>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^smooman:
one more thing, if you honestly think that having sex with your S.O. before you marry em is what is gonna ensure you have great sex.......you really dont understand sex, at least on an intimate level. experience and time with one woman will produce mind bending sex, as opposed to experience from quantity of partners

I never said that. I said that if you're going to commit to marrying someone, you should not do so lightly. You should make an effort to get to know each other in every way and that includes sexually.
You don't know me or anything about me, so don't assume what I do or don't know about sex and intimacy. For the record, I have been married for several years, and before that my wife was my girlfriend for even longer.
This is really not that complicated. Or do you genuinely believe that it is better to wait until you're married to have sex?
Oh and SeesThruYou, you're a troll and not a very good one. We have world class trolls here like QM. Try harder.


who said that was directed squarely at you? lets try and not be so much of a martyr

"Or do you genuinely believe that it is better to wait until you're married to have sex?"
speaking of presuppositions, could you point out to me what words i strung together that you misunderstood as me championing abstinence till marriage?

i used to do drugs. i still do but i used to too

very few people, if any, can do non sequitur humor like mitch, and mitch has truly mastered that art. miss that guy

ya that conveyed the intensity and the boredom of war quite nicely

i was hoping it was gonna be the poop itself then show a video of a horse having explosive diarrhea at the speed of light

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

Well, anyone who gets up from that deserves a toasty quality


and starts sprinting no less!

one more thing, if you honestly think that having sex with your S.O. before you marry em is what is gonna ensure you have great sex.......you really dont understand sex, at least on an intimate level. experience and time with one woman will produce mind bending sex, as opposed to experience from quantity of partners

>> ^ChaosEngine:

Did you even read the post? Here, I'll highlight it to help you.
>> ^smooman:
>> ^ChaosEngine:
Seriously what kind of insano would get married to someone without having sex with them first? Would you buy a car with taking for a test drive? I'm not even slightly joking here. And I'm not being sexist either, both partners need to know. Nor am I saying it's the end of the relationship if it doesn't work, but if you're committing to a lifelong relationship, you should go into eyes open.
And as for the whole "fornication is a sin" concept, we need to drop that crap. Unprotected sex is just idiocy, but if two consenting adults want to have casual safe sex, it's up to them. Honestly, we load all these expectations onto losing your virginity; "it should be special", "it should be with someone you love", blah blah. Let's face it, it's usually pretty unspectacular and awkward. These attitudes made sense when we didn't have birth control or protection from STDs but these days they're just a holdover from a time when you didn't want to end up diseased or stuck with a kid you didn't want.

women are cars now?

FFS, why is this so hard to understand? The puritanical attitude to sex before marriage is outdated and pointless. If you are making a lifelong commitment to be with someone, you should know about as many aspects of your relationship beforehand as you can. Actually forget sex, I wouldn't marry anyone with living with them for at least a year or two.


i did read your post. its not hard to understand. abstinence before marriage is outdated for sure (the institution of marriage is really recent, while throughout history laying with someone typically served as an act of marriage) but pointless? perhaps to you, but to each their own. to me? sex is sex. thats it. what my grievance is, is with the tired and utterly absurd "car test drive" analogy. its laughable on its face, and anyone who persists with it is just plain silly. women arent cars. sex isnt driving. theyre not even remotely comparable, except for humorous anecdotes exclusively.

its clear that you want to know every single detail you can about your future spouse before committing, and thats fine, that works for you. but i dont know if you knew this.......but we're not all you. some of us prefer the method of discovery. is it smart and recommended to live with someone at the very least for a little bit before you decide if this is someone you want to be with the rest of your life? absolutely. is it mandatory for a successful relationship? absolutely not. is it smart and recommended to have a physically intimate relationship with someone you are courting? depends, but usually ya. is it mandatory in order to have a healthy sex life and a lasting marriage? absolutely not

sidenote: love is not a feeling, it is not an emotion. it is action and commitment. if you want to know every possible detail about the relationship you have with someone before committing to them, if it works for you great! but i feel i need to remind you: we are not you. I would argue that whether you want to know all the details you possibly can, or if you know enough to be pretty sure, in either case if you both are committed to each other then who cares if youve had sex before marriage or waited till after.

omg that music! KILL IT KILL IT KILL IT!!!

>> ^ChaosEngine:

Seriously what kind of insano would get married to someone without having sex with them first? Would you buy a car with taking for a test drive? I'm not even slightly joking here. And I'm not being sexist either, both partners need to know. Nor am I saying it's the end of the relationship if it doesn't work, but if you're committing to a lifelong relationship, you should go into eyes open.
And as for the whole "fornication is a sin" concept, we need to drop that crap. Unprotected sex is just idiocy, but if two consenting adults want to have casual safe sex, it's up to them. Honestly, we load all these expectations onto losing your virginity; "it should be special", "it should be with someone you love", blah blah. Let's face it, it's usually pretty unspectacular and awkward. These attitudes made sense when we didn't have birth control or protection from STDs but these days they're just a holdover from a time when you didn't want to end up diseased or stuck with a kid you didn't want.


women are cars now?

man crush for brian regan. man! these bananas are good!!

and not a single decent punch was thrown =(

think about what being a good parent is all about......hmmmmm...... how about putting your kids first in everything that you do. leaving a child in a blistering car because he/she is just too much of a damn hassle for you to be carrying around while you got more important things to do, sure sounds like putting the child first to me.

"man, ive had this baby on my hip alllll day. whew im beat! but ive still got a ton of errands to run. here, i'll just set him down right here on this street corner and i'll be back in 2 minutes"

look, i know there are no perfect parents (because there's no perfect people) and as such we fuck up from time to time. parenting is an ever changing, constant learning session. the difference being, you are justifying the fuck ups with idiotic nonsense. leave your baby alone, in a stifling car, which i might add is far more dangerous for young children/babies, because theyre too much of a hassle for you? theyre kids! not fucking albatrosses! that shows an abject lack of any shred of parental responsibility on your part. seriously, i sincerely hope you do not have kids

>> ^BoneyD:

@smooman, do you have kids?


no i dont, not any of my own anyway. i do have two nieces for what its worth. but before you say it, cuz i know youre gonna, the fact that i do or do not have kids holds no relevance to the fact that Legacy0100 justified leaving children in a hot car because "theyre too heavy and strollers are a hassle". if kids are too heavy and strollers are too much of a "hassle" what fucking god damn business would you have having kids in the first place?