Rationalization On Premarital Sex Is Immoral

Modern era sex education programs in the United States began in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a result of the AIDS/HIV epidemic. With the introduction of curricula teaching safe sex and the effectiveness of contraception, other curricula refuted these ideas thus creating a conflict about sex education in the U.S. Sex education in the U.S is divided into two categories: abstinence-only and comprehensive, the former being the most implemented among states nationwide. Abstinence-only programs stress the importance of abstaining from sex until marriage, fitting the “traditional” set of American morals. Covering more than just abstinence, comprehensive sex education programs not only teach students about the options they have when it comes

Dr. Smith brings up the term “utilitarian ethic” by which is caused by the use of contraception as, “if the possibility of parenthood is deliberately excluded…character of the relationship…changes…relationship is transformed to the point in which it becomes incompatible…nothing left except ‘utilization for pleasure,’ of which the object will be a person (Love and Responsibility 228).” Thus, meaning that the other person is just used as sexual pleasure. Eventually, one loses their own “dignity,” as learned in class as the quality of being worthy of esteem and honor – worthiness. Once one loses “dignity” for themselves then one may even question on being in a marriage even one’s own possibility to reproduce, which is one of the greatest things in the world. Today it seems, women are treating the act of pregnancy as a negative thing – childbearing and nurturing your child is one of the greatest things. In the end, “utilitarian ethic” has an endless cycle of negative characteristics associated with

Christ 's teachings at the Sermon on the Mount were that the only law is the law of love. He showed this by reversing four of the Old Testament laws which conflicted with loving people. Therefore, anything that was unkind, not by mutual consent, etc. would be immoral for a Christian, but obviously not loving sexuality regardless of marital status or natural sexual orientation.

The Natural Law approach to pre-marital sex is relatively simple: sex is strictly for married couples only. This is because Natural Law is

In the twentieth century, there was much debate on women’s public sexual relationship versus her private sexual relationship. The American society only believed in pure sex, and premarital sex was viewed as a sin. From a feminist’s point of view, there should be no pressure on the woman to reproduce according to the husband’s wishes. The feminists at the time “... were assured that they were sexual beings, but their sexuality was defined by male standards” (341-342). Also, certain situations did not provide the atmosphere necessary to raise a baby.

The attitudes towards sex during the Antebellum period was surrounded with a variety of different opinions and beliefs, causing the subject to be wildly controversial during its time. The opinions people had about sex were strongly shaped by their beliefs towards marriage and family, leading to the arguments made by Americans promoting sex and childbirth, as well as limiting them. The argument over sex and reproduction during this period touches on multiple topics within the argument over sex, such as women’s rights during reproduction, parenting, the wellbeing of the offspring, the increase in population, and the ideas of preventing childbirth, explaining why the attitudes about sex were viewed as controversial and argumentative by most Americans.

The Church teaches that sexual intercourse has two overall meanings: The Unitive and Procreative Dimension. Unitive Dimension refers to the expression of love towards our spouse and the Procreative Dimension which is the bringing forth of life. The Church teaches that these two dimensions cannot be separated, and both must be accepted. Therefore, when we choose to abort a pregnancy, this is selfishness on our ends. Current society norms includes having intercourse because of the want and desire of it. However, the people whom participate in pregnancies do not want to accept the procreative dimension of

In modern society as the idea of sex and relationships becomes more liberal the purpose of sex and relationships comes under further analysis. In what is really a matter of just under a century sex before marriage has transformed from a concept that was once expected to one which is rarely practiced and as the attitude towards single mothers takes a similar U-turn we are forced to analyse the purpose of such concepts. Nowadays by many, sex is seen more and more as a leisurely activity which is in stark contrast to the idea previously held where the purpose of sex was seen as purely for reproductory purposes. It therefore raises the question of whether we should have the

