Religion and Sex

Theists, how important is "sexual purity" to you? By purity I am referring to abstinence outside of marriage. 

Are your beliefs on this shaped by scripture, culture, or your personal experience? 

Another good post/question. Welcome to the site, by the way. Please fill out some items in your profile to help get to know you. If you need help in that regard, glad to help in any way, and the mods [moderators] exist entirely for that purpose, and other stuff.

To your question: I am married for 47 years to one woman. I made a commitment then to which I have held for all those years because, well, I believe in being true to covenants. Sexual purity goes beyond just the commitment to my wife. Even before marriage, I respected the purity of the girls/women I dated [I married at 23] too much to take from them that which was not mine to take, as if she were a cupcake. Even when offered - and I had those experiences - I declined because I respected them even if they did not. I look at women in this context: Michelangelo's Sistine chapel ceiling features the center panel of Adam's creation [so it is called], but Adam is at arm's length and finger-length from God, and a slight separation between them at that. Meanwhile, that is Eve at his left shoulder, in God's protective embrace. My preference is to consider this panel as "Eve's creation." She was, after all, the last creation of all things. Considering that kind of respect from God for her, I say all her daughters deserve the same. Yeah, it's personal preference, but strike preference; it's a commitment.

I am in general not a promiscuous person but I would have no problem with sex without marriage. I would have to be in some kind of relationship with the person.  Not a religious, cultural or spiritual thing. More an emotional thing.  I have been faithful to my husband for 28 years with no real need to look elsewhere. 

Thank you for the welcome and response. Is a woman's body not her own to offer? It seems you are saying a woman's body belongs to her eventual husband, and not herself, as you do not think she respects herself if she offers her body to someone that is not her husband. Do you think this belief of yours is shaped by scripture? 

That is an interesting word to use ("faithful") in relation to marriage or sexual relationships. One usually relates faith to God or religion. You seem to be saying you have been worthy of your partner's faith and trust in you. 

I think we have done that for each other. I trust him completely. 

No, not due to scripture. The issue, whether I am married, or not, is that I simply will not engage relations with a woman to whom I am not married, since the sex act, which, often engaged merely for pleasure, has the possible consequence of pregnancy, and I totally disagree with artificial contraceptives, and I personally engaged in abstinence before marriage, also by choice. To engage at her request, ignores all of that, even if she considers otherwise. At that rate, it is her right overwhelming mine. I claim the right to not engage, Simple as that. Is my right any less applicable? And, yes, because pregnancy is a possibility, even if she uses contraceptives, none of which are 100% effective, it is a possibility she ignores, which I personally consider is irresponsible on her part. I am big on personal responsibility, and expecting that others are, too, knowing some are not. It what generated MTV's Jackass movies and skits.

Yes, I extend faith into all aspects of life. To me, faith and belief are entirely separate matters. No one is compelled by what they believe, belief asks nothing of us. Faith, on the other hand, demands we do something about it, such as pursue whether something is true, or not. Faith, to me, is already tied to something that is already true, and we, individually, may not yet be aware of the truth. I believe faith, therefore, leads ultimately to perfect knowledge by an active desire to learn it, or it is not faith that is operating. I can, therefore, have faith, and ultimately acquire perfect knowledge on any subject whatsoever. I applied faith in school to my subjects and their exams, [and thereby excelled - I have 2 PhDs] and so developed, for example, my standards on sexual relations. I am, however, very religious, as you note on my favorite scripture.

So it seems your biggest reason to avoid sex outside of marriage is the possibility of pregnancy, which makes sense on a practical level. You also said, "I respected the purity of the girls/women I dated [I married at 23] too much to take from them that which was not mine to take, as if she were a cupcake. Even when offered - and I had those experiences - I declined because I respected them even if they did not." I can see how disregarding a potential pregnancy could signal lack of self-respect, but you were also talking about purity which seems more relevant to spiritual matters than practical matters. Do you think once a person has sex outside of marriage, they are less pure?

Yes. There are many pleasure-inducing activities. That one has the biological function of procreation, regardless of its feel-good potential. Feel good another way. Since that activity has a purpose beyond and outside of stimulation, it makes no sense to engage it strictly within the intent of pleasure, as that pleasure is fleeting, at best. It's the separation between joy and happiness. Happiness is fleeting. Joy can be long-lasting delight. There's your distinction between eros and agape. 

pretty important, sexual morality effects the well-being of society in a large way.

For example, there is a clear relationship between premarital sex and divorce-https://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/premarital-sex-and-greater-risk-of-divorce/

My beliefs are shaped by scripture

A. Procreation is  instinctive, sex is a pleasurable derivative thereof.

B. Marriage and religion are latter day social and theoretical constructs.

One is not necessarily reliant upon the other.

Though various people make various assumptions, and consequently live their lives accordingly.

No one is right and no one is wrong.

I'm pretty standard......But what's the standard?

Sex with multiple partners can have some serious unpleasant consequences, you never know what STD you might get.

Sex with ONE partner can give you an STD.

Or you could become a Republican president of the United States.

Yes, of course, but sex with one partner who has never had an STD greatly reduces or even eliminates the chance of getting one.

