Zone1 We need to Return to 1940's Values on Sex Outside Marriage. Desperately.

[Moonglow]

That's irrelevant to this story. We're talking about societal sanction, although what Trump did decades ago when he was a Democrat is the only example that seems to offend the left.

Don't trip running backwards.

 

[Moonglow]

Incel says what...

Just be glad yer dog is getting plenty of cheese in their diet.

 

[Crepitus]

Take AOC, who is living with that eunuch. That wouldn't have been tolerated in the 40s. Today, it's not reported as anything unusual or immoral. That's how far society has fallen.

Please provide evidence he is a eunuch.

 

[Crepitus]

Yeah, it's called freedom and liberty....

Republicans hate that stuff.

 

[Mashmont]

Yeah, it's called freedom and liberty....

It's called sin. It destroys relationships. All the data is there.

 

[mamooth]

A conservative talking about the sanctity of marriage? You can't make this stuff up.

Yes, they'll claim it's "TDS", but it's not just Trump. The whole Republican party is made up of cheaters, molesters and perverts. You can't back Republicans and be taken seriously if you claim to care about marriage.

Remember the last black president? Married happily and only once? The right constantly called his wife a man and an ape. And even if they weren't doing it themselves, all the righties smooched the butts of the ones who did. They all approved.

Even in this thread, one of them is hating on AOC, for ... having a fiance and not cheating on him. I'm sure her ethnicity has zero to do with it.

The right doesn't care about marriage, not one bit. The right only pretends they care so they have an excuse to hate.

 

[Moonglow]

It's called sin. It destroys relationships. All the data is there.

Free will isn't free when shackled by society.

 

[Mashmont]

Free will isn't free when shackled by society.

Within rules lies freedom. With no rules, there is only imprisonment. Leftwingers have never gotten that.

 

[Mashmont]

A conservative talking about the sanctity of marriage? You can't make this stuff up.

Yes, they'll claim it's "TDS", but it's not just Trump. The whole Republican party is made up of cheaters, molesters and perverts. You can't back Republicans and be taken seriously if you claim to care about marriage.

Remember the last black president? Married happily and only once? The right constantly called his wife a man and an ape. And even if they weren't doing it themselves, all the righties smooched the butts of the ones who did. They all approved.

Even in this thread, one of them is hating on AOC, for ... having a fiance and not cheating on him. I'm sure her ethnicity has zero to do with it.

The right doesn't care about marriage, not one bit. The right only pretends they care so they have an excuse to hate.

Why do you hate arrangements that work and love arrangements that cause misery?

 

[Moonglow]

Within rules lies freedom. With no rules, there is only imprisonment. Leftwingers have never gotten that.

You Papist follow a false Christian.

 

[mamooth]

Why do you hate arrangements that work and love arrangements that cause misery?

Says the guy who hates Obama and AOC because they're in loving stable relationships.

You hate people specifically because they're decent, and you admire people specifically because they're cheaters and perverts.

How did you end up so depraved?

 

[Mashmont]

Says the guy who hates Obama and AOC because they're in loving stable relationships.

You hate people specifically because they're decent, and you admire people specifically because they're cheaters and perverts.

How did you end up so depraved?

Next you’ll bring up the Clintons as a model relationship.
And Cortez is in a shack up. That’s not stable. Why won’t she or the eunuch commit?

 

[Mashmont]

A conservative talking about the sanctity of marriage? You can't make this stuff up.

Yes, they'll claim it's "TDS", but it's not just Trump. The whole Republican party is made up of cheaters, molesters and perverts. You can't back Republicans and be taken seriously if you claim to care about marriage.

Remember the last black president? Married happily and only once? The right constantly called his wife a man and an ape. And even if they weren't doing it themselves, all the righties smooched the butts of the ones who did. They all approved.

Even in this thread, one of them is hating on AOC, for ... having a fiance and not cheating on him. I'm sure her ethnicity has zero to do with it.

The right doesn't care about marriage, not one bit. The right only pretends they care so they have an excuse to hate.

