Why do people have sex outside of marrige?

Post Reply New Topic

Semi-animals? We are animals. In the great apes catagory.

Either way we're all animals.

NO. We're God's children

Isn't it strange how long such an abstract argument can be drawn out when it's nothing more substantial than "it's bad" "why?" "because it's immoral" "it doesn't hurt anybody" "I don't care, it's bad" "why?" "because it's immoral", ad nauseam?

We don't know WHY, but there IS something wrong with it. Without resorting to religion, particularly the Bible and the OT, you're going to find it difficult to explain why it is that people find something EXTREMELY WRONG with rape, child sex, and adultery. And what's funny to me is that even people who are not Christians can sometimes be the most vocal about these atrocities.

I'm guilty of this, so I'll field it with some possible reasons --

Different reasons, some interrelated --

1) You got married too early, and didn't get to play the field.

2) You have fetishes that are either unfulfilled or unfulfillable. Example -- maybe you always wanted to experiment with bi-sexuality, but didn't get the chance pre-marriage.

3) You are angry at your spouse, or they have done something that hurts you and makes you think that they no longer value the relationship. However, you can't just get divorced, because depending on where you live, divorce law might strip you of at least 50% of your joint assets and/or leave you paying some kind of support payment, all for another person's change of heart. You decide you will get back at them secretly, while keeping your assets.

4) You are bored or unfulfilled in your sex life, and want something more.

5) You are capable of loving one person, yet having sex with another without too much emotional attachment.

6) You still value the marriage and know that this is the only person for you, yet for any of the reasons above, feel a strong need to seek sexual activity outside of the marriage. In some countries and cultures, this is not a big deal.

EDIT -- I reread the question and realized just now that the OP wasn't talking about infidelity, he/she was talking about sex in general.

If you don't understand, you might be asexual. Sexual attraction/desire is one of our strongest biological impulses, tied to the need for organisms to replicate. If you don't feel this already, it's hard to explain, but it's almost like gravity, very hard to resist or not give in to.

Firstly, let me say that I do acknowledge and believe sexual deviancy in its many forms is wrong. The "why" is worth considering, though. I think there are inherent flaws in trying to label these things as wrong from a purely secular perspective. By NO MEANS am I trying to suggest that any of these things are even remotely justified in any way.


OK, but getting into a fight with someone is also an assault and unwanted intrusion/violation. Many times the penalty is merely a misdemeanor. Rape convictions result in YEARS of incarceration. And many of the rapes that occur are probably non-violent, such as date-rape. Many victims become confused as to whether it was really rape or not--so it couldn't have affected them THAT badly. It's more of an embarrassment than anything else. "Taking something..." is what we call stealing, or legal "theft." Yet theft is not so severely punished for something as seemingly inconsequential as a sex act. More like a misdemeanor, or felony petty theft which doesn't result in long sentences. Sometimes cases can be settled privately without even going to the next step of the courts. I suppose the reality of rape is that a woman could decide for her itself that it's not worth prosecuting, though that risks allowing the man to violate someone else. Repeat offenders of theft would potentially get harsher sentences, which would be appropriate for a serial rapist. But again, rape is a felony, not a misdemeanor, and there's no getting around that. Traumatic/psychological problems result from a number of things. Military service, for example. Do we prosecute military leaders for traumatizing soldiers by putting them in harm's way? Auto accidents happen all the time, many of which are traumatic. Do drivers who are in the wrong go to prison for running red lights? No... Insurance covers medical costs and auto repairs. Shouldn't something similarly be done for rape victims while the perp goes free because of a "minor misunderstanding"?


But kids do engage in sexual play when they are left out of adult supervision. To a degree, they understand what they are doing, but they don't see anything wrong or inappropriate about it. If they don't know that it's wrong or inappropriate, what's the harm? If the child is having innocent fun and isn't engaging in something that causes pain, what's the big deal?

I don't know if I think that a child that hasn't reached puberty can understand or not. Consent, yes, but not understand. Much of our attitudes towards young children is shaped by mass media presentations of child abuse/exploitation and pop psychology a la Oprah and Dr. Phil. Not all of these ideas are necessarily rooted in fact. It's much easier to take away the child's right to choose through one or more rationalizations for legal purposes. The child, for example, cannot give consent UNDER THE LAW. Because that's how it reads on the books doesn't mean that it really fits reality. Kids understand a lot more than we want to give them credit for.

When I taught middle school, I got reassigned to elementary towards the end of my first year and was shocked by some of the things I was exposed to by these kids, and I'm talking about 3rd graders making sex jokes and acting like they knew perfectly well what they were talking about. They probably just picked it up from older siblings and cousins. But they are not ignorant, even at early ages. Given the chance, they WILL act these things out, which is why parental supervision is so important.


Well, it's a "breach of contract," so to speak. Two people agree to ONLY bond with each other. They also agree to share completely in financial contributions to the family unit, to cohabit, care for any children they may have, and so on.

But, why should it matter what one does when the other spouse isn't around?


Is it? And I'm not concerned with "other countries," just norms of Western society. If it's subjective, there need not be laws concerning it in the first place. If a young woman--say, 16 years old--is attracted to a 40 yo man, what's the harm in letting them be together? If they love each other and wish to commit to each other, why put the guy behind bars for a decade or 3 and slap a scarlet letter of pedophile/sex offender on him for the rest of his life because both partners were in love with each other?

Now, the argument these days is that minors are not capable of consenting because of their youth. While I'm admittedly playing "devil's advocate" for the sake of discussion, this is one thing I genuinely find to be total BS. A 14 yo knows the score. Only the LAW says she doesn't. Only pop psychology says she doesn't. Ask her, and she'll tell you she knows where babies come from and what sex is. Being gullible and immature doesn't cut it. I know 20 yo's who are gullible and immature, and they're getting it on in their college dorm rooms. No one is prosecuting THEIR boyfriends. This is a fairly recent idea, and it seems like just a made-up reason to keep kids from "growing up too fast." I'm being honest here--I will protect my kids from sexual predators and I will want to know their whereabouts at all times when they do get into their teenage years. But parents these days, at least where I live, tend to force dependency upon their kids and they end up killing the child's ambition. I was going to summer camps and such sometime around 5th grade or so and I loved being away from home. These parents will pick up their kids and take them home if they so much as whimper after the first 5 minutes of dropping them off. I'm excited about watching my kids grow up, and I know they advantages they'll have being more independent and more mature than other kids their age.

Because of how I feel about my own children and how they grow up, you better believe I'd make sure that anyone who abused either of them would be punished to the fullest extent of the law--and if that ever wasn't enough, I'd be on the phone with every state and fed congressman in the country to make sure that tougher laws were being written and passed so that it never happens again to ANY child. But I'm NOT fooling myself. Kids really do know a lot more and grow up faster than we give them credit for. Mere "consent" is not enough to criminalize it.

I find pre-marital sex HAWT.