Is premarital sex immoral?

[TJ in Oregon]

As to the topic, yes, it is immoral. And gravely so.

That being said, people should treat it the way they treat other sins rather than as an extra-super-dee-duper mortal sin such that makes people more likely to deny and rationalize it than repent of and confess it.

Smilo, if you have kids someday, I hope you endeavor all your efforts to protect them from sin and grow in the faith. However, if you do have kids, they will undoubtedly commit mortal sins someday. They should know the gravity of their sins and yet know you and God both still love them and want them to repent and heal their relationship. One of the things I can still remember my mom telling me over and over as a small child is that no matter what I do she will always love me. She may not love all of my decisions but she will still love me. If I have kids someday I plan to tell them the same.

[Mr. Smith]

As to the topic, yes, it is immoral. And gravely so.

That being said, people should treat it the way they treat other sins rather than as an extra-super-dee-duper mortal sin such that makes people more likely to deny and rationalize it than repent of and confess it.

Smilo, if you have kids someday, I hope you endeavor all your efforts to protect them from sin and grow in the faith. However, if you do have kids, they will undoubtedly commit mortal sins someday. They should know the gravity of their sins and yet know you and God both still love them and want them to repent and heal their relationship. One of the things I can still remember my mom telling me over and over as a small child is that no matter what I do she will always love me. She may not love all of my decisions but she will still love me. If I have kids someday I plan to tell them the same.

Well said, all of it.

[Dr. MB]

God's got better things to do than worry about who you're banging (or, in the case of most people in this thread, not banging).

[Middle-aged Europe]

No(rmal)

[DavidB.]

Lean no, but it's still best not to do it outside serious and lasting relationships. The more people you have it with, the more it is "cheapened" in terms of meaning. But it is difficult in this day and age, when people marry very late.

[GoTfan]

No.

And if churches insist on inserting themselves into politics, then they should pay taxes like everyone else.

[DaWN]

I'll let you know when I find out

[dead0man]

no, and it could be argued that it's mental abuse to tell teenagers that it is


edit-to be clear, I don't think it's abuse most of the time.  It's just another proof that your parents are full of sh**t.  They lied to you about Santa, they lied to you pot, they lied to you about sex.  Parents shouldn't lie to their kids, but our culture encourages it.  I don't think that's a good thing.

[America Needs R'hllor]

LOL, no. Also:

(I don't think I regularly interact with a single non-straight person, for instance)

Not surprised at all. By the way, you do regularly interact with at least several non-straight people, I can promise you that- just that, if I'm not wrong about the community you live in, if they even got over the self-loathing your "moral" church taught them, they'd be treated like sh**t and their lives would be destroyed by your "moral" community.

[Santander]

Well I mean it's certainly doesn't happen after marriage.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm surprised at how well Yes is polling with left leaning posters. This seems like the sort of stance that makes one right wing by default.

[Lechasseur]

Ideally, people would wait until marriage (but let's be real, in the modern world, with the current culture and people waiting so late to get married, that's not happening), but I don't think it's immoral in a serious relationship.

Hook ups, one night stands etc are though.

I think what's important is the seriousness and the commitment to the person, if you truly care about your partner it's not immoral, on the other hand if it's just for sex than yes it is.

[RaphaelDLG]

No, but having premarital sex with someone that you are not committed to without using at least one form birth control effectively is immoral

[RINO Tom]

Yes, it is always immoral and is not focused on enough by Evangelicals:

Yeah, good luck winning over converts that way

Unfortunately evangelicals, Biblical literalists, fundamentalists, etc. have no interest in attracting more people to Christianity unless it is their very narrow definition of it.

I'm surprised at how well Yes is polling with left leaning posters. This seems like the sort of stance that makes one right wing by default.

And there is a gigantic gulf of people between "left-leaning" and "right-wing" who see nothing wrong with it, FWIW.  Either way, my answer is a definitive no.

[courts]

option 4 i guess

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

No, ir not

[Antonio the Sixth]

Lean no, but it's still best not to do it outside serious and lasting relationships. The more people you have it with, the more it is "cheapened" in terms of meaning. But it is difficult in this day and age, when people marry very late.

This. Huh, guess there are still things we agree on.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Yes, very much so (leftist, abnormal).

is not focused on enough by Evangelicals

well that part's just simply not true

[OSR stands with Israel]

Ideally, people would wait until marriage (but let's be real, in the modern world, with the current culture and people waiting so late to get married, that's not happening), but I don't think it's immoral in a serious relationship.

Hook ups, one night stands etc are though.

I think what's important is the seriousness and the commitment to the person, if you truly care about your partner it's not immoral, on the other hand if it's just for sex than yes it is.

This

[alancia]

Yes but since I'm in Atlas I don't have to worry about any of that.

[President Johnson]

As long as it's consensual among adults, it's never immoral. #SociallyLiberal

[DC Al Fine]

Yes, very much so (leftist, abnormal).

is not focused on enough by Evangelicals

well that part's just simply not true

Ehh, I always found that the purity ring types were more of a loud minority than actually representative of the median Evangelical congregation. Could be wrong though.

Yes but since I'm in Atlas I don't have to worry about any of that.

Yes but since I'm in Atlas I don't have to worry about any of that.

Heh

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Yes, but so is marital sex. We should all just procreate via artificial insemination.

[Illiniwek]

I do believe it is generally immoral, but it is among the last things I would ever persecute someone over. I would advise my children to avoid pre-marital sex, but would also tell them that if they are going to do it to be smart about it.

Well I mean it's certainly doesn't happen after marriage.

Bazinga!

[DavidB.]

Lean no, but it's still best not to do it outside serious and lasting relationships. The more people you have it with, the more it is "cheapened" in terms of meaning. But it is difficult in this day and age, when people marry very late.

This. Huh, guess there are still things we agree on.

It makes sense, given that we're both not (or in your case not really, correct me if I'm wrong) Christian, but have grown increasingly communitarian and skeptical of certain aspects of the modern world, including individualism (and the interaction between capitalism and individualism).

I've never understood how/why sex is considered immoral.

You probably forgot to include "consensual" here...