Social Why are evangelicals against sex ed?

Rape: Sexual activity and/or sexual intercourse done forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will.
Usually defined as sex without consent. Raping a passed out woman would not be rape under your definition.
Consent to enter marriage is not consent to forcibly have sex against ones will.
Entering marriage gives the consent for the spouse to have sex with one. It does not give the power to end someone's sex life. If one wants to withdraw the consent at will, I'd advise not getting married. Why does this offend you so much?
Statistics do not support your position.
What statistics?
 
How about a religious sex education?

Also your wrong. Sex is for fun WHEN married. Along with procreation. You dont only have sex with your spouse when trying ti make kids. God wants a good man and good woman to love one another.


Omg lol i spit my drink up. Id like if it was not for my yellow card.


Masturbation should be done without porn. But also rarely. I cant say you should never do it. But it should not be a daily thing.

For Catholics and other conservative Christian's sex is only for procreation.

In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued his landmark encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Latin, "Human Life"), which reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.

Contraception is "any action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act [sexual intercourse], or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (Humanae Vitae 14). This includes sterilization, condoms and other barrier methods, spermicides, coitus interruptus (withdrawal method), the Pill, and all other such methods.
 
For Catholics and other conservative Christian's sex is only for procreation.

In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued his landmark encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Latin, "Human Life"), which reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.

Contraception is "any action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act [sexual intercourse], or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (Humanae Vitae 14). This includes sterilization, condoms and other barrier methods, spermicides, coitus interruptus (withdrawal method), the Pill, and all other such methods.


I can see where they are coming from and can even see some value in it but I think this teaching by the Catholic church is one of the most grievous errors it has ever fallen into and it has led to massive pain and suffering on the planet that is inexcusable to my way or thinking.
 
Usually defined as sex without consent. Raping a passed out woman would not be rape under your definition.

Are you always so exhaustingly pedantic?

From Merriam-Webster: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception.


Entering marriage gives the consent for the spouse to have sex with one. It does not give the power to end someone's sex life. If one wants to withdraw the consent at will, I'd advise not getting married. Why does this offend you so much?

Who is talking about ending someone's sex life? This is the kind of absurdity you have to resort to. This is the wagon you've hitched your horse to and it's leading you to these indefensible positions.

What statistics?

ITT stats regarding teen pregnancy and divorce rates which do not support your position on the efficacy of your religion have been presented. You haven't yet just hand-waved the data off, but I suspect it's coming soon.
 
Are you always so exhaustingly pedantic?

From Merriam-Webster: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception.




Who is talking about ending someone's sex life? This is the kind of absurdity you have to resort to. This is the wagon you've hitched your horse to and it's leading you to these indefensible positions.



ITT stats regarding teen pregnancy and divorce rates which do not support your position on the efficacy of your religion have been presented. You haven't yet just hand-waved the data off, but I suspect it's coming soon.
He already moved the goal posts to people who practice religion "seriously"
 
I'm not "an evangelical", I'm merely a Christian, but I can answer.
1) Sex isn't for recreation, but procreation. It belongs in marriage. Fornication is evil and it damages the soul.
2) Sex ed promotes and tries to normalize perversions to impressionable youths.
3) Sex ed teaches that porn and masturbation are great. Porn is evil, masturbation useless.
giphy.gif
 
Many evangelical friends I have absolutely struggle with sex in marriage.

You grow up being told day in and day out sex is bad then you get married and it's now ok go enjoy.

You now are married to someone who has been told to be ashamed of their sexual desires on both sides and you wonder why people aren't having a healthy sexual relationship in their marriage.
 
I can see where they are coming from and can even see some value in it but I think this teaching by the Catholic church is one of the most grievous errors it has ever fallen into and it has led to massive pain and suffering on the planet that is inexcusable to my way or thinking.

I agree on the second part of your statement.
 
Usually defined as sex without consent. Raping a passed out woman would not be rape under your definition.

Entering marriage gives the consent for the spouse to have sex with one. It does not give the power to end someone's sex life. If one wants to withdraw the consent at will, I'd advise not getting married. Why does this offend you so much?

What statistics?
So if someone doesn't feel like having sex one night while the partner does they should reconsider marriage altogether? Bruh and you wonder why religious numbers are dropping
 
Do people who think that sex is only for procreation seriously only fuck for...the purposes of procreation? Like, you don't pull out? You don't use condoms? You either abstain or try to make babies?
 
Are you always so exhaustingly pedantic?
You started the definitional one-upping. I'm perfectly capable of following suit.

From Merriam-Webster: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against a person's will or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception.
I'm failing to see how a husband or a wife is not capable of valid consent.

Who is talking about ending someone's sex life?
If the consent can be withdrawn within marriage, that gives the right to single-handedly end your spuse's sex life. I see that as no less an act of infidelity and betrayal as boning someone else.
This is the kind of absurdity you have to resort to.
Yet the amount of sexless marriages is increasing as we speak. Lack of sex is the most common complaint married men have.

ITT stats regarding teen pregnancy and divorce rates which do not support your position on the efficacy of your religion have been presented. You haven't yet just hand-waved the data off, but I suspect it's coming soon.
I haven't seen data concerning Christian families, lack of sex ed and teen pregnancy.
 
The current crop of Christians in the US are lazy. They only want to follow 9 commandments.
 
We are living in the best possible time. Name a time that was better to be alive than today.
65 years ago.

you have been reduced to "You started it!"
If you get so offended about definitions, why try to get anal about them in the first place?

But all right, we're now finished.
 
My goodness . . . this thread.

Sheesh.
 
65 years ago.

Better hope you don't get polio, have a stroke, develop cancer.

You had best be born white.

If you are a woman, better hope you marry a non-violet man who won't rape you because you didn't feel like having sex that night.

Once again, the facts do not align with your position. You are wrong at every turn because you're stuck in the bronze age.

I would feel sorry for you if you weren't so vile.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top