is no substitute for living with someone to get to know them. You have the opportunity to see them without their party manners.

 

I'm not quite sure about this one, based mostly on Zelda's response below.

Even after you 'know' someone [in both senses, snicker] there's still a lot of WORK to be done in a relationship.

 

I do think that more than just "checking for sexual compatibility" I'd recommend a great sex manual first -and there are Christian ones out there too. Talk about making sure your kids are prepared, lol. ;)

 

I am also leery about assuming how important sex is to a life-long relationship. THAT tends to drip of objectification to me. To value their spouse as a PERSON and not just an object of gratification.

I want my kids to be prepared to work for a relationship if they/their spouse experiences any sexual deficiencies at some point in their life.

I think I'm pretty much on the same page as most other Christian posters in this thread, so i won't repeat everything.....

 

I find it very odd that there seems to be a link between sexual happiness in a marriage and prior sexual experience. I find it equally strange that sexual happiness with a person prior to marriage guarantees it 10 years later. I think its entirely possible that delaying sex until marriage can create a marriage with the typical ebbs of flows in all aspects of the relationship all of which require some work and commitment by both parties.

 

Our world is full of examples of people who tore it up before marriage still end up being unhappy with their sex life. What's that about?

 

you said it! relationships take work and commitment. regardless of the sex life.

abusive relationships excepted, people tend to choose to be unhappy.

[lionfamily1999]

wow-- long thread :)

 

I'm not big on 'pledges' either.

lionfamily1999 --the D.A.R.E. program is still alive and going strong. we're not involved tho ;)

 

I am also leery about assuming how important sex is to a life-long relationship. THAT tends to drip of objectification to me. To value their spouse as a PERSON and not just an object of gratification.

I want my kids to be prepared to work for a relationship if they/their spouse experiences any sexual deficiencies at some point in their life.

I think I'm pretty much on the same page as most other Christian posters in this thread, so i won't repeat everything.....

 

I think the DARE program fails for the same reason that many church run abstinence programs fail. They lie. Masturbation does not cause blindness or any disturbances in the mind. Pot will not make you crazy. Perhaps if there was more honesty and less fear, kids would be less tempted. It seems like most forbidden fruit ends up as a regular on the diets of teens and young adults. If you have sex, outside of marraige, and God allows you to live, then you have to wonder if it's so bad after all. If you know people that do drugs and they aren't crack head crazies, then you begin to wonder if anything they taught you in DARE is true.

 

I agree that the emphasis placed on sex is misplaced. Relationships revolve around people, not "privates." Sex is an action, not the pinacle of existence, not something that should be placed above understanding of eachother.

[Pretty in Pink]

Getting back to the topic of virginity pledges...I don't put much stock in them and couldn't really care less if none of my children ever take one. If they expressed an interest in such a pledge or oath or promise both dh and I would discuss it with them. We would remind them of the importance of keeping our promises. We would encourage them to think and pray long and hard about such a promise before making one. We would instruct them that if they wanted to make such a promise to the Lord that maybe they should do so privately in keeping with Matthew 5:5-6. Ultimately the decision would be left up to the child regarding if, when, where and in front of whom such a promise was made.

 

I believe God expects us to break our promises but that He is a forgiving God who is ready to extend grace to those who repent and ask His favor. Breaking a promise to Him would weigh heavily on my heart, not because I was afraid of losing His love but because I was broken over disappointing Him. I know that his grace is available to me when I come to him with a broken and repentant heart.

[Quad Shot Academy]

FWIW I am still not convinced that it is wise to make such oaths.

 

Our God is offering redemption, but we need to be willing to lay down our silly pride, admit when we have done wrong, and accept His forgiveness.

 

For me, that is just why I don't like such oaths. It seems prideful. Whenever I have told myself or God I would not do something, I usually end up doing it! :blushing: Pride cometh before the fall.

 

I made an oath before God for my marriage, for my personal walk with God and dedicating my children to God, to be raised in a Christian life. Those are the basics of my life. I sin every day, but I have never given up on those and Lord willing, I won't.

 

At a local church, they were asking people to sign a pledge that they would attend church for the next 6 weeks. I was just shocked that people would do this. I always tell my kids not to promise anything because they never know what will happen next. We always say we will do something, "Lord willing," meaning that we will do it if grossly unfavorable, unforseable circumstances don't arise.

 

However, I don't think you need to take an oath to wear a purity ring. For me, it would just be a reminder that I was waiting until marriage as an act of obedience to the Lord.

[4summergirls]

When the time comes, I will recommend my daughters live with a man before marrying them, to ensure they are compatible "room-mates" as well as compatible sexually.