Not when both partners come to the marriage unsullied, and then remain committed to just themselves. Abstinence is 100% effective when practiced. No other artificial contraceptive has that track record, i.e., you have to use them in order to gain even a modicum of effectivity. Problem is, few want to say 'no' anymore; to their regret and frustration. Having said 'no' until I was married, and then 'no other' afterward, I remain free to say 'yes,' don't I? Having said 'yes' indiscriminately, who has then 'no' as an unsullied response? Which is sustained as pure in the end game?

COngratulations, I mean that's awesome for you but it clearly doesn't work for most people. I've had sex with more than one person, and I've never gotten anyone besides my wife unintentionally pregnant and have never had an STI, so I am not sure I understand either objection (except as a fig leaf to say your obejction to premarital sex is in fact scripturally based, not scientifically), in both your case and the other guy's case. I have never regretted my 'impurity,' I didn't ask my wife to be 'pure' (creepy and a really bad idea), I don't care about any of that, I don't feel bad about sex in any way. Religious adherents of all stripes not only have premarital sex, they also have sex with other people outside of marriages, they also have homosexual sex, they also get people pregnant unintentionally and get STI's, so I'm not sure what the purity argument is except a way to pat yourself on the back. 

What's the stance on masturbating, then? If the sex act is for reproduction ONLY, is masturbating cool because that's REALLY only for pleasure? Does that affect your purity? Would it affect your assessoment of your wife's purity if you found out she performed oral sex on someone before she met you? Why? Why not?

Wow, have some hang-ups there? Did I say sex was just for procreation? No. I said that's the design of the process, but, enjoyable it certainly is, and there's nothing wrong with that, unless it is the only focus, and utterly indiscriminate. Did I say religious people don't engage in actions they should not by professed religion? No, I know they do. I happen to have committed otherwise, and I don't. I'm not imposing that on anyone else. Do as you wish. I'm just saying, if the pool is deep water and I don't swim, why would I jump in? That's not a religious decision; it is entirely practical. My religion just happens to agree. I can check that box.

This you?

So you don't bang your wife if you're not trying to get her pregnant? Or do you just take children as they come?

And no answer to the masturbation / oral sex question?

Is your only objection to contraception devices that they aren't 100% effective? There's a lot of medicines that would not meet that standard. 

Plus your use of language like "pure" and "unsullied" betrays what your real objection is. There's nothing inherently impure or "sullying" about sex, man. That's the language of judgement, dude. 

Do you feel that someone is no longer pure ("contaminated") if they have sexual relations outside of marriage in ways that could not lead to pregnancy, i.e. oral sex or other kinds of stimulation? 

Answer to both: Nope. I don't "bang" her at all. Sorry, you missed my point of of my #2 completely. Congratulations, but I'm not surprised. Respect, my friend, is a concept over your head. Grow up. I don't talk like that, even with just the guys, and I don't act like that. But where, oh, where, did I say that sex was exclusively entertainment? If that's your routine, I pity you. I said its biological purpose is procreation, which says nothing negative about it pleasure. Don't put words in my mouth; yours is all you have. Stick to it.

Judgment? Who's judging when "banging" is your vernacular? When you've been around as long as I have, you'll learn a little respect for women.   

I'm donew. You're not paying me to be your tutor.

Yes, I do. Marriage, to me, is a covenant. Sex outside of that covenant breaks it by sexual congress of any manner since I have contracted with my wife to not do that. Would I consider my bargain with a retailer to not steal his merchandise as remaining pure if I just stole a candy bar? In regard to covenants, no means no, with no exceptions.

Sorry about the coarse language, snowflake. I'm plenty grown, thanks, just not the pearl clutching type. I bang my wife plenty and with plenty of respect, ace. You're done because you're expsoed as a hypocrite: your objections to premarital sex aren't science based at all, they're faith based which you denied initially. And you can answer the question about the non-pregnancy inducing ways of sexual gratification or pleasure? Is it cool with you if you find out your wife is using a vibrator because you won't bang her unless she's willing to carry a baby? Don't be so sensitive, Rev. Be honest.

Are there flies buzzing about again?

Pureness and contamination in this context is overthink.

The importance is the reproductive viability of the mass.

And the overall importance is the reproductive viability of the species.

And pathogenic infection is an ongoing issue (eg. Covid) and we develop coping strategies.

Thrush for example is an annoying little bastard.....Not the singing variety.....Often wondered why a fungal infection and a bird were synonymous....Must be the spots.

Nonetheless, such are the environmental impurities of any sex act, married or otherwise.

I think its important. There is a catch here. When you say "scriptural, cultural, personal experience"- the reality should be that when the scripture or "faith" comes into play, the cultural influence and the experiences go secondary to null. Because when scripture is prioritized, there is a sense of submission to one God. When submission takes place of absolute freedom, any other parameter has to be disowned in terms of ethically considering an act.

I believe people should wait until marriage as it is the most effective way to prevent unwanted pregnencies or STIs.  Unfortunately, people are idiots so they will have premarital sex.

How come there is never topics about ritualistic or tantric sex it's always about purity why don't we talk about that fun religious sex.

 Men who ejaculate often may have a lower risk of prostate cancer than their peers who don't do it as frequently, a U.S. study suggests.