A question for fellow Atheists/Agnostics: What are your thoughts on abstinence?

Question

Do you believe that it's something you would expect for yourself and your children, or do you feel differently?

I'm personally for it, and I'm agnostic.

Answer 1

Unrealistic, as Gov Palin has discovered.  

Teach it, but teach about birth control too, because teens will do it, no matter how religious they are.

You are doing your child a disservice if you do not teach them birth control also.  And who pays?  The child.

Answer 2

well no, cause that just causes many people to marry just to get laid and not see the big picture!

so no, i think one should do it when i total trust with someone.

I am also against marriage , i see it as a form of oppression  against women.

I am an atheist

Answer 3

try it before you buy it i always say.

s*x is a wonderful thing, and a great physical expression of love.

i dont first need a written contract in order to fully trust the person im with in regards to s*x.

Answer 4

I don't support it.

I think that safe s*x (emphasize safe) is a good thing.

Every human needs it, and it is important in a long term relationship.

I think that if you don't practice safe s*x, abstinence is the best way to go, but otherwise I don't see anything wrong with having s*x before marriage.

Answer 5

People can do whatever they want.

However, I do agree wih abstinence, since it is a good form of sexual responsbility.

Answer 6

Expecting all or most people to remain virgins until marriage is unrealistic.  People are simply too horny.  And I wouldn't reccomend abstinence before marriage because I believe sexual chemistry is important to a good romantic relationship and should be tested before tying the knot.  The honeymoon is the wrong time to find out your partner has erectile dysfunction or vaginismus.

Answer 7

A silly expectation at best because most of the time with hormonal teenagers it is going to take place so it is best for them to have education in ways to prevent pregnancy and disease . That goes for the ones who are promising abstinence as well doubly so for them .

The only things abstinence only education has ever brought humanity is high rates of STDs and teenage pregnancy . Many couples in the past married early to cover the fact she was already pregnant .

Answer 8

I don't mind that people wait for marriage.  It's not for me to decide how and when they have s*x.  My problem is with "abstinence-only" s*x-ed programs... because, really, that's not s*x "education".

Answer 9

I never thought abstinence from all pre-marital s*x was a good idea, at least for me, but I did see there might be some important benefits from it. I saw there were also a number of important problems it could contribute to, also.

In the end, I just did what felt natural to me.

Answer 10

In the general meaning I think everyone should abstain until they're ready.  That's something only the person can know and often people feel pressured into it early because many people around them are doing it.

However, I completely disagree with abstinence only education.  Encourage people to abstain but teach them what to do if they choose another route.

95% of Americans men and women have s*x before marriage, we *must* teach good sexual practices in addition to abstinence if we expect to keep the disease and teenage pregnancy rates acceptable.  To do otherwise is completely socially irresponsible.

I deflowered *a lot* of virgins.  Most people don't wait till they're married and I can't imagine having done so... as I'm 31 with a son (intentional on both our parts) and still have never been married :P

Answer 11

I think children should be fully educated on the (no pun intended) ins and outs of s*x, and the decision should be theirs to make.

Answer 12

well im athiest and i say that i don't care.  you your abstinenece then good for you but your missing out on the fun.  if your not then well have fun with stds and babies.  either w\ay you ******

Answer 13

I am concerned with all the STDs out and the high prospect of having children, abstinence is not a very bad choice. Religion or no religion doesn't change the fact that when you have s*x, you are having s*x with everyone the other person has ever had s*x with, too.

Answer 14

Abstinence is a choice for people who prefer it (though not for me personally). I don't see anything wrong or right about it, if that's what one feels compelled to do. Some people prefer to remain abstinent while still masturbating, others prefer to not even touch themselves sexually, and that's all fine, as it is one's body to do with as one pleases.

However, the repression of natural urges is something to take into consideration. Sexual experiences and "relief" can be an aid, health-wise and mentally/emotionally.

I think that over a period of time it can become unhealthy for some (not all) people who repress their sexual inclinations.

Also, not having had sexual experience prior to marriage could later become a serious issue in some (not all) relationships.

Ultimately, it is a personal choice, each person is an individual, and if abstinence makes some people happy, they should do what fulfills them.

Answer 15

Why is it that mankind thinks it is above nature?  We are a species of nature, it is a natural function to be curious and have s*x.  Man made up marriage, man makes up so many ideals and ideas and it seems that not one of them has beaten nature.  s*x is a natural function - unnatural is not having it or putting up barricades to what it is all about  Why is it an important ideal to abstain - it is for the priests and the preachers who manipulate truth and the natural processes in general.  Marriage no longer works, abstinence doesn't work - wonder why?  Could it be all that 'good book' morality?  It is a choice - having the desire is a choice, but there are repercussions and that is what needs to be considered.

Answer 16

I'm for the abstinence of other men. Sort of levels out the playing field...in my favor. j/k

I think that every person is ready at different times. One person might be ready and willing at 13 (as I and, well, almost every other guy I knew was) while another person might be ready later, so I think abstinence is no way to practice "safe s*x." It's just not a good idea to be unprepared for the possibility that you're going to have s*x. Anything can happen and we're programmed to procreate. Why not prepare for what our bodies are inevitably made to do??