Sex has been widely viewed as a taboo topic amongst the pre-adolescents and adolescent population. Many teens around the world are experiencing sexual activity at a more alarming age than ever before (Anderson et al., 2011). Studies have been done to determine the causes for their sexual involvement and interventions that can be implemented to help increase the abstinence rate. However, it has been found that interventions should be initiated during pre-adolescent years. Unfortunately, studies have not yet determined the attitudes, experiences, and anticipation of sex among the pre-teens to identify what interventions to execute. This information is imperative for nurses to take into account when

In Rev. Martin Rhonheimer’s article “The Contraceptive Choice, Condom Use, and Moral Arguments Based on Nature: A Reply to Christopher Oleson,” Christopher Oleson challenges on Rhonheimer’s views on contraception and the use of condoms. Oleson focuses mainly on Rhonheimer and Fr. Benedict Guevin exchange. The article’s logic which has a strong appeal of reasonableness. Unfortunately, Oleson’s critique is based on a misrepresentation of Rhonheimer’s view on contraception and the role of “nature” in moral argument. Oleson’s article also contains at least one rather baffling interpretation of Aquinas, which is both central to Oleson’s view of “nature” in moral argument, and utterly incorrect. Moreover, the article shows a surprising disregard

They see the overwhelming importance given to sexual attractiveness in the media-one study estimated that the average teenager ahs witnessed nearly 14,000 sexual encounters on television- yet they also hear their parents and religious advisers telling them that sex is wrong. As a result, many young people begin having sex without really intending to and without taking precautions against pregnancy.

This week marks the forty-sixth anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae, a document which clarified the Church’s moral teaching on contraception. What is contraception? Contraception is, “any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation whether as an end or as a means” (Humanae Vitae 14). There are various methods of contraception that temporarily or permanently sterilize a couple, thus making it impossible to have children. Contraception destroys the union and love between couples. In this we find that contraception violates God’s plan of procreation. Contraceptives go against the gift of fertility by treating pregnancy as a disease. The issue of contraception has drawn worldwide attention with people divided on whether it is morally permissible to use any form of contraception. Society views contraception as a development in the modern world that helps in the regulation of birth. We find that many Catholics don’t understand this issue and the Church’s teaching on contraception has been misunderstood. The Church makes it clear through Humane Vitae that any use of contraception is morally wrong, for it violates the dignity of marriage and God’s plan of procreation. It is our understanding that marriage is a sacrament of love between two people, instituted by God, for the whole purpose of continuing his plan of creation. Marriage is the foundation of

Sex for pleasure instead of reproduction has been a concept practiced for millennium. The concept of birth control has been around since for several millennium, as evidenced by “cave [paintings] that researchers believe could be 15,000 years old, found in France” (Gibson, 2015); presumably made out of “fish bladders, linen sheaths, and animal intestines” (Thompson, 2013). Evidence of things like spermicide has been around since 1500 B.C.E. Rubber condoms and dental dams have been around for nearly 200 years. And yet, there is still an extreme pushback on birth control. In the year 1873, the Comstock Act was put into place. This act prohibited the distribution knowledge of birth control on a scale ranging from printing to conversations between doctors and patients. This act prompted centuries of skepticism and backlash towards the concept of birth control. The backlash towards birth control is based on nothing but on the archaic views of the past featuring themes on abstinence and notions like that the sole purpose of a woman is to be a child-bearer; therefore birth control and the knowledge of such should be accessible to every person regardless of age, socioeconomic status, gender and sexual orientation.

Premarital sex goes against God's law so our relationship with God is destroyed. Penance can heal our relationship with God, but the emotional ties that go along with premarital sex can hurt a person for life. Many couples that have premarital sex often do not stay together in marriage. Many people have strong emotional hardships that they go through after having premarital sex. Premarital sex doesn't just lead to sin; it leads to a separation of God and your family and friends.

Over many years, the views of premarital sex have been becoming increasingly more tolerant. The whole reasoning behind why sex was created is lost in the minds of society and used for pleasure and own physical satisfaction. There are negative consequences for these actions leading to guilt, depression, and numbness to intimate relationships. Having strong parental influence can also strongly affect the outcomes of adolescence and causal sex. Additionally, marriage can be