Sex before marriage and cohabitation protects couples from making the serious mistake of entering into a marriage with someone you are incompatible with.
Do your studies include those couples who break up before getting married because cohabitation revealed they were not a compatible couple?
We seem to have it figured out pretty well. The difference in your beliefs and mine come down to the balance between majority rule and the freedom to be in a majority. The problem with most Catholics like you two and also with conservative Christians in general is the desire to impose your particular religious beliefs on everyone, which many people like me oppose. I may happen to agree with your views, but I don't want those views imposed on people who might disagree and have valid reasons.
My point is that once at a gathering of friends (all of us happily married; all of us who lived together before marriage) were talking about this. All of us wanted our relationship to continue, so we went along with living together some because that's the way it was "supposed" to happen these days. The interesting part of that conversation is that all of us (even those who were in favor of living together before marriage) that while living together did lead to our successful marriages, if we had it to do over, we wouldn't have lived together before marriage.
It's not hard to look up these studies, plus as I said most if not all religions teach that sex outside marriage is immoral. So it's a fact all the way around. It doesn't matter if you disagree with God's teaching. It's like disagreeing with the wind or disagreeing with gravity.
All true, I would provide argument that while those situations, thank God, have been remedied - others took their place.
I've been there. Yes, it takes a little adjustment, but it's fun learning to adjust and doesn't take too long. Loving couples enjoy learning together. So-called 'fireworks' is a Hollywood godless leftwing construct.
Here's the problem. Where do you differentiate between "natural" and "artificial", and why is the married couple not desiring more children approved in one case while opposed in the other? If you take the approach that every sexual encounter MUST be done so children can be produced, is it not then the DUTY of the married couple to, for example, have sex during every one of her peak fertile times?
I value it quite highly because it creates a bond between my God-given spouse and me that is unique to us and no one else.
We have two children and did not desire anymore, so yes, you could say I was open to one of its purposes. We continue, however, to enjoy our sex life long after it can possibly produce more children. If we are to limit sex to only procreation, no one would be having it after menopause. Therefore, it has multiple purposes far beyond merely producing children.
Yes, we value each other quite highly.
Now that is intriguing. It would sound like you're arguing that someone who deliberately chooses to limit their caloric intake because they desire to lose weight is not valuing food for it intended purpose. You would not, for example, argue that obesity is a sign that someone is using food correctly. I would argue that a person who is clearly at a healthy weight IS using food correctly for its intended purpose. Here's where it's different. Enjoying sex with your spouse beyond having children is not harmful to you at all. Eating more than is healthy IS harmful.
Lust between husband and wife is certainly NOT sinful, which any reading of Scripture reveals. I find that teaching to be preposterous. I do not see how anyone, for example, can read the Song of Solomon and come to a different conclusion.
But you don't have to have it on your wedding night. Great things require waiting. Self-deferment. Attention to others. Patience. Then when it comes, it's better than ever. That's the essence of God when you think about it.
This is why I scratch my head when people say they would refuse to date and marry a virgin. "We're going to have so much fun learning about this together" is my response.
I've never heard of anyone or any organization who insist "that every sexual encounter MUST be done so children can be produced". My point is that the Catholic Church values life and it also promotes natural family planning. It's a matter of priority, isn't it. Does one value life over sex, or does one value sex over life?
And any couple can do that
Grin. My husband and I lived together before marriage. After our wedding and starting out on our travel plans, we were both too exhausted to do anything but fall into a deep sleep the moment we climbed into bed. We still laugh about this, but we were that tired. It had been a stupendous day, and we had had so much fun and so much to do. So, no, our wedding night was not better than the wedding night if two virgins--not even close.