Ultimately, though, whatever works for you...

Answer 17

I think it's a good idea to be somewhat abstinent, but that's just me. I would really like it if people were given a proper s*x education, that way when they do have s*x they're well prepared.

Answer 18

If two mature adults feel close to each other and want to explore each other sexually, then I have no problem with it.  However I do have problems with less mature people having early s*x because they don't know the risks or don't care (we all feel invulnerable at that age).  If parents would raise their children properly and if people would take necessary precautions, I don't see any real problem with pre-marital s*x.  Although if a couple choose to remain abstinent, there is nothing wrong with that either.

Answer 19

My personal opinion?

If you want to get your freak on, go for it. Have fun.

If it's between two (or more) consenting adults, nothing wrong with it. Marriage is irrelevant to the question of s*x.

Atheistically yours,

JM Gendron.

Answer 20

If I had kids...for it until they would be adults and free to make their own choices. I would definitely be stressing the thought that our own family values is that they wait until they are adults, preferably out of their teens and with someone they really do love, that it's not a casual thing. And the thought of waiting until marriage (or better, engagement...) would probably also be mentioned...

What it up with the thumbs down? I'm for them waiting until adulthood, not the stupid education thing...

Answer 21

I am against it. Marriage is a lifetime commitment, and nobody wants to make a lifetime commitment to someone and then find out that they're completely sexually incompatible with them.

Answer 22

Depends on your reasons.

Abstinence for the sake of abstinence is just an arbitrary rule you impose on yourself for no other reason but to trick yourself into thinking you're "pure" and "wholesome"

It has no practical purpose.

Answer 23

I see marriage as just a ceremony, so abstinence is not only unrealistic, but also unnecessary.

People can wait if they want, and that's perfectly fine.

Answer 24

I'm not for it. Though it depends on your definition of abstinence. I never sleep with someone until we've been together for at least six months, so it's strictly limited to long-term relationships. As far as I'm concerned, the marriage is just a formality.

I'm not sure abstinence should be promoted to young people; promiscuity should be discouraged, though. Abstinence-only supporters tend to have the idea that there's no middle-ground between the two, an argument to which I myself am a compelling counterexample.

Answer 25

And abstinance only education for every child!  It's worked very well for my family and I want it to work for yours.

Answer 26

Even when I was religious I thought it was a bad idea to absolutely restrict one's sexual activity until a totally arbitrary event (marriage.)

My choice was always to safely experiment with s*x.  I never believed that it was a sin that would condemn me when I was religious.  Now that I am not religious I am even more in favor of people doing what feels natural to them, so long as they don't harm anybody else (including the kids they might conceive and bring into crappy circumstances before they're ready to provide for a family.  That's my long way of saying, get on the d**n pill and use a d**n condom.)

I don't have children and don't want to, but I am very involved in the raising of my nephew.  My sister shares my beliefs about just about everything, including atheism.  She plans to raise her son to know that sexual feelings are normal, and that it's okay to be sexual as long as you know the possible consequences and take responsibility for your actions...and protect yourself and your partner.  I will support her in this, obviously, and if my nephew came to me at the age of 14 or 17 or whatever and asked me how to get condoms, I'd tell him I was proud of him for being responsible and let him know that he can ask me any questions about s*x that he needs to ask.

Answer 27

I think that it is kinda silly.  I think s*x is very natural, and while I don't think its something that should be taken lightly, I think that if you feel comfortable with the person and it is consensual and safe then there is no reason not to do it.  I think it is very important to be smart and safe, but not necessarily abstained from altogether.

Answer 28

It really depends on the nature of one's relationship or sexual desires. If I desire to have s*x with someone whom I value but aren't necessarily in a relationship with, I probably would, and I'd be sure to use protection. If I ever become a parent, I wouldn't expect much different from my children. What they do sexually would be their business, but I would not tolerate it if they weren't applying common sense.

I don't see any value in "waiting until marriage."

Answer 29

You have more willpower than I do m'dear.

I haven't made up my mind whether I'd want to get married or not. As for s*x... well there I have made up my mind.

I do think it's a good idea to encourage abstinence for teenagers just because they're not quite mature enough to handle sexual relationships, emotionally or in terms of responsibility, though I also believe in comprehensive s*x ed. But once people reach early adulthood, I think a s*x life before marriage should be an option.

Answer 30

I think it's a personal choice. If a person does not want to wait until marriage and they are of consenting age and could find another person of consenting age that feels the same, then so be it. BUT if they wish to wait until marriage, then that's their choice. No one should be forced to wait if they feel they are ready and they are of consenting age.

Answer 31

Doesnt work isnt natural shouldnt be taught.  IMO abstinence is the fastest way to ensure your kid will get knocked up or an STI so...  We should take a responsible adult approach to s*x, not hide our heads in the sand, spell it out for kids and adults alike.  If some one wishes to make the choice not to have s*x fine and dandy but safe s*x should always be first and last educational method.  

Oh, but marriage isnt everyone's goal.  Shouldnt be held in such high regards related to s*x.  Most s*x happens outside of marriage anyway, and the best is never within the confines of marriage.  Hahaha