Sex Before Marriage: Does God Approve?

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Aquila

And... none of the above is true.

In life, there is the truth... and illusions. Illusions are often self created based on fear or hatred.

- I've chosen not to participate in civil marriage again nearly 8 years ago. And I've explained why in a very detailed manner over the years, with references ranging from conservative commentary, libertarian commentary, and even liberal commentary. It isn't a matter of "Now I don't want to get married..." So, the timing of the accusation is untrue and disconnected from reality.

- I don't support abortion. I've been adamant that I see abortion as a tragedy, and a terrible sin. My concern is more with empowering the government to control a woman's womb. Any government that can violate a woman's sovereignty and force her to give birth... can violate her sovereignty and force her to abort. In your short sightedness, you can't see that ever happening. But given circumstance, it could become a reality far sooner than most realize if the government is granted that kind of authority. Also, historically, abortion wasn't outlawed in the United States until the mid 1800's. Prior to this it was legal up until "quickening" (when movement could be felt in the womb). Ads in periodicals at the time can even bee found advertising the service by midwives. If the Founders had any desire to end abortion as found among the colonies or even the established states, they could have done so easily. They chose human sovereignty over governmental power. Looking at nations like China who mandate abortion for couples who already have a child, I feel the Founders were wise in that decision. So, the position isn't pro-abortion, it is a hesitancy to give the government power over the bodies of human beings.

- I do not support gay marriage. There is no such thing. However, given the laws of the land any "civil" institution of government and civil statute is required to treat all citizens with equal representation under the law. Therefore, no one can be denied a marriage license based on age, race, religion, or sexuality. It's about laws applying equally without reference to any discriminating factor. However, I believe this is the problem with marriage being a civil institution. Had it remained a private contract as it was prior to civil marriage licensing, we'd not see gay marriage legally codified in the United States. It would be a private contract between gay people... a contract that can even be denied validity by other private entities without fear of lawsuit. If government continues to have a civil option for marriage, it must be equally accessible to all. I'm for equal representation under the law. But I'd prefer government get out of the marriage business.

- On healthcare, I do not see any other viable solution to the healthcare crisis than a universal healthcare system. It can be a mandate to purchase health insurance (as seen in Switzerland) or it can be single payer (as seen in Canada). But any service open to all must be paid into by all else it will suffer skyrocketing costs for those who pay into the system. There is no free market solution for healthcare as it is run in the United States.

Now, you can either believe what tell you above, or make up more slanderous lies and post them, forcing me to continue to defend the truth of what I really believe. It's entirely up to you.

Anybody who has been around here longer then a week already knows. So hate to tell you, the cat is out of the bag. If you wouldnt have highjacked numerous threads and argued for these things I would be lying.

But now this thread is in danger of heading in that direction too..

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Anybody who has been around here longer then a week already knows. So hate to tell you, the cat is out of the bag. If you wouldnt have highjacked numerous threads and argued for these things I would be lying.

But now this thread is in danger of heading in that direction too..

Is that my doing, or on account of your false accusations?

I only voiced my opinion regarding the topic.

You voiced an accusation against me personally. Again, you made the thread about "me" instead of the issue, much like another poster who frequents this forum.

It's not about me. Everyone who has read these threads can see that you guys go personal when you lose ground to logic. Everyone who reads these threads can see that you guys have distorted numerous things I've said and convinced your own selves that your distortions are true.

Allow me to clarify and define what I think. You're not in my head, so you're on a fools errand if you don't. Also, stick to the topic and all goes well. Get personal... and the discussion goes South every time.

So, let's work together to keep the topic on track, even if we have disagreements on various details of the topic.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Is that my doing, or on account of your false accusations?

I only voiced my opinion regarding the topic.

You voiced an accusation against me personally. Again, you made the thread about "me" instead of the issue, much like another poster who frequents this forum.

It's not about me. Everyone who has read these threads can see that you guys go personal when you lose ground to logic. Everyone who reads these threads can see that you guys have distorted numerous things I've said and convinced your own selves that your distortions are true.