What we’re talking about is society that now pushes sex outside marriage that didn’t used to in the 1940s, to the detriment of all. Why are you getting off the subject?

 

[Mashmont]

Don't trip running backwards.

What?

 

[White 6]

I just read an article this morning that singer Katy Perry and actor Orlando Bloom just ended their nine-year "engagement". A casualty of this failed shack up is their four-year-old daughter. The story was reported without the bat of an eye. Just more humdrum news. More of the same.

Contrast this to 1949 when actress Ingrid Bergman conceived a child out of wedlock and was banned from Hollywood. Huge scandal. Huge news event.

America and the world had those high moral standards through the 1940s into the first half of the 1950's. People think the 60s ushered in sexual immorality, but it really started in the late 50s. In 1959, Some Like it Hot won the Academy Award. Why? Not because it was a great movie, but because it had gay sexual inneundo at the end.



This decline in sexual morality manifests itself in encouragement of: sex outside marriage, contraception, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, masturbation, and abortion.

The sexual revolution, also known as the sexual liberation, was a social movement that challenged traditional codes of behavior related to sexuality and interpersonal relationships throughout the Western world from the late 1950s to the early 1970s. Sexual liberation included increased acceptance of sexual intercourse outside of traditional heterosexual, monogamous relationships, primarily marriage. The legalization of the pill as well as other forms of contraception, public nudity, pornography, premarital sex, homosexuality, masturbation, alternative forms of sexuality, and abortion all followed

Sexual revolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Incidentally, by 1957, Bergmann had been forgiven and welcomed back to Hollywood. Again, changing mores. Change for the worse.

Changes in the divorce rate: You can see by the chart, divorces were minimal until 1960, then skyrocketed in the 70s, then reduced somewhat. But the drop was related not to a renewed view of sanctity of marriage; but rather to an increase in cohabitations, which have a higher fail rate than marriages. In short, the total percentage of relatiionships combined licit and illicit has been increasingly failing since 1960.

Some will say "People have always engaged in illicit sex throughout all periods". True. But we are talking about societal sanction. That's the all-important difference. Because once society approves and encourages a behavior, that behavior increases markedly.

You may wonder why sexual moral standards were higher in the 1940s. I say it's because people's character was forged by difficult times: The Great Depression followed by World War II. In bad times, people turn to God. In good times, people become more lax. As America becomes more prosperous, we get morally lax.

I find it interesting the Catholic Church also had it's highest number of priests and sisters in the 1940s and 50s. Those numbers fell right along with the sexual revolution, showing the overall deterioration of society. People are less willing to give up earthly comforts for the sake of others. It's an overall weakening forged by permissiveness. It's a selfish self-comfort. Same with illicit sex. It all goes together.

Conclusion: Immoral sex may seem so simple, innocent, and victimless. In reality, it is among the most dangerous and destructive of all sins because of its pervasiveness. It destroys relationships, objectifies women, derails commitment, creates unwanted children, and numbs people's ability to have meaningful relationships. The promotion illicit sex is done on purpose. Overall, it is Marxists trying to weaken powerful Christian nations, especially the United States, to make us ripe for takeover. This is why illicit sex is sanctioned and encouraged by the leftist media. That trend started in earnest in the mid-1950s.

What will bring us back? If history is a guide, it may take catastrophe to make people refocus on God. Tough times bring out character in people to live in service to others. Or we can be like the people of Ninevah who heeded the warnings of destruction and repented on their own, thus saving themselves.

View attachment 1129383
Divorce rate through the decades



The assertion that cohabiting relationships fail more often than marriages is supported by various studies and reports. Research indicates that couples who live together before marriage are more likely to experience divorce compared to those who do not cohabit before tying the knot.
Factors Contributing to This Trend:

• Lack of Commitment: Cohabiting couples might not have the same level of commitment to the relationship as married couples. This lack of commitment can make it easier to dissolve the relationship when difficulties arise.
• Inertia: Couples may find themselves "sliding" into cohabitation out of convenience rather than consciously deciding to commit to the relationship. This inertia can lead to less marital satisfaction and increase the likelihood of divorce.
• Financial and Practical Considerations: Moving in together for financial reasons or convenience might lead to a less stable foundation for a future marriage compared to cohabiting to spend more time together.
• Pre-engagement Cohabitation: Studies show that couples who cohabit before getting engaged are more likely to divorce compared to those who cohabit only after being engaged or married.
• Accumulating Cohabiting Partners: Having a history of multiple cohabiting partners can increase the risk of divorce later, even if the couple eventually marries.

