He's celibate until marriage, and dates won't tolerate it

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | June 15, 2003 | Mary Mitchell

[B4Ranch]

>>Assuming that your motivation is to find the right wife forever, making sure you are sexually compatible is as important as making sure you agree on children and handling money. <<

I was wondering how many posts I would have to read before common sense entered the picture. (29) Sex is a normal part of life between married folks. I think I'm correct about this after 27 years with the same lady.

[B4Ranch]

>>I must add: " ...living in a society that is increasingly and progressively saturated, 24/7, with sexual stimulus."<<


Much to the pride of NAMBLA and the other queer organizations.

[hinckley buzzard]

But after six months, she wanted me to make a commitment. She felt if she knew we were going to marry then she could abstain. I couldn't make that promise."

Apparently there are a number of FReepers who think 6 months of dating is ample time to decide on a lifetime commitment. For some it is, but for many serious sober people, it is a minimal amount of time. The old maxim "Act in haste, repent at leisure" applies here.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Would women a hundred years ago tolerated this?

Women 100 years ago got married 10 years younger, with 15 not being an uncommon age. In fact, I knew of someone in high school who married out of 9th grade at 15. Staying celibate to 15 should not be a problem. There is no point waiting 15 more years for that one-in-a-million. That would take at least a few millennia. If you marry one-in-twenty, you've got the top 5%. You are not going to get the top 1% unless you are the top 1-2% yourself anyway.

[BlazingArizona]

I was wondering how many posts I would have to read before common sense entered the picture. (29) Sex is a normal part of life between married folks. I think I'm correct about this after 27 years with the same lady.

Further proof that my own advice works: on 6/3, it will have been 27 years together for us, too.

[cyborg]

Praise da Lawd Jayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyysus! I do believe I've witnessed a miracle. A thread that died almost two years ago has been brought back to life!

[k2blader]

Wow, a bunch of foolish FReepers arguing against abstinence. Whoddah thunkit.

[k2blader]

So it has!

I guess I won't think it's that dumb then.

[cyborg]

Some of these way back threads can be oldies but gooddies *lol*

[NYC GOP Chick]

Aha! I *knew* I'd find you on this thread! ;)

[cyborg]

LOL! Yup ;-)

[NYC GOP Chick]

Some things never change!

[mowkeka]

But if you are still celibate at 33, there is something wrong. If you look at it through a wordly perspective, yes, there is something wrong with you. But if you look at it like God looks at it there is nothing wrong. Just pick up the Bible. Plenty of God's loyal servants remained celibate their entire lives. Free love isn't so free.

[Tribune7]

:-)

[Petronski]

Praise da Lawd Jayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyysus!

I just got a mental image of you in a pearly white suit head to toe and a gold-nugget wristband. ;O)

[PurVirgo]

If the girl even implies that she either a) likes, admires, enjoys, or has ever at any point in history dated a "bad boy" she can go to hell. I will never be friends or respect or even talk to her.

News flash - I don't know of any girl that hasn't at one point in her life been attracted to, or dated a "bad boy". Myself included. I've learned my lesson, and so have most of my girlfriends... people change.

[streetpreacher]

Who is Robert A. Heinlein? What authority does he bring to the subject? On what foundation does his assertion rest? If it is just his opinion of right and wrong, then he is being morally relativistic. After all, who's to say that his definition is the right one? I could just as easily argue:

"Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily things that impede upon my own happiness. All other 'sins' are invented nonsense."

Just because murder is a sin to you doesn't mean it is to another.  And who wants to be the moral arbiter on "unnecessarily"?  What if I find it "necessary" to hurt others who "impede upon my own happiness"?  Who is Robert Heinlein to tell me I can't do that?  Who decides these moral questions?

Only One Being has the right to make a Universal Judgment on issues of sin and right and wrong and his name is not Robert Heinlein.

[Rca2000]

Oh boy, ANOTHER one of these threads, where "anything I say, can and WILL be used against me," by fellow FReepers!LOL!!

SO, all I will say, is that I too admire this man, although I do NOT really consider him "celibate" he may have "renewed" his commitment to purity, but he has NOT evidently been that way, since birth.

And, BTW-- He should had been UP FRONT about his vow of purity, with that woman he dated for 6 months, and then dumped , because he did not feel he could "make a commitment" to her. I do feel, he most likely hurt her, by his "wasting her time".

As for me, I had an AWESOME weekend, Nowhere, starting Friday at the Dayton Hamfest, and then Saturday, at the Estes auction, and then, today, at Hamfest clean-up. Acquired computer hardware, tube audio items, SS amps, Kenwood receiver, Kenwood audio scope,(in original box, WORKS!!) tubes, CRT tester, tube tester,Round BW RCA tv,5" ac/dc color tv,'67 model RCA radio,3 riders manuals, Box of digital amp boards, sub amp, and other electronic items.

[Nowhere Man]

I'll fire off a quick explaination. Robert A. Heinlein (1909-1989) was a science fiction writer with a considerable following. He wrote books like "Farnham's Freehold," "Stranger in a Strange Land," and "Starship Troopers." Politically, he leaned conservative/libertarian, he's a wee bit too libertarian for me, but I don't toss the baby out with the bathwater, he does have some good ideas where people need to be more responsible.

In "Starship Troopers," the book (1959), he did foresee the problems of libertines where they wreck society so much with their PC claptrap, we ended up with an anything goes society to where things go to pot until military veterans rose up and took over to where before one can vote, theyh ave to serve for a term in the military. That's a wee bit too far for me, but I understand the logic to where one should be responsible and have a stake in society and understand it before having a say in it. I have posted my thoughts elsewhere on this.

In "Farnham's Freehold," (1964), it is about a family that survives a direct hit from an H-Bomb which caused them to go 2000 years into the future only to find out that the Third World survived the US/USSR atomic wars and generally took over. The religion of the people the family encountered seems to be Moslem based and anybody who is from the former First and Second (Communist Bloc/Warsaw Pact) World countries were kept as slaves or at times, eaten as food. Very chilling, kept me up at nights. I remember the Third World people called their god "Uncle" and they were experimenting with time travel. Towards the end, the protagonist and his girlfriend along with their twin sons were deemed to unruly for his owner but the owner had a soft spot in his heart for him so they made him go back to our time with a homing device so they can prove time travel exists so the Third World society from the future can go back in time to get more assets to become even more powerful. Well, when they got back to our time just before the missiles fly, he didn't want to help his master and society so he took the device, tossed it onto the target of one of the nukes so it would be vaporized and hid out until it was over to go on with his and his family's life and to hopefully break the cycle that would lead to what he saw in the future. I know I left a LOT out but it was a good story.

I think Robert A. Heinlein is one of the best SF writers out there, again there are things I don't agree with him on, but he does put out a good story and makes one think at times. Of course, like all of us, he is not infallible.