 

And I say this as someone who lived with my husband before we married (although we were engaged before we lived together). I'm from the same line of thought as Drew who posted earlier about teaching our children about the lifelong commintment and self-giving in a sexual relationship, by way of Theology of the Body.

 

Based on my recent interest in studying Theology of the Body more and training as a speaker on marriage for my diocese, I learned that cohabitating before marriage actually increases the chance of divorce by 50%. On first reflection, that may seem counterintuitive, but upon further reflection, it's not. When you're living together, what you're really doing is practicing an uncommitted relationship and forming "habits of heart" that are difficult to break.

 

You don't need to take my word on this, you can read more about it at, http://www.jennifer-roback-morse.com/articles/cohab_fast_facts.html, the article is called, "Why Not Take Her for a Test Drive?" As Dr. Morse, the author, says, "Half a commitment is no commitment. Cohabitating couples have one foot out the door, throughout the relationship. They rehearse not trusting."

 

Just wanted to put forth a different perspective on it -

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Based on my recent interest in studying Theology of the Body more and training as a speaker on marriage for my diocese, I learned that cohabitating before marriage actually increases the chance of divorce by 50%. On first reflection, that may seem counterintuitive, but upon further reflection, it's not. When you're living together, what you're really doing is practicing an uncommitted relationship and forming "habits of heart" that are difficult to break.

 

Just wanted to put forth a different perspective on it -

 

Well, as much as I completely respect your views on this matter, I do think that you have to remember that this might be an improper conclusion that you're drawing. Correlation does not equal causation.

 

You could rightly say, I think, that according to this study, people who live together have a higher incidence of divorce. But you couldn't say that living together *increases* the likelihood of divorce. Or at least, as I understand interpretation of data, you can't.

[Spy Car]

FWIW I am still not convinced that it is wise to make such oaths.

 

I'd be quite surprised if you were, to be honest.

 

 

For starters, one misconception among non-Christians is that we worship a God of condemnation. We don't.

 

Cindy, it would seem to me to be a great error to over-generalize about what Christians believe on this front.

 

From my vantage point (outside this faith) it seems the belief in a God of loving forgiveness is one end of a spectrum that runs on the other end to a belief in a God with a wrathful and avenging nature and a God fully capable of meeting out condemnation and punishment.

 

The "emphasis" on these two poles of God's nature varies greatly from denomination, and from person to person, but it seems to way to simplistic to me to try to say what all Christians believe. It's far too complex and beliefs are too varied.

 

We stand condemned already due to our own choices.

 

Not to niggle, but many would argue we have already been condemned at birth not by our own actions, but by the actions of a distant ancestor. And that has nothing to do with our own choices.

 

Our God is offering redemption, but we need to be willing to lay down our silly pride, admit when we have done wrong, and accept His forgiveness. Now I think you are right in the sense that when a sin has been committed *and* an oath has been broken, it is that much harder for us to repent.

 

Here I'm not entirely certain what "repent" means. Because I imagine if I lied to a God I believed it I would feel very ashamed of myself and want to be forgiven. Perhaps a God of mercy could/would forgive me, but could I forgive myself? I tend to think such self-forgiveness would be difficult (understatement). Maybe it's my own personality, but I can't imagine that breaking an oath to my God is something I'd get over.

 

The other misconception is that because we believe in God's grace we feel we can commit any sin we want and just ask for forgiveness. The reality is that as Christians, we consider God to be our Father "Abba" which means something like "Daddy" whom we love and desire to please. We want His will for our lives, and we try very hard to do what is right. Even though we fail (daily, even hourly) our Father appreciates it that we try and encourages our efforts just as we do with our own children. He wants us to succeed, and will help us if we ask Him. I trust Him and obey even when I don't understand why because I know He knows just a little bit more than I do.

 

I totally get this. And I think if I shared your faith I'd ask "Abba" to help give me the strength to follow his path, and admit when I felt weak and in need, and do my best to please him. And I would not make the kind of oaths he has told me in scripture I ought not make. Especially if I had the slightest doubt I couldn't keep my bond.

 

So with respect to making promises, it is kind of the same as when my four year old promises me that if I buy him a candy bar he will never ask me for anything ever, ever again. He has neither the maturity, the wisdom or the self-control to maintain such a promise. In fact he will probably forget ever having made it as soon as the chocolate is in his hands. He will break the promise, and I will forgive him for it. My guess is when we make promises to God He pretty much just rolls his eyes most of the time.

 

This is what I have a problem with. Folks decry the lack of respect people have in their word these days, yet it's OK to break ones trust with God and have it be dismissed with an "eye-roll"?

 

I'm finding it difficult to fathom that it's the non-believer in the crowd who's got the problem with this configuration, but I do.

