(August 5, 2015 at 6:21 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(August 5, 2015 at 5:39 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: This. If I'm willing to leave and not marry the man I love because sex hadn't been amazing initially, then how can I promise him to be by his side in sickness and in health if he gets paralyzed and unable to have sex after we are married?
Here's the thing: sexual compatibility is kind of a big part of a relationship as it's growing to the point that you'd actually want to stick by him through paralysis.
I hope that doesn't sound dismissive of your point because I'm not trying to be; actually what you're saying is very relevant to my own life, as my wife is sick and often physically can't have sex for extended periods of time. What I'm saying is that you have the order of things a little backwards, in that sexual compatibility informs the relationship, it's not an appendage of it. It's one of a collection of factors that should go into the decision to spend your life with a person.
Well it is possible to love someone very much without having had sex with them though. If I love someone very very much, to the point where I am about to commit myself and my life to him, and we decided to have sex right before we got engaged, I wouldn't leave him if the sex wasn't great (especially since such a thing can be improved, but that's another point) . I already love him at that point. Likewise, I wouldn't leave my husband if he, for whatever reason, was unable to have sex anymore. I don't really see the difference between the 2 scenarios.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
