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

The rich and famous have always been able to do what the rest cannot.

You miss the point utterly.

It was the WOMEN, who were slut shamed, cast out and deemed “immoral” in the 40’s and 50’s. Not the men.

The papparazzi didn’t follow Robert Downey Jr., or Johnny Depp around when they were zonked out drug addicts and breathlessly report every time they farted in public.

No, they chased Britney Spears and Lindsay Logan endlessly, The American press has always ignored the behaviour of male celebrities and focussed on the “bad behaviour” of women.

Your so-called “morality” doesn’t include men.
 
America and the world had those high moral standards through the 1940s into the first half of the 1950's.
I agree with the basic premise of your thread, which is even more bedrock than your thread title.

And I am not surprised at the responses people have given on this board.
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

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.

















I don't believe that the 40's or 50's represent anything special in terms of people's devotion to mongamy.

It would seem that premise of your thread is that fornication (sex before marriage) and adultery (sex outside of marriage) are bad for society.

I agree. However, appealing to an earlier time is not a good argument IME.

I see it as more fundamental.

1. God placed Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden and married them. There were specific instructions given regarding leaving parents to "cleave" to one another and raise families.
2. Adultery and fornication brought vicious reprisals in Old Testament times. While I am not going to throw stones at anyone (except maybe left-wingers...for completely different reasons), this was an attempt at external control. That was essentially what the Law of Moses was. One of the ten commandments....thou shalt not commit adultery. Another was though should not covet thy neighbor's wife.
3. When Christ brought the higher law (or returned it), those injunctions were not dropped. In fact, they were heightened (if a man lust after a woman he has committed adultery already...in his heart....and would be judged accordingly).

That still stands today.

If you believe in God.

The concept of family is strengthened by fidelity within marriage. And fidelity is further strengthened by restraint prior to marriage.

However, if someone is simply stuck in the external constraints of society (something the OP implies should be happening), and really isn't bought in.....it's a tough sell. It's still a good idea for young people IME, regardless. Poor choices early on lead to a lot of issues down the road.

But, overall, society is going the way it is going (as per the OP) because the concept of morality and being tied to something bigger (God and family) has been eroded over time. Along with so many other basics as taught in things like the Sermon on the Mount.

I am not for constraining adults. I would hope they would choose to have strong marriages by working at them. But, they should be free to choose whatever....but they don't get to choose the consequences of their actions.

I know more than one person paying child support for a "mistake" they made in their late teen years. Far to many young men skate in that regard.

Teach them....but respect agency.

If you believe in God and His laws then you have set the standard for yourself. If they seem like constraints or burdens, I would recommend really digging into what they are about. You'll probably eventually "crack" if you are in a Law of Moses situation.
 
You miss the point utterly.

It was the WOMEN, who were slut shamed, cast out and deemed “immoral” in the 40’s and 50’s. Not the men.

The papparazzi didn’t follow Robert Downey Jr., or Johnny Depp around when they were zonked out drug addicts and breathlessly report every time they farted in public.

No, they chased Britney Spears and Lindsay Logan endlessly, The American press has always ignored the behaviour of male celebrities and focussed on the “bad behaviour” of women.

Your so-called “morality” doesn’t include men.


I don't know, I kind of looked down on them for that behavior and only respected them as they try to climb out out of that.


Indeed, I think the people to question abotu that, aren't AMERICANS, but HOLLYWOOD, that was happy to work with them as they were complete trainwrecks.
 
Soldiers during WWII were provided with condoms.
 
The right godly way to live is for those who would be godly to speak to others about, but the faith and any of its ways should not be anything enforced with legislation. We would not be willing to have those of other faiths have their ways enforced on us. Faith is something voluntarily joined and embraced, or it is not meaningful.
 
The right godly way to live is for those who would be godly to speak to others about, but the faith and any of its ways should not be anything enforced with legislation. We would not be willing to have those of other faiths have their ways enforced on us. Faith is something voluntarily joined and embraced, or it is not meaningful.
But why not at least have the Christian way presented as the default or the number one alternative instead of the atheist way?
 
Ivanna died years ago. Marla stays out of the press. None of his children spend holidays or birthdays with their father.

They all seem to stay as far away as possible. He spends birthdays with his club members.
What planet are you currently inhabiting? His sons and daughter worked for the company. His youngest daughter graduated law school, got married and is in DC. His son has been with him forever as he just enrolled in college. His granddaughter plays golf with him all the time. His grandkids seem to love and care about him.

Do you any idea how badly you lie?
 
What planet are you currently inhabiting? His sons and daughter worked for the company. His youngest daughter graduated law school, got married and is in DC. His son has been with him forever as he just enrolled in college. His granddaughter plays golf with him all the time. His grandkids seem to love and care about him.

Do you any idea how badly you lie?
You are right

It is his wife who does not spend time with him
 
I believe in marriage and have been married for over 35 years. At the same time, we both agree that the human species, although given to pair bonding, is not hard wired for monogamy, The evidence is clear when one considers the degree to which we are lured by wanderlust and how often we give into it. Yet the ideal of monogamy has been drilled into us to the point where so many people are willing to end a marriage over a single act of infidelity

Recognizing the difficulty in adhering to the rules that we did not made and that inherently makes no since, the obvious solution became …change the rules. Call it an open relationship. polyamory . swinging or whatever……not being so hung up and uptight over sexual fidelity is the answer to preserving marriage.

We don't need to go back to the 40's . We need to go forward without fear.......without being tethered to the traditional values of the past that clearly don't work.
Giving up is a recipe for failure. You try hard to be moral. People do it. It can be done.
 
Yeah, it's called freedom and liberty....
Ironically, those who break God's rules are imprisoned, while those who follow them are free.

I'll give you an example. I know my wife would never cheat on me because that's not her value system. It's enormously relaxing going through life knowing that. I can only imagine the anxiety of having to check up on people all the time to make sure they are faithful. Studies show people who have sex outside of marriage are more likely to have affairs within the marriage.

The simple answer is to follow God's rules from the start. Then you don't have to worry. That's freedom and liberty.
 
Last edited:
15th post
I have a personal relationship with God

He is not too fond of Trump or those who voted for him
.

I dine with Him six days a week and He told me you're lying.

And He says I need to pray for you anyway. So I do, every day.





.
 
Back
Top Bottom