Are Sexual Sins the Worst Ones?

Catholic Therapist Allison Ricciardi discusses sexual sins and whether they are the worst sins...and why we might think so; Mary Magdalene.

spiritualdirection.com

​

Maybe Trump will get on that next.

 

[MarathonMike]

I can't agree with that. Immorality harms all of society.

I understand your perspective I grew up in a very religious home.

 

[Dragonlady]

I just read an article this morning that singer Katy Perry and actor Orlando Bloom just ended their nine-year "engagement". A casualty of this failed shack up is their four-year-old daughter. The story was reported without the bat of an eye. Just more humdrum news. More of the same.

Contrast this to 1949 when actress Ingrid Bergman conceived a child out of wedlock and was banned from Hollywood. Huge scandal. Huge news event.

America and the world had those high moral standards through the 1940s into the first half of the 1950's. People think the 60s ushered in sexual immorality, but it really started in the late 50s. In 1959, Some Like it Hot won the Academy Award. Why? Not because it was a great movie, but because it had gay sexual inneundo at the end.



This decline in sexual morality manifests itself in encouragement of: sex outside marriage, contraception, abortion, pornography, homosexuality, masturbation, and abortion.

The sexual revolution, also known as the sexual liberation, was a social movement that challenged traditional codes of behavior related to sexuality and interpersonal relationships throughout the Western world from the late 1950s to the early 1970s. Sexual liberation included increased acceptance of sexual intercourse outside of traditional heterosexual, monogamous relationships, primarily marriage. The legalization of the pill as well as other forms of contraception, public nudity, pornography, premarital sex, homosexuality, masturbation, alternative forms of sexuality, and abortion all followed

Sexual revolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Incidentally, by 1957, Bergmann had been forgiven and welcomed back to Hollywood. Again, changing mores. Change for the worse.

Changes in the divorce rate: You can see by the chart, divorces were minimal until 1960, then skyrocketed in the 70s, then reduced somewhat. But the drop was related not to a renewed view of sanctity of marriage; but rather to an increase in cohabitations, which have a higher fail rate than marriages. In short, the total percentage of relatiionships combined licit and illicit has been increasingly failing since 1960.

Some will say "People have always engaged in illicit sex throughout all periods". True. But we are talking about societal sanction. That's the all-important difference. Because once society approves and encourages a behavior, that behavior increases markedly.

You may wonder why sexual moral standards were higher in the 1940s. I say it's because people's character was forged by difficult times: The Great Depression followed by World War II. In bad times, people turn to God. In good times, people become more lax. As America becomes more prosperous, we get morally lax.

I find it interesting the Catholic Church also had it's highest number of priests and sisters in the 1940s and 50s. Those numbers fell right along with the sexual revolution, showing the overall deterioration of society. People are less willing to give up earthly comforts for the sake of others. It's an overall weakening forged by permissiveness. It's a selfish self-comfort. Same with illicit sex. It all goes together.

Conclusion: Immoral sex may seem so simple, innocent, and victimless. In reality, it is among the most dangerous and destructive of all sins because of its pervasiveness. It destroys relationships, objectifies women, derails commitment, creates unwanted children, and numbs people's ability to have meaningful relationships. The promotion illicit sex is done on purpose. Overall, it is Marxists trying to weaken powerful Christian nations, especially the United States, to make us ripe for takeover. This is why illicit sex is sanctioned and encouraged by the leftist media. That trend started in earnest in the mid-1950s.

What will bring us back? If history is a guide, it may take catastrophe to make people refocus on God. Tough times bring out character in people to live in service to others. Or we can be like the people of Ninevah who heeded the warnings of destruction and repented on their own, thus saving themselves.

