Because science requires the free and unfettered sharing and publication of work and data, any censorship of science for any reason is BAD for science, period.

Thanks.

Okay, but it seems to me the inherent problem here is the dischord between expectations, not either of the particular expectations themselves. If the involved parties agree on the expectations, then there is no misunderstanding/miscommunication. The root of the problem is not casual sex, it is the failure of the involved parties to communicate thoroughly.

Now it may be fair to realize this is the way it has always been. It’s hard to get rational adults in committed relationships to actually communicate. That makes it difficult to get naive and immature teenagers to actually think about their expectations and then communicate them effectively and thoroughly with their partners before engaging in emotional activity – such as flirting, hand holding, kissing.

See that’s the problem. The emotional damage is already being done, it’s the act of living that we damage each other before we figure ourselves out. It’s not malicious, it’s not intentional, it just happens in the course of finding our way. I submit that a larger part of the problem is the fairy tale expectations of love rather than the act of physical entanglement.

>Regarding skeptigirl’s comment on sex as a compatiblily research tool for marriage, two problems with that: 1) If sexual compatibility is the primary measuring stick for the relationship, I’ll bet money it won’t last.

I’m not sure if that’s really a difficulty as much as a lack of experience and a failure to learn what the other wants/needs.

>2) There will probably be lingering doubt about whether you’re “performing” up to a standard that somebody else has set. Whereas if both partners are virgins at the start of the marriage, you’re the best sex your partner has ever had, and it can become better as you learn each other’s wants and needs.

Ah, but the root of that problem is really insecurity. A real relationship is not about the quality of sexual performance. In fact, if the true purpose of sex is intimacy and the act of pleasing the other, one should not be concerned with measuring up to anyone. The emotional bonding and the mutual experience is all that’s important. If you’re satisfying each other and emotionally connected, there’s nothing to measure up to. Measuring up is only a risk if you’re aiming for pure pleasure.

Someone concerned about his/her partner will care enough to learn what the partner needs/wants and how to provide it. That can happen whether virgins or tramps.

I submit for consideration that there’s nothing special about sex for building intimacy, it’s the attitude going in that makes all the difference. Are you focusing on your partner, or focusing on yourself?

“>Do you believe that sex out of wedlock is ever acceptable? – It is not the ideal scenario for anyone.

On what basis do you reach that conclusion?”

I base it on my personal experience, coupled with my observations from high school and college, and amplified by my mother’s experiences as a high school teacher. I saw many relationships messed up when the couple succumbed to peer/societal pressure to have sex. It’s a stereotype, but an accurate one that I saw repeated over and over: most guys saw it as a conquest, most gals saw it as a statement of commitment, somehow moving the relationship “to a deeper level”. This fundamental misunderstanding/miscommunication can cut deep into the developing psyche of adolescents. When you add this potential damage to the list of negative physical consequences, I find it amazing that so many people argue that there’s nothing wrong with “casual sex”.

Regarding skeptigirl’s comment on sex as a compatiblily research tool for marriage, two problems with that: 1) If sexual compatibility is the primary measuring stick for the relationship, I’ll bet money it won’t last. 2) There will probably be lingering doubt about whether you’re “performing” up to a standard that somebody else has set. Whereas if both partners are virgins at the start of the marriage, you’re the best sex your partner has ever had, and it can become better as you learn each other’s wants and needs.

Now that may not be correct. It may be possible for sex to work both ways. But poo-pooing anyone who tries to promote the idea of sex serving a higher goal the recreation does them a disservice. And declaring that their only justification is religious prudishness is inaccurate and unfair.

I’ll let skeptigirl speak for herself. I think there might be some assumptions on both sides here.

>“how can we expect immature teenagers to make better decisions?” Well, believe it or not, it does happen, they’re smarter than we give them credit for. You look at a group (priests) that fails to live up to its promises, and conclude that the promise is invalid, and that is a fallacious argument. The fact that many (even most) priests *can* uphold their vows is evidence that abstinence isn’t unrealistic.

Some teenagers do make better decisions than some adults. That doesn’t mean that the bulk of teenagers are mature enough to make good decisions. But even if the bulk are, that misses the essence of my point. With priests, we’re talking about mature adults who have spent years of contemplation and meditation to make a decision about how to live and act. They make a reasoned decision in light of their strong religious convictions and moral judgement. They then fail to uphold their vows. Yet you expect teenagers to make better decisions, when most do not have the maturity, wisdom, or thought put into their decisions.

Look, I’m all for encouraging better judgement. I’m all for teaching them to consider their actions, and all the ramifications. But if we can’t control underage drinking and smoking, how the heck do you expect to rely on their judgement for underage sex?

>OK, because I’m curious to hear what you’re going to do with my answers:
>Do you believe that sex out of wedlock is ever acceptable? – It is not the ideal scenario for anyone.

On what basis do you reach that conclusion?

>Do you believe that rational people can control their hormones and still choose to have sex for pleasure? – A qualified Yes: if by “sex for pleasure”, you mean “with whomever whenever”, I’d question whether one is really controlling their hormones.

Fair enough. Clarification, “sex for pleasure” does not necessarily mean going to bars every weekend and taking home the first person that buys you a drink. In the context of the question, “sex for pleasure” means sex outside a long term relationship – sex without commitment. This can still be a reasoned decision, not an automatic response to getting drunk.

>Do you believe sex should be reserved only for long term relationships? – Yes, sex without emotional “tie-in” presents all the physical and emotional risks with none of the emotional benefits.

Okay, clarification required. Do you mean this should apply to everyone, or is this your personal decision for yourself?

>Do you accept that some people may wish to have sex but not want children? – Yes.

Okay.

>Do you think that teenagers should only be given one option, or informed about all the options available and all the ramifications so they can make rational decisions? – Yes, but not like you mean the question. In today’s society, one option (abstinence) is routinely ridiculed, dismissed, ignored, etc., when it should be encouraged as the *simplest* and most logical method.

Okay, I can see your point – abstinence should be included in any sex education program and emphasized as the best option to avoid all the complications that come with sex.

I’m not opposed to education about abstinence. I’m not even opposed to stressing it as the best solution for the reasons you mention. However, I am opposed to teaching it as the only solution. Not having sex does not prevent emotional attachments and the consequences of ended relationships. Birth control methods are valid within marriage. Humans are emotional and sexual beings. And not everyone shares your opinion about the limitations that should be placed on sexual encounters. You won’t change those opinions just by saying “abstinence is better, sex should be reserved for long-term relationships and/or marriage”.