Poll: Do you think that morality is something that should be applied to sex?

Brawndo

New member
Jun 29, 2010
2,165
0
0
I was talking to some girl I know about sex before marriage, and I made the argument that most people who are celibate until marriage do so out of fear of being ostracized by their religious community or family. Her reply was, "Or maybe they just have morals." Her response irked me, but I couldn't really put what I was thinking into words until I made this thread.

Now I turn to you, Escapists, and I ask whether morality should apply to sex.

My personal belief is that morality has no place when it comes to consensual sex. Sure, I think infidelity is immoral. But that has everything to do with honesty, trust, and loyalty, and nothing to do with sex. It shouldn't be considered immoral to like sex, even with many partners. Unsafe? Arguably. But immoral? I'll tell you what's immoral - murder. Rape. Slavery. Stealing.

Another thing that upsets me is how many people who wait until marriage to have sex naturally take the moral high ground. All you did was adhere to a custom that dates back to a time when women were property, congratulations. In my opinion, the only difference between me choosing to have sex now and another person waiting until marriage is that I get discriminated against come tax season.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,887
733
118
Brawndo said:
My personal belief is that morality has no place when it comes to consensual sex.
Er, and people's morals won't affect whether or not they consent to various sex acts?

Do you mean imposing an arbitrary moral code of someone else's design upon people?
 

crudus

New member
Oct 20, 2008
4,415
0
0
No, I do not think that morality should be applied to sex in the way you (OP) are thinking of. I think it rejects a very (for lack of a better word) necessary aspect of life. Like everything people just need to be smart about it and do it in moderation.

Brawndo said:
Her reply was, "Or maybe they just have morals." Her response irked me, but I couldn't really put what I was thinking into words until I made this thread.
I get this all the time. Your immediate reply should always be "and what morals would that be"? Her reply would be something like "sex before marriage is immoral". Your reply should be "and why is that". Now is when you start going around in circles with the "because God said so" line. It kind of gets nowhere.
 

Gerishnakov

New member
Jun 15, 2010
273
0
0
crudus said:
Brawndo said:
Her reply was, "Or maybe they just have morals." Her response irked me, but I couldn't really put what I was thinking into words until I made this thread.
I get this all the time. Your immediate reply should always be "and what morals would that be"? Her reply would be something like "sex before marriage is immoral". Your reply should be "and why is that". Now is when you start going around in circles with the "because God said so" line. It kind of gets nowhere.
Long story short: Religious people are hopeless.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,847
0
0
was the girl religious? because the whole "no sex before marrage thing" because it really annoys me how they get sex and morality all screwed up

even non-religion people do it...why is it "wrong" for somone to sleep with alot of people?

anyway, IMO as long as there is consent (that being a very important thing) then ANYTHING is ok (well...not if it involves animals)
 

winginson

New member
Mar 27, 2011
297
0
0
This isn't really a question of whether morality applies to sex, because obviously it should. Morality is what we have to determine right from wrong, and clearly in sex you should follow your morals.

This is alot more question of what your personal morals are. I believe sex before marrige isn't immoral, other people think it is. No one is 'right' as such.
 

The Artificially Prolonged

Random Semi-Frequent Poster
Jul 15, 2008
2,755
0
0
I think your friend phrased her argument a bit wrong. I think she meant that people who believe in no sex before marriage have a different set of morals, not better than those that don't. All individuals have a different set of moral standards anyway, so really neither group can claim to have better morals than the other anyway.

Mortai Gravesend said:
I think you chose some poor phrasing there really and framed the entire debate in terms of the view of those who think there are moral issues with sex before marriage. I mean morality does apply to sex, when you specify consensual sex you're specifying sex that already fits a particular moral rule. The real question here is whether they are right that it is immoral to have sex before marriage. It isn't whether morality applies to it, it's a question of how it applies to it.
Could not have put it any better.
 

Nickolai77

New member
Apr 3, 2009
2,843
0
0
Yeah, OP you've phased the question badly. Of course morality is involved in sex- the fact we have consent laws, make choices as to who our partners are etc are all moral choices. The question is not if morality is applied to sex, but what sort of morals are applied to sex.


So, going back to what you mean about sex before marriage- some people may well choose to abstain from sex before marriage for secular reasons- maybe they like the idea of waiting and only having sex with "the one"- or perhaps they are a bit anxious about having sex and say they want to have sex only with marriage. My ex-gf only wanted sex after she had turned 18, marriage like age may be one of the conditions that people attach to sex.
 

Raognerrrm

New member
Apr 2, 2011
396
0
0
Yes, morality applies to sex. If it wasn't, it would get very nasty and we wouldn't have all these laws about it.