View attachment 1129383
Divorce rate through the decades



The assertion that cohabiting relationships fail more often than marriages is supported by various studies and reports. Research indicates that couples who live together before marriage are more likely to experience divorce compared to those who do not cohabit before tying the knot.
Factors Contributing to This Trend:

• Lack of Commitment: Cohabiting couples might not have the same level of commitment to the relationship as married couples. This lack of commitment can make it easier to dissolve the relationship when difficulties arise.
• Inertia: Couples may find themselves "sliding" into cohabitation out of convenience rather than consciously deciding to commit to the relationship. This inertia can lead to less marital satisfaction and increase the likelihood of divorce.
• Financial and Practical Considerations: Moving in together for financial reasons or convenience might lead to a less stable foundation for a future marriage compared to cohabiting to spend more time together.
• Pre-engagement Cohabitation: Studies show that couples who cohabit before getting engaged are more likely to divorce compared to those who cohabit only after being engaged or married.
• Accumulating Cohabiting Partners: Having a history of multiple cohabiting partners can increase the risk of divorce later, even if the couple eventually marries.

Are Sexual Sins the Worst Ones?

Catholic Therapist Allison Ricciardi discusses sexual sins and whether they are the worst sins...and why we might think so; Mary Magdalene.

spiritualdirection.com

​

Prior to the 1970s, women couldn’t apply for credit, get a loan or a mortgage, or buy property without their father or their husband cosigning the loan.

Women had no economic security outside of their family or their marriage, and we’re forced to stay in unhappy marriages.

The divorce rate went up, but because women were no longer economically shackled to men who treated them badly.

It had nothing to do with morals at all.

 

[Meriweather]

The sexual values of the 40's did work and do work. Fewer people broke the rules, and fewer people suffered the misery of doing so.

The reason monogamy may have worked better then is that (in the main) it took two people to keep the home environment running. Modern conveniences (even vacuums) were not yet a given. Most were still drying clothes on clotheslines. Microwaves were yet to appear, two-car families were not the norm, not to mention dishwashers, frozen foods, take-out, and the like. Many were still sewing their own clothes, canning their own fruits and vegetables. Then there was the ironing--no permanent press. Most of this fell on women while men brought in the income to pay the bills. The reality was, "We're in this together" which isn't a bad thing especially when love is present, and where each spouse actually wants and works toward good of the other.

Today, one person can easily take care of all of the above, and having a spouse can easily be seen not as two yoked together for the benefit of both, but can seem a luxury that eventually is perceived more as a burden and a block of personal freedom. The focus turns to, "I want the good for me." It has been shown the children of those in monogamous relationships are happier than children of those who do not maintain monogamous relationships. (Two parents who also want and work for their children's good.)

It seems--when it is affordable--selfishness takes rise over love and laziness triumphs over the work it takes to work on and maintain a relationship where two truly want the good of the other and the family as a whole. Could it be that sexual freedom is the result of laziness because one can now (due to modern conveniences) do all the work that once required two?

 

[Mashmont]

Prior to the 1970s, women couldn’t apply for credit, get a loan or a mortgage, or buy property without their father or their husband cosigning the loan.

Women had no economic security outside of their family or their marriage, and we’re forced to stay in unhappy marriages.

The divorce rate went up, but because women were no longer economically shackled to men who treated them badly.

It had nothing to do with morals at all.

It had mostly to do with morals. When I was a lad in Catholic school, there were a handful of divorced parents out of the 100 or so families. We always felt there was something wrong with them. These parents usually weren’t Catholic themselves; we didn’t see them in church as often. They just seemed like outsiders who dropped off their kids. The kids themselves were often unruly.

Leftwing government unfortunately inserted itself as the dad, and made the real fathers expendable, maybe it easier to give up on relationships and not work things out. This goes along my claim that prosperity leads to selfishness and laziness and a loss of shared goals. Merriwether echoed this sentiment.

 

[fncceo]

The rate of teen pregnancy's was much higher in the 1940’s than today.

Face it … grandma was a slut.