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

Before I debate this round I want to say how pleased I am with this debate. While I do not agree with my opponent's position or arguments, I am very pleased with his intent. Both of us are genuinely motivated to seek truth in this question. While it is accepted to argue for the sake of argument on this website, I am pleased that we are not taking that course here. Well done Pro. The Eiffel tower evidence is a continuation of the slippery slope argument. People do weird things in France. Does her marriage to the tower hurt anyone? Is this not more proof that marriage does not equal love? Did we not both already agree to the last statement? I am trying to confine our debate to the original question. Assertion - two people in love should wait until after marriage to have sex. I will now clarify my position on the nature of "testing" indictments by both of us. The assertion by pro is- people should wait for after marriage to have sex. I in no way seek to morally arm twist people into having sex before marriage. This is a personal choice for anyone to make. Each person has different needs based on personal background, religion and psychology. We are all of us wired just a little differently from each other. I am debunking the assertion that people should wait until after marriage. My argument is as follows: 1.)Marriage is an institution created to ensure political and economic ties between people that were created to promote a new political reality. Historically, marriage had no formal connection with love per church and state until the Victorian era. Please see evidence I presented in round 1 to that effect. a.People falsely equate marriage as a love garuntuer. The relationship becomes a paper tiger. People are then afraid to pursue communication and healthy loving for fear of losing the paper tiger. b.The pushing of sex before marriage is often done with an element of shame. This shame is inherent in our society from two millennia of shame brokering by church and state. It is not a part of my opponent's stated argument. Shame is a destructive emotion that inhibits communication and therefore love. Shame is detrimental to everyone's health. c.Marriage is a church/state contract. It is designed to put real and binding results onto what each of us can do with our bodies. The notion that we should "wait until marriage to have sex" asks us to voluntarily relinquish control of our bodies to the moral authority of the prevailing church/ state influence in society and then receive "permission" to have "sanctioned" and "sinless" intercourse. The best way to promote optimal spiritual/ mental/ physical health is to realize complete personal control of each of our spirit/mind/bodies right here and now. This approach is known to be of benefit to health. Personal responsibility is a cornerstone of psychological improvement. http://www.psychologytoday.com... d.The assertion "people should wait until after marriage to have sex" misidentifies the nature of the key process and input. The assertion puts falsely dictated boundaries on an abundant process-physical/spiritual union from genuine love. It also misidentifies the key input time as abundant. Time is the scarcest input available. I am not suggesting that partners "test" each other to see if they are "good at sex" before deciding who to marry. That sentiment is another straw man argument on the part of pro. I did say- "People learn by living. Wouldn't it be better to know you are with the right soul mate from experience or is it better to roll the dice based on an illogical assumption?" At no time did I mention having sex in the above statement. My argument is for people to communicate and love freely at all times. We primates do tend to seek a soul mate/partner to share our lives with. We do select based on criteria. That criterion is different for everyone. My suggestion for criteria, as it pertains to this argument is the capacity to communicate and love. We learn to communicate and love by the act of communicating and loving. I seek to help all others no matter what their abilities for the above criteria may be. For my partner, the one who closest to me who will enable (or inhibit) me to complete these tasks of goodwill that I have for others I select for an openness and ability to grow in the areas of communication and loving. The above assertion of this debate is wrong. It is incorrect because it falsely inhibits communication and loving to no good end. The imaginary fruit of "I waited to do this with only you" is just that, imaginary. Pro has not supplied any evidence to support the benefit of waiting. I have clearly and concisely debunked the assertion proving the detriments of waiting. Pro. Can you elaborate again on the benefits of waiting. In particular it would be good to know how this "feeling special for having waited" is a tangible benefit and not a misguided sentiment based on other emotions, possibly shame. I have given evidence that love is an abundant process and that time is a perfectly finite input. Do you choose to refute the above two statements? Cheers. Con. Also I mistakenly thought you were a woman because you said your first intercourse led to discomfort. My misunderstanding there.