Wait for sex with the one you love before marriage--NON BIBLICAL APPROACH Pro

Pro starts her argument with an anecdotal fallacy-" I agree that marriage is not necessarily for one to be in love, even brothers and sisters or dad and a daughter, cousins aunts and uncles can make love to each other, outside of just sex, but call it "making love" and do so without getting married, if they want go ahead and do that and if its not against the law in some states no one has a true reason to tell them not to do so" Pro has falsely substituted incest relationships for the spiritually loving and compassionate relationships that this debate was intended to explore. Is all premarital sex akin to incest according to pro? In the first part of her "non argument" my opponent uses an appeal to authority- Pro- "we all know the Christian God is against it and that's why in that aspect marriage was create so that much leeway wouldn't be created." It is nice that you have "God on your side", so to speak, but this is a debate between two people. This statement is also false for factual reasons in the second part. What leeway was the Christian God attempting to avoid pre Victorian England? It has already been established that love was not an essential part of marriage until Victorian England. The leeway to be avoided was the injustice and uncertainty of one man unknowingly raising another man's child and so loosing the ability to pass land and title to his male heirs. The leeway to be avoided was jealous murder at the prospect of infidelity. The leeway to be avoided was one man not receiving fair compensation for his betrothal payment of 15 goats. If love were not a key component of marriage for the Christian church until the Victorian age how could the prohibition of adultery and premarital sex be for the benefit of the sex. I need for my opponent to clarify her argument at this point. Is pro saying that love is the prerequisite for great sex and that marriage is a prerequisite for love or is pro saying that marriage not love is the prerequisite for very good sex? Pro next continues her argument as a misrepresentative Straw man/ anecdotal attack- "Let me rephrase this.... is it possible to have flawless children and not have to worry about them ever messing up? It is unlikely to happen. People learn by having other people's children first, wouldn't it be better to know you are fit to have children before you have them? Or is it better to not have children because you afraid you have no experience and will do a bad job?" You certainly did rephrase it…. into something completely different. Apples into oranges. A parent child relationship is very different from a romantic and spiritual partnership between two people. The child will gradually develop a separate personality and become more independent over time. The two adults will maintain their individual personalities but continue to bond and grow with each other. It is precisely the ability for the adults to love each other which helps the child flourish. So, using intelligence and experience to choose and create a wonderful spiritual relationship aids greatly in parenting. In our romantic relationships we have choices in our parenting we have some choices but the genetic template of the child is not our choice. Your argument is to point to a situation without choice and advocate artificially taking away choices in another area by comparison. Also Pro stated "How is it unconditional love if it is halted by a condition"? What would that condition be? Not good sex? So now we have a circular argument from pro- people should wait for marriage to have sex because waiting will make the sex better. "Sex is worth the wait" People should not have sex before because if the sex is bad then they might not want to get married, the fear of bad sex is a "condition" to be avoided. Love cannot be unconditional if we do not worry that the sex will be bad so we must wait. Then, after the appropriate sanctioned legal and church ritual the sex will become magically good. It will become magically good because the couple chose to ignore its importance or in any way experience it before the magical act of marriage. Also who is saddled with the "condition"? Waiting before marriage seems like much more of an artificially imposed "condition" than living healthfully does. I would like clarification from pro. Is great sex the goal? It would seem so from her statement " Sex is worth the wait". My belief is that great sex is the fruit of great love and communication. It cannot be the primary motivation. If great sex is the ultimate goal than waiting for marriage or not waiting for marriage will both fail. This is true in the same way that a person cannot have a great and satisfying career for the money. People are, in both the cases of sex and money, clouded by their greed. As a practicing tantric I know this to be true. If I say "it is not about the hour long orgasm…." everything I say about true loving and communication after that will not be heard. It is the same phenomena when the entrepreneur Richard Branson gets onto a Virgin jet and says "It's not about the money"…. People are so distracted by those types of fruits that they lose sight of the important processes that generate those fruits. Richard Branson thrives on the excitement of being a creative entrepreneur. It really is not about the money for him. In the same way couples who generate crystal clear communication and spiritual loving really do that for its own sake. The joy of physical union is only a part of the benefits of the loving. The loving itself is the main benefit. Would Richard Branson have been well served to abstain from all business activity until he formed his first company Virgin? Should he expect his unconditional love for Virgin to propel his business without any help of prior business experience? The benefits of a couple having experience have been stated clearly by myself. We have heard no argument from pro concerning the real and tangible benefits of waiting. All we have seen from pro is cloudy misdirection. I expect that the real sentiment underlying pros argument is the unhealthy emotion known as shame.