The morality of casual sex

[Hanafuridake]

It's morally wrong but ultimately harmless so long as between consenting adults. I don't really care about it and think people should be left to it if they want to.

[Sundiata]

You missed the most important part of the question, Sundiata. And I want it answered.

I don't want that cop-out answer you keep giving. I want you to answer me this:

1. Is a marital relationship -- where two people marry as virgins -- where one party starts beating the shit out of the other one with unconditional love, simply because they married? Would a marriage where the man raped his wife be one with unconditional love? As you insist repeatedly that "unconditional love in romance is only realised through marriage", it seems pertinent to ask

In those instances, the unconditional love of God is absolutely not being realized; grave sins against marriage are being committed. However, the marriage is sacramentally valid. Therefore, it's not too late for the spouses to will the good of each other and reciprocate God's unconditional love through dedication and good will.

Can a relationship between two people who are unmarried and in a relationship together -- one where they have sex, value the other as equals and respect one another, have lived together for years, would die to protect the other and would never harm the other -- never have unconditional love, in your consideration.
I want your answer. And if your mean to chant that same thing all over again, kindly don't.

Assuming they're not ignorant of the bible and christian tradition, no. They're not realizing unconditional love because God is not at the center of this relationship. They're not praying together, attending mass, or practicing chastity. In other words, their romantic love for each other has become an idol unto itself- a mutually destructive false God. For unconditional love or God's love to be realized and reciprocated through their romantic relationship, they must marry, will good of each other, and be open to the possibility of procreation. That is how they reciprocate God's love for them through the passion of romance. Keep in mind, God already loves them. It's now on them to reciprocate that love through the bond of marriage. The responsibilities of marriage also don't stop at the wedding, they're lifelong.

It's consistent virtue.

[The Free Joy State]

You missed the most important part of the question, Sundiata. And I want it answered.

I don't want that cop-out answer you keep giving. I want you to answer me this:

1. Is a marital relationship -- where two people marry as virgins -- where one party starts beating the shit out of the other one with unconditional love, simply because they married? Would a marriage where the man raped his wife be one with unconditional love? As you insist repeatedly that "unconditional love in romance is only realised through marriage", it seems pertinent to ask

In those instances, the unconditional love of God is absolutely not being realized; grave sins against marriage are being committed. However, the marriage is sacramentally valid. Therefore, it's not too late for the spouses to will the good of each other and reciprocate God's unconditional love through dedication and good will.

That's your righteous answer for abused partners and raped wives? Pray their partner stops and show good will?

How does one show good will to one who beats them, to one who abuses them, to one who defiles them -- while living under the same roof and being retraumatised daily. Answer me that without mentioning Jesus or God.

Thank God we do not live in your ideal world! *clasps hands together*

Can a relationship between two people who are unmarried and in a relationship together -- one where they have sex, value the other as equals and respect one another, have lived together for years, would die to protect the other and would never harm the other -- never have unconditional love, in your consideration.
I want your answer. And if your mean to chant that same thing all over again, kindly don't.

Assuming they're not ignorant of the bible and christian tradition, no. They're not realizing unconditional love because God is not at the center of this relationship. They're not praying together, attending mass, or practicing chastity. In other words, their romantic love for each other has become an idol unto itself- a mutually destructive false God. For unconditional love or God's love to be realized and reciprocated through their romantic relationship, they must marry and will good of each other. That is how they reciprocate the love that God has for them through the passion of romance. Keep in mind, God already loves them. It's now on them to reciprocate that love in return through the bond of marriage. The responsibilities of marriage also don't stop at the wedding, they're lifelong. It's virtue everyday.

I didn't say they were not praying together. They may well be Catholic and attend mass. You assumed all that.

Anyway, this assumes all marriages must be Catholic -- married Protestants, Jewish people, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, atheists... are they married in your eye?

[Sundiata]

I didn't say they were not praying together. They may well be Catholic and attend mass. You assumed all that.

Anyway, this assumes all marriages must be Catholic -- married Protestants, Jewish people, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs... are they married in your eye?

Not really, this is because they're not sacramentally valid.

[The Free Joy State]

I didn't say they were not praying together. They may well be Catholic and attend mass. You assumed all that.

Anyway, this assumes all marriages must be Catholic -- married Protestants, Jewish people, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs... are they married in your eye?

Not really, this is because they're not sacramentally valid.

All those couples, who didn't know they were "living in sin"...

Why -- according to those ludicrous standards -- casual sex is the norm. Why should anyone not do it? Why should anyone care. Let's all wave our knickers in the air right now. According to this thinking, it's only a very tiny minority of people, those married as virgins inside the Catholic church, who haven't.

