I don't know that I'd downgrade straight to missionary.....

Well you always were a naughty one, peach.

(April 1, 2013 at 7:29 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Also, you might want to ask yourself why you're saving yourself

Well, I'm seeking a relationship. I'm undecided about sex before marriage, not due to religion.

Suppose naturalism is true. From that perspective, it maybe that, we learned to hate for similar reasons we hate incest. It's because sex without marriage would mean no family unit, and societies with family units, might of prospered better. Furthermore, kids not knowing their Dad would be problematic in functioning in the past. Those kids would not survive as much as kids who know their dad and have them supporting them.

Therefore we would've been with this sense of it's "wrong" to do it without marriage.

However, in this day and age, we do have contraceptives and pills, etc...but still, the way we naturally feel about it, maybe still that there should be a committed relationship.

If we go there is supernatural, there can be more to it then all that.

It can be we have this feeling not simply due to evolution, but because it's more honorable to the woman and the man. I'm not sure.

The fact, in the past, it definitely was something else, because children can be born out of wedlock.

Right now, we have ways against that. However, as I said, if naturalism is true, it perhaps can make me feel bad about it, simply because of what benefited the species in the past before.

Besides, if he was going to be such a terrible voyeur, might as well give him a show.

---

A strong sense of community and belonging, good monetary support, and an education is better than "a father and mother".

(April 1, 2013 at 7:37 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(April 1, 2013 at 7:29 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Also, you might want to ask yourself why you're saving yourself

Well, I'm seeking a relationship. I'm undecided about sex before marriage, not due to religion.

Suppose naturalism is true. From that perspective, it maybe that, we learned to hate for similar reasons we hate incest. It's because sex without marriage would mean no family unit, and societies with family units, might of prospered better. Furthermore, kids not knowing their Dad would be problematic in functioning in the past. Those kids would not survive as much as kids who know their dad and have them supporting them.

Therefore we would've been with this sense of it's "wrong" to do it without marriage.

However, in this day and age, we do have contraceptives and pills, etc...but still, the way we naturally feel about it, maybe still that there should be a committed relationship.

If we go there is supernatural, there can be more to it then all that.

It can be we have this feeling not simply due to evolution, but because it's more honorable to the woman and the man. I'm not sure.

The fact, in the past, it definitely was something else, because children can be born out of wedlock.

Right now, we have ways against that. However, as I said, if naturalism is true, it perhaps can make me feel bad about it, simply because of what benefited the species in the past before.

Well, sex benefitted our species, sex period. Not sex but only in a marriage/committed relationship. Sex offers it's benefits to every species bumping whatsits with hoo-hoodillies, but that's no reason to call something "good"...there's a name for that. Similarly, even if your notion of marriage/commitment was "natural"...it still wouldn't be "good" because it was "natural" which I promise you, you'll have a hard time establishing.

(I'm just giving you shit btw, you'll stick it where you stick it whenever you get around to it..lol)

I have a great urge to shout PENIS right now from the balcony.

Which, incidentally, could be called a reason for why I'm an atheist.

That's the nice thing about living in New York City. If I stepped out on the balcony and yelled "PENIS!!!" the only thing that'd happen is that I'd get a few decent bids.

I live above a retirement nursing home and a school. I'd probably have the cops called on me. Also, I'm only in a black satin robe.

(April 1, 2013 at 7:40 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

(April 1, 2013 at 7:37 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Well, I'm seeking a relationship. I'm undecided about sex before marriage, not due to religion.

Suppose naturalism is true. From that perspective, it maybe that, we learned to hate for similar reasons we hate incest. It's because sex without marriage would mean no family unit, and societies with family units, might of prospered better. Furthermore, kids not knowing their Dad would be problematic in functioning in the past. Those kids would not survive as much as kids who know their dad and have them supporting them.

Therefore we would've been with this sense of it's "wrong" to do it without marriage.

However, in this day and age, we do have contraceptives and pills, etc...but still, the way we naturally feel about it, maybe still that there should be a committed relationship.

If we go there is supernatural, there can be more to it then all that.

It can be we have this feeling not simply due to evolution, but because it's more honorable to the woman and the man. I'm not sure.

The fact, in the past, it definitely was something else, because children can be born out of wedlock.

Right now, we have ways against that. However, as I said, if naturalism is true, it perhaps can make me feel bad about it, simply because of what benefited the species in the past before.

Well, sex benefitted our species, sex period. Not sex but only in a marriage/committed relationship. Sex offers it's benefits to every species bumping whatsits with hoo-hoodillies, but that's no reason to call something "good"...there's a name for that. Similarly, even if your notion of marriage/commitment was "natural"...it still wouldn't be "good" because it was "natural" which I promise you, you'll have a hard time establishing.

(I'm just giving you shit btw, you'll stick it where you stick it whenever you get around to it..lol)

Some Bird species developed monogamous relationships, because, it was in their advantage.

Most species, it's in their advantage to have multiple relationships.

Which one occurred our species? Perhaps not monogamous, but definitely one father (patriarchal) per family unit, became a norm.

Not saying no societies go against that later, but over all, this seems like to be our nature.

And even it seems we naturally have a dislike towards polygamy even if the parents are known to the child.

I'm not sure. I'm just theorizing here.

The thing is, a society that it was the norm to not know your father, would be chaotically dysfunctional.

Jealousy would be for the advantage, and the feeling of "family" and "long lasting love commitment", would be at our advantage.

It's no wonder almost all societies if not all, have a concept of marriage.

Norm wasn't necessarily "the best" - our species had evolved long before then. Read "sex at dawn". Take it with a grain of salt, but it's interesting.