Generally, Sex Before Marriage is Not Morally Sound

Thank you for your response. Let’s look at my re-worded resolution to remember what exactly I am arguing: Generally, Sex Before Marriage is Not Free From Error, Fallacy, or Misapprehension According to Principles Relating to Right and Wrong Behavior. Let’s keep in mind that we are completely discussing a general case. I agree with my opponent that it is possible to share that perfect balance of agape and eros that marriage calls for before a couple gets married, but let’s be real here; the majority of couples, especially teenagers and college students do not take love as seriously as a marital commitment calls for. In addition, I must only show that sex before marriage has some kind of error, fallacy or misapprehension in order to affirm the resolution. Sex before marriage has error because of the risks and consequences. Even my opponent agrees that most of the time (generally) sex before marriage is ill-advised. Well the only reason something could be ill-advised would be if there was some kind of risk or consequence to it. This is enough to fulfill my resolution but I’ll take it further. Sex before marriage is in a way a fallacy because it misrepresents true love. Sex before marriage is also a misapprehension because it misrepresents true love. This is all of course, in a general case. There are few ways someone could practice the kind of love marriage calls for before marriage; that would mean the couple must either (a. Have a true commitment to each other that would allow agape to grow naturally or (b. fully understand the concept of agape and eros and be able to act upon it. Both of these options are unrealistic to the average young couple. 46% of teenagers between the ages of 15-19 have had sex at least once (1), and I don’t even know the statistics for students in college, but I could only imagine they are the same or a bit higher. “For teens having sex for the first time, the majority identify their partner as someone with whom they were "going steady" -- 70% of females and 56% of males.”(2) These are general cases, and I find no way that these people could have a true commitment to each other nor could I ever imagine they have a good understanding of agape and eros, and choose to act upon it. My opponent says it himself: “the expression of agape is what makes it(sex) moral.” We look at these general cases and we understand that agape has very little meaning to them. Marriage is important because without having an understanding of agape, agape naturally becomes part of their life with each other. The commitment a couple makes to each other through marriage will naturally cause agape to grow. This is why marriage is so important. You brought up cases such as divorce or polygamy. You see, a couple can make a commitment to marriage. However, it is up to them to uphold that commitment and you act as if marriage means nothing because these things happen. A couple should wait to be married when they already have an agape type love. Marriage simply makes this agape grow further. With polygamy: Marriage can be misrepresented. If the largest amount of agape grows through two people being with each other, then it would be a misapprehension to allow more people into that kind of relationship. Marriage is about the greatest amount of agape, if a polygamous type relationship does not support this then marriage is being misrepresented by allowing it. I do not deny that couples practice agape besides through sex with each other. What I am arguing is that not having sex allows you to put more effort into finding those ways to express agape to your lover. In addition, the abstinence from sex allows your partner to know that you love them and want to be with them regardless of the pleasure they may bring you. “If the child is loved, truly loved with agape, then it is fine to have a child out of wedlock” I absolutely, 100% agree. However, is this a realistic thing? I will tell you that there are few circumstances when a child born out of wedlock is put in the same or better kind of environment that a married couple has. Remember we are looking at a general case of pre-marital sex. In general, a couple that has pre-marital sex does not share the same kind of commitment or agape love that a married couple has. Even more so, teenage and college students are at one of the worst points in their lives to have a child. “On the other hand, a child in a loveless marriage is in fact a terrible thing to do to the child, and having a child in a marriage where you and your spouse no longer love each other will harm the child as well.” Like I said earlier, a couple can make a commitment to marriage but not actually live it out. A couple that truly shares love and agape with each other (Generally in marriage) like you said, will raise a child properly to be loved. You have everything backwards. You give me a rare case with marriage yet then say that unmarried young couples who share a pure sense of agape will welcome a child into their lives. Both of these examples are not general cases. They are simply can’s. There is no point in arguing whether something can happen if it usually won’t. “Children born in a loveless or unready relationship outside of marriage is just as bad as in one, and having a child in a marriage where you and your spouse no longer love each other will harm the child as well.” However, it is far more likely that a child will be born in an unready relationship with a pre-marital couple then it would be with a married couple. Why? Because a pre-marital couple does not share the true commitment to love and agape that marriage calls for. My opponent argues that a couple needs to know whether their bodies are compatible with each other for sex before they get married, then provides a story about someone who suffered for not having done so. First off, just read the story. Can you not see that this woman does not share a very great love for her husband? Think. She stated that she would rather divorce him than have bad sex. She would rather divorce him than have bad sex. This obviously shows she has no true love for him. A couple that shares true love and agape with each other would not be bothered nearly as much as her that the sex wasn’t up to par. In addition, a couple that shared true agape would work through such a thing. Obviously no one is great their first time and I assume both of them stayed abstinent. In addition, they fight. A lot. This just hints us that perhaps they weren’t ready for marriage in the first place. Your point fails because a couple that truly loves each other would work through such a thing. Conclusion It would appear that the only argument my opponent dropped when responding to me would be my point on faithfulness in my opening argument. If he chooses to argue it in the next round, disregard it because I will have had no chance to respond. I have shown that marriage is in general, a needed commitment for a couple in order to express true love and agape for each other. I have that marriage can be misrepresented and that cases such as polygamy should not be taken to mind. I have shown that marriage is at no fault if a couple was not ready to make a commitment and did, resulting in a divorce. I have shown that abstinence from sex shows that a couple loves the other for them, and not for the pleasure they may bring. I have shown that generally, a child raised in marriage is better off than a child raised outside of marriage. I have shown that a couple who has remained abstinent will work through their sexual life together in true love, but only if they are truly dedicated to each other. This was a great debate and I’m very glad to have participated in it. Good luck to you in your final round. ^^ 1 - http://womensissues.about.com... 2 - http://womensissues.about.com...