Premarital sex: it's good for you!

No. I was only curious.

That may vary by region. I know swingers who had plenty of pre-marital sex. At any rate, swinging is usually consensual in that both spouses are willing/interested in doing it enough to participate.

I'm actually thinking more about the problem created by only one spouse wondering what they missed. Mrs. Apostle might some day think, "I wonder what good sex is like," and Mr. Apostle might not want to swing. That will create tension in the marriage.

After ten years together they've graduated from Green M&M's to Blue M&M's.

Those who have premarital sex and move in prior to marriage have higher divorce rates down the road.

...unless you get the herpes.

These discussions always skip over the herpes.

Well...yeah, because that one respect is important. If you were with someone and they didn't share any of the same religious views, would you keep them around? Or replace religious views with moral views, political views, views on having children, etc.

Oh, it's by no means the rule. But it's no coincidence that the most prolific lifestyle communities in the region, Springfield MO, Fayetteville AR, Tulsa OK, overlap heavily with another cultural/geographic region...

So the bible belt rests over the swinger's garter?

I would love to know how Dayton and Apostle could possibly justify 'no good coming of pre marital sex.'

Im a year and a half in to the marriage journey. Very happy, no divorce looming on the horizon as yet (touch wood).

I had plenty pre-marital sex both with the Stallioness and others, (sadly not at the same time). We also lived together before we got hitched!

Good times before we got married, and good times since!

No you're Satan.

I never found Saddam very attractive

And on the flipside, the idea that someone who has only had one partner would be ignorant, lacking a good sex life and must be lousy in bed because they haven't partaken of a football team's worth of lovers before settling down is equally ludicrous.

Frankly, it all depends on the people involved and their characters and how good the other aspects of their relationship are in both scenarios. Just picking one aspect..like past sex life...and expecting to get an accurate idea of why marriages fail or succeed is extremely naive and kind of dumb.

Whatever about marriage, sexual repression is bad for you. That shouldn't even be controversial.

Nice to know that I am in EXCELLENT health.

This is retarded, even for you. My folks - who engaged in premarital sex - have been married 43 years and are still madly in love, it's one of the most incredible things to witness. Where have they gone wrong?

Stop pretending that your decision to not have premarital sex was a choice. I mean what did your wife get out of you not getting laid when you were younger, a black eye? I can tell you one thing, my premarital sex having father never hit my mother.

You're such a joke.

According to whom, closet case?

Good point. A well known fact. Sexual relationships outside the bond of marriage (whether before or after) weaken the marriage bond because it takes away physical exclusiveness and replaces it with no more than words on paper.

So you will only marry someone that you are in complete sync with in EVERY aspect of life?

Ridiculous.

Meaningless. The biggest danger period for divorces in in the 3-7 years range.

Why the automatic assumption that abstinence equals "repression"?

Irrelevant.

Occasional exceptions mean nothing. I can list literally dozens of couples that had an extensive sexual history prior to getting married who have marriages (often more than one) that did not last.

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa...-B7EB-DAAF152AD5A9&resultID=1&page=1&dbTab=pa

Journal of Family Psychology

In other words, yes, people who live together before marriage are statistically more likely to divorce.

From articles online discussing the paper:

Has nothing to do with having sex or not, but generally couples that are opposed to moving in together are also opposed to premarital sex. Maybe there's a correlation there, but I don't feel like digging up more papers.

^ Maybe im picking Ted Lubak up wrong but it seems to read that you have been beating your wife??

* Directed at Dayton, not TKO

Eleven years ago I slapped my wife during an argument.

And here you are, judging others and their life styles. Most of wholm would never lay a hand on the women we love.

You really are a despicable human being.

Oh big deal. One moment more than a decade ago. And yeah, I'll made judgements about immoral lifestyles to my hearts content because you don't have to be perfect to make value judgements.

And yeah, I'll take a minor loss of temper once 11 years ago......over years of pussy chasing like an unthinking animal any day.

Any sane man would.

It's hardly an occasional exception. I too can name a few dozen couples enjoying healthy and productive marriages that had sex prior to their respective marriages.

And now his nickname for her is 'Flinchy'.

Any sane man would take hitting a woman over having premarital sex with a woman?

Did that post really just happen?

So you're asexual. That's your problem.

The studies cited above would seem to indicate you are wrong in that regard.

I can find just as many couples that didn't have pre-marital sex that have been together for 50+ years.

The whole argument is stupid. Marriage shouldn't hinge on having/not having sex, and yet the way some are talking here having sex BEFORE marriage means your marriage will last longer.

My guess is it has fuck all to do with anything.

Any sane man would rather strike the woman he is supposed to love over making love??

Keep on trying to justify it to yourself.

Nothing more than a coward!