 

Bill

[lionfamily1999]

And I say this as someone who lived with my husband before we married (although we were engaged before we lived together). I'm from the same line of thought as Drew who posted earlier about teaching our children about the lifelong commintment and self-giving in a sexual relationship, by way of Theology of the Body.

 

Based on my recent interest in studying Theology of the Body more and training as a speaker on marriage for my diocese, I learned that cohabitating before marriage actually increases the chance of divorce by 50%. On first reflection, that may seem counterintuitive, but upon further reflection, it's not. When you're living together, what you're really doing is practicing an uncommitted relationship and forming "habits of heart" that are difficult to break.

 

You don't need to take my word on this, you can read more about it at, http://www.jennifer-roback-morse.com/articles/cohab_fast_facts.html, the article is called, "Why Not Take Her for a Test Drive?" As Dr. Morse, the author, says, "Half a commitment is no commitment. Cohabitating couples have one foot out the door, throughout the relationship. They rehearse not trusting."

 

Just wanted to put forth a different perspective on it -

Isn't the current divorce rate 50% overrall?

 

I agree, but I have a different p.o.v. I agree for the same reasons that I do not believe that my single friends who have been living together for ten plus years are 'as good as married.' When you live together, you're living together. When you are married, however, there is more responsibility and a longer commitment. My hubby and I lived together (once we were engaged) as did my parents (after engagement and my dad was HORRIFIED when my mom told us). We all changed after we were married. Learning to depend on someone, learning to truly rely on them, to trust them implicity, is not something that is done when you're only living together. It's just as easy to learn how to load the dishwasher the right way (my way) or do laundrey the right way (his way) once you're married as it is single and cohabitating. But, like you, that is my 'do as I say, not as I did' two cents.

[Spy Car]

and SpyCar -- in a nutshell, the unforgivable line is in rejecting Christ.

 

I'm no theologian, but I believe this is scripturally incorrect. Isn't the unforgivable line blaspheming against the Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost?

 

Didn't Peter reject Jesus? Wasn't he forgiven?

 

One of the scripturally well-versed will hopefully help on this one, but I have some confidence I've got this correct*

 

Anyway, violating an oath to God seems like a pretty bad thing in my personal religion.

 

Bill

 

* risk nothing on my so-so :D

[4summergirls]

I absolutely agree that corrlelation does not equal causation, but there have been many studies done in this area and I was trying to keep it brief. At the risk of drowning you in data, here's some more info (with citations) in case you're interested:

 

 

What social science says about cohabitation

 

 

 

·

On average, marriage preceded by cohabitation is 46% more likely to end in divorce. (Popenoe and

Whitehead, "Should We Live Together?" 2002, p. 4, citing 1992 study by Alfred DeMaris & K.

Vaninadha Rao, "Premarital Cohabitation & Subsequent Marital Stability in the U.S.: A Reassessment,"

Journal of Marriage and the Family

 

 

 

54)

·

 

 

 

The risk is greatest for "serial" cohabitators who have had multiple relationships. Some studies indicate

that those who live together with definite plans for marriage are at minimal risk; however, there are no

positive effects from cohabiting. (Popenoe and Whitehead, "Should We Live Together?" p. 5-6)

·

 

 

 

Social scientists have tried to determine whether some of the risk is due to the selection effect, i.e., that

people who cohabit are already those who are more likely to divorce. While research shows the

selection influence, most social scientists emphasize the causal effect, that is, cohabitation itself

increases the chance of future marital problems and divorce. (Anne-Marie Ambert, "Cohabitation &

Marriage: How are they related," 2005, p.18-19, www.vifamily.ca/library/cft/cohabitation.pdf; Stanley,

Kline, & Markman, "The Inertia Hypothesis: Sliding vs. Deciding in the Development of Risk for

Couples in Marriage," p. 6-8,

www.bgsu.edu/organizations/cfdr/cohabitation/lead_papers/inertia_hypothesis.pdf)

·

 

 

 

Cohabitation usually favors one partner over the other. Studies find that cohabitors are unequally

committed. Often, the more committed partner is willing to put up with poor communication, unequal

treatment, insecurity and abuse. Typically, women are more vulnerable, since they tend to be more

committed. (Anne-Marie Ambert, "Cohabitation & Marriage: How are they related," 2005, p.13-15)

·

 

 

 

Cohabitation puts children at risk. Forty percent of cohabiting households include children. After five

years, one-half of these couples will have broken up, compared to 15% of married parents. (Whitehead,

"Patterns & Predictors of Success & Failure in Marriage," p.7, from the 2005 colloquium "Promoting &

Sustaining Marriage as a Community of Life & Love")