And you actually expect me to take your position seriously?

Oh, dear.

[Sundiata]

That's your righteous answer for abused partners and raped wives? Pray their partner stops and show good will?

Yes, good will includes enforcing just laws, especially against spousal abuse.

How does one show good will to one who beats them, to one who abuses them, to one who defiles them -- while living under the same roof and being retraumatised daily. Answer me that without mentioning Jesus or God.

By contacting the legitimate authorities. Spousal abuse is unacceptable.

Thank God we do not live in your ideal world! *clasps hands together*

Is there anything else I can better clarify?

[Sundiata]

Not really, this is because they're not sacramentally valid.

All those couples, who didn't know they were "living in sin"...

Why -- according to those ludicrous standards -- casual sex is the norm. Why should anyone not do it? Why should anyone care. Let's all wave our knickers in the air right now. According to this thinking, it's only a very tiny minority of people, those married as virgins inside the Catholic church, who haven't.

And you actually expect me to take your position seriously?

Oh, dear.

Non-Catholics aren't necessarily "living in sin," they don't know that they're wrong or why they're wrong. The Lord is merciful.

But anyway, assuming you're familiar with and understand Catholic doctrine, you shouldn't have casual sex because you're essentially rejecting God's unconditional love for you in favor of fleeting passions. Why reject God when he loves you unconditionally and only wants you to love him in return?

Everything he does, he does for you.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

That's your righteous answer for abused partners and raped wives? Pray their partner stops and show good will?

Yes, good will includes enforcing just laws, especially against spousal abuse.

Well I can actually agree with that. Gather evidence, call the cops, send the abusive spouse to jail.

[WayNeacTia]

She digs big fletching stones eh?

"Baby, I'm going to paint your cave."

She already claims she is married to a neanderthal, so you may have to step up your game.

[The Free Joy State]

Yes, good will includes enforcing just laws, especially against spousal abuse.

Well I can actually agree with that. Gather evidence, call the cops, send the abusive spouse to jail.

I actually fully agree with that, too. Abused spouses are entitled -- under just law -- to an order of protection -- to keep the abuser away. They are entitled to report them to the police and prosecute. They may be entitled to compensation, so they may subsequently rebuild their own lives. They may be entitled to free counselling with a qualified and impartial counsellor, so they can rebuild their self-esteem.

I also fully support just laws against domestic abuse.

Non-Catholics aren't necessarily "living in sin," they don't know that they're wrong or why they're wrong.

The Lord is merciful.But anyway, assuming you're familiar with and understand Catholic doctrine, you shouldn't have casual sex because you're essentially rejecting God's unconditional love for you in favor of fleeting passions. Why reject God when he loves you unconditionally and only wants you to love him in return?

Everything he does, he does for you.

Not only Catholics believe in or love God -- your interpretation of God, perhaps (which seems pretty exclusivist).

Nor does having premarital sex signal a rejection of God. Loving another person does not mean you love God less (and, if it does, why love at all -- why not just pick out a random fertile stranger, marry them and have your kids raised in a Church-run dormitory to ensure you cannot risk loving another human being more than God?).

Even Catholics -- followers of what you claim to be the One True Faith^TM -- engage in premarital sex: 65% of US Catholics say cohabitation without marriage is not a sin (including 51% of those who regularly attend church). Meanwhile, among Catholic youths in Germany:

"The church's sexual morals are irrelevant to nine out of 10 young Catholics," reads the BDKJ summary. "Sex before marriage and birth control are a given in their intimate relationships."

And hardly anyone feels guilty about it. For their grandparents' generation, premarital sex was tantamount to living a life in sin. In sermons, Grandma and Grandpa were taught to feel "tainted" after taking sexual liberties. Today, according to the BDKJ, 96 percent of people who are in "sexual relationships" without having been married in the church have no qualms about it. Young Catholics simply do as they please, and yet they still participate in the sacraments.

In short, whether you approve of others having casual sex or not, it's something that will become increasingly impossible to legislate against. People do not appreciate being told what their morals must be and what they should do in their own bedrooms, even if they believe in God and support the basic precepts of a Church.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Everything he does, he does for you.

I thought that was Bryan Adams.

[Hurdergaryp]

Everything he does, he does for you.

I thought that was Bryan Adams.

Or Bon Jovi, perhaps.

[The Holy Therns]

Well, if it requires something, it's not unconditional, is it?

No.

