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

I will start by refuting Pro's argument for this round before making my own closing arguments. I think you chose the wrong example with the drunk driving. Drunk driving is a situation that a friend should authoritatively another friend not to participate in. Consensual loving sex is a situation for (you are suggesting) encouragement to wait. Pro states, "If one gives in to moral temptation before marriage, what's to stop him or her from giving in to moral temptation once married? sex partners in the past have effected marriages, they were more prone to infidelity, because of pleasure thoughts of old partners they wish they could have tried out one more time, sex is powerful and creates atomic bomb psychological attachments, we have even seen good men who loved their wife, destroyed by one case of infidelity, contrary to popular belief its been rumored that even Dr. Martin Luther King, gave in to this." Pro does not define "moral temptation". The meaning of those words is not made clear. I suspect that according to Pro a person is doing something "bad" if they have sex before marriage, something that they may become ashamed of. Please see evidence posted in previous rounds provided by myself as to the negative effects of shame on human health. Pro does not give evidence for her theory that "sex partners in the past have effected marriages" (affected right?). It is pure speculation on the part of Pro that spouses cheat because they had sex before marriage. Using the example of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is an anecdotal logical fallacy. We do know that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had extramarital affairs because the FBI bugged his phone and then sent the recordings to his wife. This was part of the criminal COINTELPRO operation that was later revealed under the Church committee senate hearings. We do not know why he cheated. There are a number of theories as to why spouses cheat on each other. It is believed that one factor is observed and emulated behavior based on parents who have cheated. I would like some evidence as to pro's theory of infidelity. It looks as though this statement was invented by pro in the nine minutes she had before going to work. Pro states- " but even though Con did not say the word sex, Cons default stance in this communication and love implies though sex to be a part of that communication, I I am implying that it does not need to be. We can discuss the past and communicate and love and develop intimacy." Another straw man argument from pro. I did not at any time say at any time that sex was a necessary tool for communication. Clearly, I stated that loving spiritual/physical union was a fruit of great communication and loving. Pro finishes with: "If we wait until marriage, that person will be the only experience, Many think a relationship without sex is no relationship at all but Sex is what is killing many relationships and leaving many people heartbroken. The longer a couple waited to have sex, the better that sexual quality, relationship communication, relationship satisfaction and perceived relationship stability was in marriage. how does a parent respond when asked, "Why did you not wait until you were married?" what example does that set for the child? If divorced, what example do parents set in regard to dating and sex? Do they believe it is acceptable for them, to have pre-marital sex whenever they feel like it? If so, should they expect anything different from their children? Now unwanted pregnancies and stds will abound. :( out of space" The above paragraph is a series of logically flawed unsupported statements. I will respond to them in order: "If we wait until marriage that person will be the only experience" So? Pro has not, per my request, provided any evidence as to why her above statement is good. I have provided a sound argument into the nature of scarcity of time and the abundant nature of love. I have asked that Pro attempt to refute my abundance/scarcity model and she has not done so. "Sex is what is killing many relationships and leaving many couples heartbroken" In earlier arguments Pro stated that the sex would be better for waiting. Is Pro labeling sex as a bad? That is new to our debate. It is also inconsistent with Pros previously stated argument. "The longer a couple waited to have sex, the better that sexual quality, relationship communication, relationship satisfaction and perceived relationship stability was in marriage." This looks like a direct quote but no source is listed. I am now struck with raw curiosity as to the source. ". how does a parent respond when asked, "Why did you not wait until you were married?" what example does that set for the child?" Pro is begging the question. Pro has an imaginary offspring demanding to know why his/her parents did not wait to have sex until they were married. Why did the children ask? Because pro wanted them to. There is no evidence from pro that a child will ask that question unless exposed to the shaming question by pro and others who agree with pro. "If divorced, what example do parents set in regard to dating and sex? Do they believe it is acceptable for them, to have pre-marital sex whenever they feel like it? If so, should they expect anything different from their children? Now unwanted pregnancies and stds will abound. :( out of space" Again we have the slippery slope from pro. This is a classic almost textbook example of that particular logical fallacy. Children can be discouraged from having sex for reasons of their own physical/emotional/spiritual health. Adolescents can be taught what real love is and why they are probably not ready for it. They can be apprised of the emotional scarring that can take place if, at a young age, they engage in loveless sex. Also there are and should continue to be family planning alternative made readily available to adolescents. There is no rational causal chain of: Adults have extramarital sex leads to adolescents having extramarital sex leads to STDs and unwanted pregnancy. This is another slippery slope invention by pro. I will not reiterate my entire argument as that would be unneeded repetition. To sum up: The burden of proof is on Pro made the statement -People should wait till marriage for sex with the one you love. Pro has not supported any of her statements with evidence. I have made clear arguments as to the nature of time as a scarce input and to love being an abundant process given the right conditions- compassion, communication, etc. Therefore, since time is exactly scarce and loving is abundant with the right person, there is no reason to wait until marriage. Marriage, as I have explained, is a creation of the Church/State made to bend individuals to the will of others in society. Love was not officially part of marriage until the Victorian era. Due to the historical nature of the marriage contract, the idea of waiting for marriage posits control of our bodies back to the church/ state. The idea of waiting for marriage has historically been enforced by shame to do otherwise. As I have provided evidence for previously, both shame and lack of agency for one's own body are psychologically anathema to human health and wellbeing. Pro has stated that she lacked time to complete arguments and also that either her computer or this website limited her responses to 2000 words each. I definitely have sympathy for those situations. We are all doing this as a hobby after all. I think it might have been better for pro to pick fewer statements and actually support them than to make a larger number of unsupported statements. I would like to reiterate my happiness regarding Pro's intent regarding this debate. She has shown her intent to be toward seeking the truth and I have enjoyed the spirit of this debate. Thank you again Pro. It has been a lovely debate.