Allow me to clarify and define what I think. You're not in my head, so you're on a fools errand if you don't. Also, stick to the topic and all goes well. Get personal... and the discussion goes South every time.

So, let's work together to keep the topic on track, even if we have disagreements on various details of the topic.

Just be you, only one of you when you answer. Not one person at a time, but only one person period. Please and thank you in Jesus name. If you start "waxing elephant" (I wish I could take credit for that reference!)and going all over the place, out the side of your neck, I'm going to call you out on it..

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Just be you, only one of you when you answer. Not one person at a time, but only one person period. Please and thank you in Jesus name. If you start "waxing elephant" (I wish I could take credit for that reference!)and going all over the place, out the side of your neck, I'm going to call you out on it..

You mean, "If I think I perceive you starting to "waxing elephant" and going all over the place, out the side of your neck, I'm going to call you out on it."

Own it brother. Own your perceptions. Own that it is a perception that is created in your mind based on what you think you understand one to be and be saying. And be open to allowing that perception to be corrected, should it be incorrect. Don't assume that what you perceive in others is the infallible ultimate reality. Such is only for God Himself.

Let me show you how it works... You incorrectly stated:

But you have been pouring your liberal propoganda and support of abortion...

Let's slow down and chew on this little statement. In your mind, you have constructed the notion that I support abortion. But... is that true? Let's look at what I truly believe. And allow me to define myself, for it is I who knows what I believe in my heart, and not you. You're an outside observer constructing conclusions. All I ask is that you construct "truthful" conclusions.

1.) Abortion is always a tragedy. And if unwarranted, abortion is an abomination. I would never recommend an abortion, nor support an abortion wherein a mother's life wasn't in danger.

2.) Until viability, the life of the unborn and the life of the mother are essentially interwoven, intertwined. This relationship is unique and existent only between mother and offspring. Therefore, it is a part of her and it is the fruit of her womb. No human being has sovereign authority over her body but her. And being a part of her physical being, for good or for evil, she has sovereign authority over the fruit of her womb. No human being, familial relation, organization, or government can rob her of this sovereign and sacred sovereign authority to force birth or to force abortion. And so motherhood brings with it a sacred trust that the mother will preserve and protect the life entrusted to her. The decision to terminate the life entrusted to her should never be taken lightly. Only in the most extreme of circumstances would the termination of this life be morally bearable. Nevertheless, the right to make this decision should be reserved for herself, and for her alone, with all Godly encouragement, support, and appeal to choose life if faced with unplanned pregnancy or circumstantial difficulties. God will judge all sin and wickedness on the Great Day of Judgment. Women who abuse this sovereign authority over their bodies through illicit sexual behavior and/or unwarranted abortion will face God's wrath. No sin will go unpunished. To those guilty of this grave sin, their only hope is Jesus Christ. For those contemplating an unwarranted abortion, their only source of hope is Jesus Christ.

3.) Government can be a blessed institution ordained of God, or an evil rivaling the most fearsome of beasts. Government often involves political interests and agendas that can become against the best interests of its own citizens. Therefore, the power of government should always be restrained with appropriate checks and balances. In addition, basic human rights are to be affirmed and defended from any private or governmental violation, intrusion, or oppression. The Constitution of the United States clearly limits the power of government with regards to an individual's private authority and privacy over their own property, persons (bodies), paper, and effects. This privacy can only be violated with a duly authorized warrant and seizure of arrest. Outside of this circumstance, the privacy of one's choices and decisions regarding their own body should be respected and defended. This might allow for sinful decisions, acts, or behaviors. However, an even greater evil would be to empower government to overrule such sovereign authority without due process of law. Any government empowered with the authority to violate a woman's sovereignty over her body and force her to give birth, can also one day violate a woman's sovereignty over her own body and force her to abort. Therefore, for good or for evil, a woman's sovereign right over her body should be defended from any attempt of private organization or government to usurp said sovereignty. The power of government is a beast that should be chained from violating human sovereignty afforded by true liberty.

