Posted on 06/15/2003 10:39:14 AM PDT by Mister Magoo
It's a character flaw. If you can't be honest enough to stay faithful in a serious relationship, not including marriage, you can't be trusted period. I know what I'm talking about here.
BTW, there are other assumptions you're making that we just don't know. We don't know that she finds his abstinance an attractive quality. Perhaps she thought she could change his mind. Perhaps she thought it was a ploy, a line.
Frankly, I find a woman who says something to effect that she can abstain if she knew they were going to marry to be less than ideal. It sounds to me more like she's not willing to wait for the one she loves. She knows she can get sex other places and if he's not going to come through, then she'll go elsewhere. Afterall, if she really loved him, shouldn't she be willing to wait? My grandmother's aunt waited for her soldier to return from WWI. She had a promise of marriage from him. He never returned. She loved him and waited for him. She never married.
Far from faulting Mr. Washington, I'd say it was in HIS best interest that their relationship is no longer.
Really? How do you figure? For every person you are sexually active with, you are actually sleeping with 10 or more other people?? For every one person you sleep with it increases exponentially. Each person they slept with before you, and each one that each of those slept with, and so on and on. So the risk is only with a drug user, or whor? I don't think so.... Think about how many people you have been sexually intimate with, and then figure they were the same with that number of people..... and then each of those that person slept with..... Kinda scary, eh? Then I ask myself about the risk, the emotional damage when the relationship breaks up, and everything else that goes with it. Abstinence til after marriage seems a very smart thing to do. (Fighting passion is hard, but considering the alternatives.... AIDS, STDs, emotional wreckage.... I'll take abstinence.)
For the longest time, I simply refused to accept the possibility that some Freeper men were capable of being intimidated by intelligent, strong women. Surely, I thought, the idea of an everyday, intimate relationship with a first-class mind (especially when combined with a first-class body) just has to be every man's idea of the ideal relationship. No more begging on the Internet for a good chess partner, no more explaining for hours on end the rules of bridge, no more having to play Go against the computer yet again. And as for the idea that men are vulnerable in such a relationship, well, love by its very nature is an exercise in vulnerability anyway, isn't it?
Then, I started reading the Annika Sorenstam threads and the scales fell from my eyes.
Hmmm. I'm not celibate and I also have no sexual disease, illegitimacy, etc.
Excuse me, I've been celibate for 5 years and it's getting old. God help a burglar at this point. I do have enough respect for myself and my kids not to run around and behave like a jackass.
Stealing a quarter and stealing a million dollars are morally equivilant -- it is transferring something that belongs to someone else to you. The morality behind sexual activity, which adults should understand, is simple: Sex withing marriage only. This makes sense from a socioligical and pratical perspective as well (amazing how morals work that way!).
Are you telling me that I can never have a relationship with a man ever again unless I'm married to him? BAH! I've had all the kids I'm going to have. I have a granddaughter for pete's sake. It's time for me to move on, if certain people would let me. Heck even my 15 yr old son told me I should think about dating again. He probably wants to get me out of the house so he can party ;-)
I am speaking of something called principles here. These are missing in the USA and in your arguments (assuming you are making arguments here and not just whining). This is not an attack -- I am merely pointing out that your activities are part of the milleu from which sprang Bill Clinton and provide cover for Hillary.
I have principles. I don't whine. Don't compare me to Bill and Hill, because those are fighting words....
Judge not lest ye be judged yourself.
I'm quite certain you are correct. On the other hand, celibate people, particularly teenagers, with every good intention to remain so end up in pretty much the same prediciment
Hmmm. I wonder if God took that into consideration. /sarcasm/. I hear this excuse, even from guys who want a piece of me. To be looked at like a piece of meat to be tested I find revolting. (No, I am not that good looking.) For too many the prevailing line of thought, if it would be considered thought, is the piece of *ss is more important than the person it contains. Shouldn't it be something that is experienced and worth waiting for after marriage? If 2 people are that compatible on all other levels, how could it not be possible sexually? Or that they couldn't work it out sexually after? That line seems to me to be an excuse to make it ok, when you believe it to be against how you were brought up, or against your own morals, IMHO.
Touche'
There ain't too many ballplayers around with bow-wows as wives. I have been a baseball fan for thirty years, and a rule of thumb is that if an all-star athlete's wife blends in with the crowd, she's on the way out. Within a few years, an eye-popping former, current, or wannabe model will take her place.
The only exception to this rule I have ever witnessed is Kurt Warner, whose wife is not unattractive, but has the look of an Arena Football League QB's spouse rather than that an NFL MVP with a Super Bowl ring. Warner is a born-again guy who was just happy to be sitting on the bench when fate intervened. In coming years, we will see if success changes him -- I hope not.
I wonder how [Palmeiro's wife] feels about him doing these Viagra ads. Surely he doesn't need the money.
Who "needs" the kind of money ballplayers make? Come on. I would hope that for all the ribbing that Raffie takes, his pay for being the face of impotence would bring him to within a few mill of what his fellow Rangers infielder Alex Rodriguez makes.
Palmeiro's only got a few years left on the diamond, but he's going to be the Viagra poster boy for years to come, especially if he makes it to the Hall of Fame. Look at the way Nolan Ryan's still plugging Advil years after his retirement, and how much play Joe DiMaggio got out of Mr. Coffee ads well into his sixties. And George Foreman is making tons more money with that grill than he made getting punched in the face for a living.
I've been waiting for someone to say it, and so far, no one has, so here goes:
Thanks, everybody, I'm here all week.
Sammy Sosa, in his latest apology, said he doesn't understand why everyone is so angry about the cork incident. "I don't see anybody getting mad about Rafael Palmeiro corking his bat!"
Decent? Probably. Self-absorbed beyond belief? Definitely.
Why "non-marriage"? Why not marriage? I ain't a shrink, but to me, it's common sense: If people who claim they are dedicated to each other refuse to make it official, they are afraid of how the official designation will change either their bedmate or themselves.
If marriage is "only a piece of paper", what is the deadly fear of it? That's actually a reason to GET married, not to refuse to marry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.