The popular ideals of love that James expressed -Love being constant and unwavering so as to support a lifetime of marriage- feels weak, old, naive and a very missleading argument. Life is not a 24 paged illustrated fairytale. Love is a beautifull word but do we really know what it is and what it feels like? Can we really unitze love so confidently as to know all its properties including its impact upon time? How do we distinguish love between the people we encounter each day? Should we always be ‘in love’ love when married or is it ok just to love the other person enough? Then, how is this love different from any other close relationship that one may have outside of their marriage? Love is not a rational entity therfore how is it that such rational statements are made? That is the beauty of love!

I am really questioning the institution of marriage here as well. Couldn’t it be that there is more than one person to be in love with within a lifetime? How fair is it to promise a lifetime of the unknown to another person? Is this in itself loving? For practicle and economic purposes marriage protects the family unit. It even protects our fear of lonliness by providing a sense of stability, prediction and support. But what happends when we grow into different directions? What are we to make of our promise then?

We live in times of cheap contraception, emerging female independance, a respect and acknowledgment of ones phenomenological experience, quality eduactions and a growing maturity on how to raise children through divorce. These are very different times. Is marriage a flailing institution?

I don’t suggest that we head into some type of hedonic way of life just one where personal inner truth is listened for paramount to any social expectation. I question marriage but that’s not to say that I know that there is no form of love that suits the commitment. And this leads me to a question I have been wondering about for sometime… I recognise that there are some very truely in love couples out there, what is it, what is that one thing that remains constanst in a couples love to get them through 50 years of marital growth?

Regarding you comments, generally everyone worries some time or the other. However, one could let the worry go as soon as they realise they are worrying or if someone tells them that they are on a negative analytical path. When the gap is created (when there is no thinking thus no opinion) in that moment one can visualise what one wants. It is like anything else, takes time, practice and effort.

Don’t you think you should be prepared for the worst in any case? I mean, your statements after the first paragraph are quite ideal. What you are proposing is amazingly difficult, so I guess if you find someone who can visualise their intentions without worrying, then perhaps you can see if this happens…

Science of possibilities… so who knows [anything]…

Quantum physics suggests you attract what you think – law of attraction. If you think you will have an ideal partner / spouse for life you will. If you expect the worst, don’t be surprised if it shows up. From science to philosophers recommend to visualise what you really want in life. If you worry about something it will show up!

You might want to try it out with simpler things as an experiment. If you master it you have a wish fulfilling tool within yourself!

How about this: sex before marriage is personal, and it’s up to the people involved. What right does anyone else, or religion, have about it being right or wrong?

Who really has the right to determine that people have to get married. All marriage is is a contract anyway. I definitely does not prove love or commitment!?

Your third paragraph is talking about something that is relative, and people can move on after the ripping of flesh and it hurts different people to different extents.

I see your point, and you have the right to have your own opinion. Your last paragraph is just what you, and I’m sure many others, define sex (and love) as. Your view, and a scripture, doesn’t make sex and love what you say it is unfortunately.

Thanks for adding another view to the discussion.

This argument that “love makes it right” is a common one. But love does not imply commitment and sex, as a union of two people has consequences beyond just potential childbirth. Consider this, why is a sexual violation considered the worst in our society? Because it is robbing someone of part of themselves that should be held sacred.

I know how little bible references are valued, and how ‘blindly’ quoting them doesn’t really support a point…but from the bible sex is considered as the union of two beings, into one flesh. When united, these are not meant to be separated and the pain ensuing can be compared to ripping flesh of your body.

Sex is the most intimate expression of love – not just affection. Love in this sense is constant (not wavering despite momentary feelings of anger, boredom etc) – so in this sense it is feasible to have ONE partner throughout your life. Marriage confirms this commitment to love despite the inevitable trials that life brings.

The point you make about rules such as “no sex before marriage” were put in place was for our own safety is a good one. Maybe that was the case, but I’d be interested in what a fundamentalist would say to that remark. Perhaps they would agree that it was for our (or someone’s) safety, but then it’s also because of some sort of absolute system of morality that isn’t based in worldly reason. All your points are valid. Hormones are there for a reason, but perhaps to tempt and test us? I doubt it.

People should just use their brains and work out what is the right thing to do in the given situation.”So I say if you want to have sex before marriage and feel you are with the right person, go for it!” Agreed.