Unconditional love requires nothing; all people are already loved unconditionally by God. Unconditional love is God. To achieve its expression through romance, however, requires the sacrament of holy matrimony. Matrimony is a transition from the conditional love of one's romantic partner into the unconditional love of God.

Sex is no casual thing.

Wait, so which of these is true:

To completely express unconditional love through romance requires the sacrament of marriage and its consummation

Unconditional love requires nothing

[Cekoviu]

No.

Unconditional love requires nothing; all people are already loved unconditionally by God. Unconditional love is God. To achieve its expression through romance, however, requires the sacrament of holy matrimony. Matrimony is a transition from the conditional love of one's romantic partner into the unconditional love of God.

Sex is no casual thing.

Wait, so which of these is true:

To completely express unconditional love through romance requires the sacrament of marriage and its consummation

Unconditional love requires nothing

now, i dislike what sundiata's saying as much as the next person, but there is a clear distinction there. according to his trash philosophy, you can have unconditional love without needing anything, but you can't express that love without """the sacrament of marriage and its consummation.""" it's stupid, but not inherently contradictory

[Kernen]

Then I need a divorce lawyer or twelve, because that puts me several marriages ahead of where I thought I was.

Were I stuck with my first partner forever, one of us would die before a month was out.

True love takes time.

Indeed. But not all time generates true love. No amount of time would have made us compatible, and we would have made a piss-poor married couple.

Nonetheless, we were an important part of each other's sexual development, and now we make our respective spouses very happy.

[Tarsonis]

Everything he does, he does for you.

I thought that was Bryan Adams.

As the story of the Prodigal son tells us: wherever you go, whatever you do, God will be right there waiting for you.

[Sundiata]

Wait, so which of these is true:

now, i dislike what sundiata's saying as much as the next person, but there is a clear distinction there. according to his trash philosophy, you can have unconditional love without needing anything, but you can't express that love without """the sacrament of marriage and its consummation.""" it's stupid, but not inherently contradictory

Yes, to clarify, you can't express that love through romance without the sacrament of marriage.

[Necroghastia]

now, i dislike what sundiata's saying as much as the next person, but there is a clear distinction there. according to his trash philosophy, you can have unconditional love without needing anything, but you can't express that love without """the sacrament of marriage and its consummation.""" it's stupid, but not inherently contradictory

Yes, to clarify, you can't express that love through romance without the sacrament of marriage.

And... why is that? Feelings don't suddenly change that much between the moment before and the moment after a [relevant title here] reads the vows.

[Sundiata]

Yes, to clarify, you can't express that love through romance without the sacrament of marriage.

And... why is that? Feelings don't suddenly change that much between the moment before and the moment after a [relevant title here] reads the vows.

Because love is not just a feeling, it's a commitment to the good will of another. It's constant giving.

[Necroghastia]

And... why is that? Feelings don't suddenly change that much between the moment before and the moment after a [relevant title here] reads the vows.

Because love is not just a feeling, it's a commitment to the good will of another. It's constant giving.

And one cannot make that commitment without marriage, in particular, a Catholic one?

[Andsed]

now, i dislike what sundiata's saying as much as the next person, but there is a clear distinction there. according to his trash philosophy, you can have unconditional love without needing anything, but you can't express that love without """the sacrament of marriage and its consummation.""" it's stupid, but not inherently contradictory

Yes, to clarify, you can't express that love through romance without the sacrament of marriage.

What a load of bullshit. Marriage at the end of the day is merely symbolic. Sure it comes with some secular benefits and shit but you don´t need it to have a long term loving relationship.

[Neanderthaland]

And... why is that? Feelings don't suddenly change that much between the moment before and the moment after a [relevant title here] reads the vows.

Because love is not just a feeling, it's a commitment to the good will of another. It's constant giving.

I can commit to things just fine without a priest casting a magic spell on it.

[Sundiata]

Because love is not just a feeling, it's a commitment to the good will of another. It's constant giving.

And one cannot make that commitment without marriage, in particular, a Catholic one?

Sure, in a symbolic way but marriage for Catholics is more than just a symbol of romantic love. It's the purpose of romantic love.

[Sundiata]

Because love is not just a feeling, it's a commitment to the good will of another. It's constant giving.

I can commit to things just fine without a priest casting a magic spell on it.

I agree, that's why priests don't administer the sacrament of marriage- the couple does.

[Neanderthaland]

I can commit to things just fine without a priest casting a magic spell on it.

I agree, that's why priests don't administer the sacrament of marriage- the couple does.

There are plenty of people who are committed but not married. Who aren't interested in being married for whatever reason. Saying that this invalidates their true love is insulting.