Sex outside Marriage is not a Sin!

The Morality of Sex outside Marriage

Do not judge or condemn yourself if you have had or are having sex without being married.

Sex outside marriage is thought to be a sin. Most people these days choose to differ.

To claim that sex outside marriage is wrong is to proclaim that sluts exist. To do that is to fire the flames of hate in your heart. Do not judge.

If sex outside marriage is wrong it is wrong for two reasons.

One, it is lying to the person you have sex with and using the language of lifelong commitment without the commitment. Sex is giving your body, your whole self, to another person. If you don’t wish to spend the rest of your life with that person then it is a lie. You are acting as if you give your whole self but you do not.

The allegation that sex outside marriage makes objects of one's sexual partners is another way of saying all this. If sex outside marriage is bad, then it cannot be bad for any other reason. But this overlooks the fact that nobody regards others as total objects. There has to be some respect there. The "sin" is not that "bad".

The idea that in sex you give your whole self to another person is nonsense. You give your body but not your mind. Even in marriage your spouse does not have the right to control you or unduly influence you. And your mind is more you than your body ever could be.

The idea is described as the theology of the body.  This theology is famously linked to John Paul II and is best understood as his codification and explication of the subject. It is not new theology. It is what the Church uses to argue against LGBT, contraception and divorce etc.

Its core idea is that "I love you can mean you are you and the other is the other and love is connecting you both. But you remain different people. Real love in the Christian view is unity and union. There is no me first and then loving you. It's fusion." This is most obviously going to be applied in matters such as sexual morality and marriage.

The language of sex in fact does not really mean that one partner is communicating that to the other.

The language of male sex is potential attack. The female can be overpowered and penetrated with the penis like a weapon. The design, if we may call it that, is the language of attack as well. It is known that a child seeing a man penetrating a woman sees it as violence and abuse. Perhaps the man is the abuser and the woman the self-abuser in his or her eyes.  "We know that when young children observe sex between adults, it is regarded as a physical sadistic attack on the woman.  This is a psychological fact.  I have many patients who were exposed to this in childhood, and as  result they have become exhibitionists-voyeurs and sadists-masochists...Sex is an intimate relationship between a man and a woman.  When it is performed before an audience, whether children or adults, it becomes debased" (page 19, Pornography A Psychiatrists Verdict, Melvin Anchell M.D., Liguori Publications, Missouri).  Children see best.

The pope is simply papering over the abuse of women.  It is wise to admit the vile language of male sex instead of glorifying it or insulting women by declaring it sacred.

Also men have a rather complex way of looking at sex with a beloved spouse.  There is a high level of animal non-personal programming there.  Men as noted by our psychiatrist have a body parts visual way of approaching sex.  In some way the woman is always an object no matter how much she is loved.

Sex for Christians implies a promise to be with the other person for ever. You give your body to your employer when you become a builder. That doesn't mean you should marry him!  The toxic Christian attitude to sex stems from and is tied into marriage.

The opponents of sex before marriage are equating the marriage with commitment. They are not the same. Marriage and commitment are not the same thing. You can be married without commitment. Sex in marriage without commitment would be using the person. Married cannot mean more committed. Marriage is only a way of stating that the commitment is already there.

If the sex is a lie and expresses a commitment one will not uphold, the fault lies in one's motive. You could go through a marriage ceremony and still be lying through the sex.

They say sex should express total lifelong commitment. If they believe that then why do they let you have sex with your spouse when you suspect that they have been sleeping around? Such sex cannot express such commitment.

Two, it can result in diseases and unwanted pregnancy.

A woman can marry a man and catch diseases from him on the wedding night. If sex is only lawful within marriage then undeniably the man did not do wrong by having sex with her. The wrongdoing was simply in how he hadn't tried to be cleared of the diseases. This number Two is really just an excuse for condemning sex outside marriage.

To say that sex outside marriage is bad because of the diseases or unwanted pregnancies makes no sense for marriage is not a cure for these diseases. It would make more sense to say that sex is good even then and that it is taking the risk of disease or pregnancy that is bad. Then sex outside marriage would not a sin if it is kept as safe as possible!

People must make their own sexual choices and be free from criticism for the choices they make as long as they don’t involve minors or any form of sexual abuse. Some sexual activities involve the enjoyment of pain but such are not necessarily sexual abuse. Everybody must decide.

Religion invents excuses for condemning sex outside marriage. In doing that it proves its hatred for those who enjoy this sex by accusing them of sin without proof.

Sex outside marriage and in marriage can be a wonderful way of boosting one's self-esteem and making one happier.