Exactly? Religion affects your morals though, and it's likely that people will have different morals based on their religion.
So morality is concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles and current social standings. And if over 80% of the population thinks it is morally wrong to have sex before marriage then whither you think it is write or wrong, the majority of the world would consider a person who has sex before marriage immoral. I know plenty of people that are atheists that still consider sex before marriage immoral because of the social standings of the rest of the world. They also have personal moralities but if you want to argue this issue based on a world view then sex before marriage is morally wrong. It might not be wrong in your personal view but to most of the world it is.
80% of the population definetely do not think that. There is nothing morally wrong about sex before marriage, it's just against religious views. I notice you cleverly sidestepped all the other questions too..
I guess it depends what statistics you look at. Mine came from Time magazine issue in 2001. I am sure it has probably dropped in the past few years due to more and more liberalization of personal views. But the numbers still stand. You can look it up if you would like. (50% + woman that they questioned said it was morally wrong, and 30% + men said it was morally wrong) Only against religious views? Umm did you not read about my atheist friends that think it is wrong? Also morality also comes in all shapes and sizes and ideas. For instance killing people/genocide is accepted as immoral in the world. However, it has not always been like that. Do you think the moral code of not killing is also just religious based? If you think all morals are religious based then you are wrong. I am assuming that you think if you have a feeling to do something that it is natural because it is instinct? So if you have a feeling to kill someone that is natural and you should follow through with it? No you shouldn't because it is moral wrong and socially unacceptable. There it is again, the thing that separates us from the animal world. The ability to control urges and make rational decisions. So now we can see that the definition of morals come from the general social acceptance. Now I am not saying that all morals are not affected by religion. Because a lot of morals do come from religion. Religion has set guidelines for the followers to act upon. So morality changes via your environment and social locale. For example, Utah is known for its high morals do to the amount of members of the LDS church. Now stereotypically members of the Mormon church have high morals so the effect of these morals are seen throughout the whole state even if the non-religious people know it or not. We are a very social species. And because we are extremely gregarious the effects of other people and their ideas are a constant part of our lives and have an effect on who we are and our moral and social standings.
50% women+30%men is average 40% of population, not 80%. And I don't have sex just because it is my instinct to do so, I do it because both me and my girlfriend believe it is okay, it doesn't harm out relationship in the slightest and we both enjoy it. Where is the harm?
Lmao. 80%. The VAST majority of religious people I know happily have sex before marraige. I'd wager the number of people that won't have sex before marraige is significantly below 80%, more around...5%? Even that seems high. And the whole, Murder can give you kicks + it's natural argument has tried and failed before. There's a huge difference between having someone you care about and stabbing someone, for one, sex is actually a good thing, where-as murder, on the whole, is not. Yes, as I keep saying there's occassionally baggage associated with sex but not nearly to the level you're suggesting, especially if you're at least slightly clever about it. We obtain our morals, well, primarily from our parents, and morals do adapt through time depending on what is socially acceptable. And you know what? Sex before marraige is becoming more and more morally acceptable by the hour, people are realising that by being safe, and as long as you do have some feelings for each other, sex isn't a bad thing, it's something we should be promoting not discouraging. PS : If 50% of Women + 30% of Men said sex before marraige is morally wrong, that's not 80% of the world population. You can't add percentages together like that.
Complete celibacy, celibacy before marriage, celibacy for a certain time period like preteen to teen to adult, or celibacy before real love, etc . . . ?
I am not celibate, and I think that celibacy is illogical. I understand if someone does not want to have sex, because they want to save it for someone they love, but I don't quite understand celibacy.
Never know, you may be wrong, there may be a god, and you and I will probably be in hell if that's the case. Don't count on it though . I generally agree with pretty much everything you said. Nothing changes in a serious, committed relationship from the day before marriage to the day after, apart from a marriage license (which, among other things, comes from the State...). If the couple both believes that it's OK to have sex before marriage, OK. Be responsible about it. If one or both decides that it's best to wait, so be it. More power to them. The emotional baggage argument has some merit, as does the STD/pregnancy risk. However, if both partners are responsible and mature about it, none of that comes into play. The argument's pretty much like the "magical knowledge" you get when you turn 18 in the US. When I was 17 and working, I was not allowed to handle a boxcutter at work. The day I turned 18, I was. When I was 17 years, 11 months, I was supposedly not mature enough to vote or know the dangers of cigarettes or know the risks of being in a pornographic film, etc. etc. etc. A month later, I magically knew these things/gained that maturity. Does that really make sense? Transfer that to the emotional baggage argument, and how it disappears once that marriage license is there. I understand the "being committed to one person alone" argument. Honestly, it's respectable to me. It isn't my cup of tea, however; both me and my girlfriend are OK with this.