As for the "sex only after marriage being moral", it's just a different set of morals. I happen to think that sex is a special thing that I only want to experience with one person, and the best way to ensure that is with marriage. If your approach to sex is to do it with anyone, that does not make you less moral, it means that your morals are different.
For it to be immoral, sex would need to be a bad thing. It's not. It's great, but I happen to want to wait before I experience it. That does not give me the higher moral ground.
 

DoPo

"You're not cleared for that."
Jan 30, 2012
8,665
0
0
The Artificially Prolonged said:
All individuals have a different set of moral standards anyway, so really neither group can claim to have better morals than the other anyway.
This.

Mortai Gravesend said:
I think you chose some poor phrasing there really and framed the entire debate in terms of the view of those who think there are moral issues with sex before marriage. I mean morality does apply to sex, when you specify consensual sex you're specifying sex that already fits a particular moral rule. The real question here is whether they are right that it is immoral to have sex before marriage. It isn't whether morality applies to it, it's a question of how it applies to it.
And this.

I wanted to say basically both of those but they've been already said. So to recap - yes, it may be immoral to have sex before marriage because different people have different morals.
 

Colour Scientist

Troll the Respawn, Jeremy!
Jul 15, 2009
4,722
0
0
I thought the thread title said 'mortality' first, it was confusing.

OP: People need to mind their own business when it comes to other people's sex lives. If you wanna wait till marriage, fine. Same goes for someone who likes to fuck everything that moves. provided they're safe about it and it's consensual (although that goes without saying). Neither party has the right to go around calling the other a prude/slut.

Everyone should have their own set of morals but don't try to force them on other people, at least in relation to sex and sexuality. It shouldn't matter to anyone else whether I want to wait until marriage or want to fuck someone in an upside-down boat. Sex is sex and it should only be the business of the person they're, or planning on, having sex with.

I know I'm being an idealist here but a girl can dream.
 

DoPo

"You're not cleared for that."
Jan 30, 2012
8,665
0
0
Colour-Scientist said:
Everyone should have their own set of morals but don't try to force them on other people, at least in relation to sex and sexuality. It shouldn't matter to anyone else whether I want to wait until marriage or want to fuck someone in an upside-down boat. Sex is sex and it should only be the business of the person they're, or planning on, having sex with.
Quoted. For. Truth.

This is enough to call it a /thread. (but it wouldn't happen)

Waiting for sex after marriage is no more "taking the moral high ground" than trying to undermine those people's opinions. Those people do (exactly what OP calls) "get discriminated against come tax season" because of their beliefs.
 

Aerodyamic

New member
Aug 14, 2009
1,205
0
0
Colour-Scientist said:
I thought the thread title said 'mortality' first, it was confusing.
The only place that I've ever noticed that mortality is applied to sex is in repressive religious regimes, and "Friday the 13th" movies.

That said, I think everyone else has covered the appropriate answers; consent laws and protection for minors are the primary moral constraints that should be relevant to sex, while things like sexual orientation, positions or fetishes are a private matter among consenting partners.
 

Necroid_Neko

New member
Nov 24, 2011
147
0
0
Every person has their own set of 'morals', if she feels that sex before marriage is immoral then that's her choice. She does not have the right to force that opinion on you, but equally you do not have the right to tell her what morals she should value.

Personally, so long as it's consensual by all parties I couldn't give a damn what goes on in people's sex lives.
 

MetalMagpie

New member
Jun 13, 2011
1,523
0
0
I think that there is nothing morally wrong about sex as long as the three golden rules apply: safe, sane and consensual.

I also think that there's nothing morally wrong about eating meat. But not everyone agrees.

Morality isn't (in general) an absolute thing. It depends on the individual. Sure, there are a few things that most people agree are wrong. But even simple things like "murder" are a matter of individual opinion. (Is executing someone for a crime murder? Is killing someone in war murder? Etc.)

Brawndo said:
Another thing that upsets me is how many people who wait until marriage to have sex naturally take the moral high ground.
I'm afraid this is just how human beings behave. I get annoyed some vegetarians for the same reason. The important thing is not to retaliate by acting as if your choice in any makes you superior. You are not better/smarter/braver/wiser just because you don't follow the tradition that she does.

It's a difference of opinion on a concept that only exists in people's minds anyway. (There's no real-world entity called "morality" that we can run experiments on!)
 

OtherSideofSky

New member
Jan 4, 2010
1,051
0
0
Morality, as it is applied by human beings in everyday life, is entirely relative. People can choose to do what they want for whatever reasons they want, but when they look down their noses at you for not doing the same they're just being assholes. Naturally, this doesn't apply in cases where there is a demonstrable "right way" of doing something. For example, people are perfectly justified in dismissing research that fails to follow proper methodology.