4.) I believe that to foster a society that affirms life, a society should focus on the wellbeing and quality of life belonging to both mother and child. It has been demonstrated by various countries that social policies focused on the wellbeing of mother and child reduce the abortion rate significantly, even if the nation is a "prochoice" nation. Policies such as provision of contraception, universal health insurance that provides for universal prenatal and postnatal care, paid maternity leave, state subsidized daycare on state college campuses, safe houses for abused women, equal pay, and a living wage go far in helping mothers in unplanned pregnancies choose life. Nations such as Denmark, Belgium, Switzerland, all have abortion rates lower than 12 per every 1000 pregnancies, yet they are "prochoice" nations. In the United States the abortion rate is roughly 17 per every 1000 pregnancies. We do well to learn from the social policies of these nations who are ahead of us with regards to lowering the abortion rate. Any effort to save the unborn must look to deliver the mother from circumstances that encourage abortion. And so, the focus should be on the wellbeing of the mother. If the wellbeing of the mother is secured, the wellbeing of the child will naturally follow.

Now, while we might have some philosophical differences in our approaches, I pray you realize that I do not "support abortion" as you claimed. In fact, I see past the illusion that a mere abortion ban will solve the problem, and seek to find a true life affirming political philosophy that honors both mother and child. I see merely banning abortion as being merely a token gesture. A political band aide. It would only serve to be shift in a never ending political war between those who are anti-abortion and those who are pro-choice. If banned tomorrow, a massive political movement to restore choice would begin. It is a fruitless, expensive, and time consuming waste of effort that only serves to empower governmental authority to violate the human sovereignty of the individual over their own person. And so, I see a middle way, a more narrow path, wherein both sides can join forces to support women and fashion a society that values life and motherhood by focusing upon the wellbeing and quality of life of both mother and child.

If banning something worked, why not ban alcohol, drugs, crime, and even guns? Clearly it has been proven time and time again that a ban on something is only a superficial political gesture at best, and a step towards a police state at worse. I say, value women. Serve their needs. Help relieve the very real concerns that they face when confronted with a crisis pregnancy. And in doing so, we will foster a society that values life and chooses life, while also honoring a woman's sovereign authority over her own body.

So, while you might disagree with various points of my politic on this issue, or while you think my view is too complex, the one thing you can be certain of is that I do not support abortion.

[n david]

So the elephant is waxed...

[votivesoul]

Sexual relations and encounters of any sort outside of Biblical marriage is fornication, and therefore sin, a soul-damning practice that will take a person to their eternal destruction before the Lord.

See: 1 Corinthians 7:1-3 with Revelation 21:8.

There is no more discussion after that.

Any promotion, therefore, of it, as acceptable, on this forum, will be dealt with right quick.

[JoeBandy]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Sexual relations and encounters of any sort outside of Biblical marriage is fornication, and therefore sin, a soul-damning practice that will take a person to their eternal destruction before the Lord.

See: 1 Corinthians 7:1-3 with Revelation 21:8.

There is no more discussion after that.

Any promotion, therefore, of it, as acceptable, on this forum, will be dealt with right quick.

Now that's funny!!!

[JoeBandy]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Sexual relations and encounters of any sort outside of Biblical marriage is fornication, and therefore sin, a soul-damning practice that will take a person to their eternal destruction before the Lord.

See: 1 Corinthians 7:1-3 with Revelation 21:8.

There is no more discussion after that.

Any promotion, therefore, of it, as acceptable, on this forum, will be dealt with right quick.

Now that's funny!!!

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by n david

So the elephant is waxed...

Lol!!

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Sexual relations and encounters of any sort outside of Biblical marriage is fornication, and therefore sin, a soul-damning practice that will take a person to their eternal destruction before the Lord.

See: 1 Corinthians 7:1-3 with Revelation 21:8.

There is no more discussion after that.

Any promotion, therefore, of it, as acceptable, on this forum, will be dealt with right quick.

Amen! I agree with you on this one.