CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Yes Sex before marriage is wrong because it is a sin. Here is why it is a sin.
Question: "What does the Bible say about sex before marriage?"
Answer: There is no Hebrew or Greek word used in the Bible that precisely refers to sex before marriage. The Bible undeniably condemns adultery and sexual immorality, but is sex before marriage considered sexually immoral? According to 1 Corinthians 7:2, “yes” is the clear answer: “But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.” In this verse, Paul states that marriage is the “cure” for sexual immorality. First Corinthians 7:2 is essentially saying that, because people cannot control themselves and so many are having immoral sex outside of marriage, people should get married. Then they can fulfill their passions in a moral way.
Since 1 Corinthians 7:2 clearly includes sex before marriage in the definition of sexual immorality, all of the Bible verses that condemn sexual immorality as being sinful also condemn sex before marriage as sinful. Sex before marriage is included in the biblical definition of sexual immorality. There are numerous Scriptures that declare sex before marriage to be a sin (Acts 15:20; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13, 18; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7). The Bible promotes complete abstinence before marriage. Sex between a husband and his wife is the only form of sexual relations of which God approves (Hebrews 13:4).
Far too often we focus on the “recreation” aspect of sex without recognizing that there is another aspect—procreation. Sex within marriage is pleasurable, and God designed it that way. God wants men and women to enjoy sexual activity within the confines of marriage. Song of Solomon and several other Bible passages (such as Proverbs 5:19) clearly describe the pleasure of sex. However, the couple must understand that God’s intent for sex includes producing children. Thus, for a couple to engage in sex before marriage is doubly wrong—they are enjoying pleasures not intended for them, and they are taking a chance of creating a human life outside of the family structure God intended for every child.
While practicality does not determine right from wrong, if the Bible's message on sex before marriage were obeyed, there would be far fewer sexually transmitted diseases, far fewer abortions, far fewer unwed mothers and unwanted pregnancies, and far fewer children growing up without both parents in their lives. Abstinence is God’s only policy when it comes to sex before marriage. Abstinence saves lives, protects babies, gives sexual relations the proper value, and, most importantly, honors God.
You should downvote yourself for copy and pasting an argument without crediting the source. That's called stealing. I think that's a sin or something.
It's a moronic diatribe anyway, I have no idea why you'd choose to post it on a debate site. It's written by the religious indoctrinated for the religious indoctrinated, nothing more.
What if a married couple can't have kids because one or the other is impotent? Is it then a sin to have sex?
If it's not then why is it a sin for someone else to have sex without having kids?
There are quite enough children in the world, and any god who would deny one utterly and completely harmless sex for no reason but "because I said so" is not at all worthy of worship.
And there are millions of couples not married who do fine raising kids, better than many traditional christian parents in fact judging by how dumb these christian kids grow up to be.
Its not called stealing. I go to that website because it has good Bible answers
Well it was a Bible answer. Did you know that when Daniel was in the Bible Podifers wife wanted to have sex with him and he kept saying no. Podifers wife ripped a part of Daniels clothing and Daniel and Podifers wife was alone and no one saw them and so Podifers wife told the people and Daniel was commited of rape. Thats why you shouldn't have sex before marriage because the person can charge with rape if you and the only person is there they can charge you of rape.
Also the person can leave you at any time and leave your house and never come back again and then stuck with a child.
you do realize that the Bible can't even make up it's own mind on anything, except that people are idiots. Nothing in it makes a lick of sense, and it contradicts itself on every page. You can support anything by quoting the Bible. Literally anything, it's given support for slavery, genocide and draconian law, and I don't mean that pussy draconian law, where you can be arrested for cursing, I mean real draconian law, where missing the toilet gets you stoned to death. It's in there, read Deutoronomy. It's makes far more sense to up and abolish age of consent, it benefits no one and costs millions to maintain. Hell, marriage itself is evil, it's motivated by envy, not love. The desire to own someone, not to be loved.
Marriage is not evil. God see's the man and the women as one in the flesh. He said that the husband and wife are together as one. Marriage is not evil its the person's descision on whether or not to get married or not. Paul wasn't married and he said that if your not married you can get closer to God. But when you get married and have kids you have to take care of them and pay the bills and to all sorts of stuff and you get little time with God.
You have no idea what god does or does not see, or even whether he does or does not exist. You're a parrot repeating things you've heard, nothing more.
Come up with actual arguments why if you want to debate. This isn't a christian fellowship site where you just take turns quoting some silly book, it's a debate site...
and I was shocked to see your profile says you're 14, it's time to learn something. Try reading a few books besides Dr. Seus and the Bible. I assumed you were about 8 from your arguments before looking. Literally my niece in 2nd grade puts forth more coherent arguments than you do. I'm not flamming either, I'm trying to help you. For your own good work on getting smarter.
Let me ask you something just because you cant see something doesn't mean it exists, Have you seen wind,gravity,oxygen,atoms,molecules,have you seen any idea's?
I do know what God does why don't you read Mathew,Mark,Luke,and John it tells when Jesus Christ came down on this earth to pay for our sins. God is everywhere you cant hide from him he is always watching everyone including me and you. Those 4 Gospels are 4 different people with four different testimonies on what they saw saying the same thing that Jesus is God and He died for our sins,and if you believe in him you will be saved. If you saw a car accident happen and you gave a police a report it will not be the same as a another person who saw the same thing it will be slightly different but saying basically the same thing who was at fault. How do we know that you exist? 200 years from now someone can say that you do not exist and what evidence do we have to prove that you existed 200 years ago. We have records that state that you exist and there are witnesses that prove you exist. Its the same thing with the Gospels.
I have learned something that Jesus was God and he came down to earth to show how to live life properly and how to get to heaven and Jesus talked what God did so we do know what he does and what he is like.
I know your not flamming you said you were trying to help me but how can you help me when you think God's word is not true and God doesn't exist. No one has shown me that there is solid evidence that there is no God. But I have seen evidence that there is a God.
Let me ask you something just because you cant see something doesn't mean it exists, Have you seen wind,gravity,oxygen,atoms,molecules,have you seen any idea's?
You can feel and measure wind and gravity. Oxygen is evident in nature, we can even see it on a molecular level. Similarly you can see atoms and molecules in a lab. Further all of these things are measured and mathematically evident. None of this is true for any sort of god.
I do know what God does why don't you read Mathew,Mark,Luke,and John it tells when Jesus Christ came down on this earth to pay for our sins. God is everywhere you cant hide from him he is always watching everyone including me and you.
I've read the bible many times, even studied it and obviously understand it much better than yourself. The bible contradicts itself at nearly every turn. There is absolutely no proof that Jesus came down for our sins or that a god even exists. You've not provided an ounce of proof. Saying something over and over does not make it true so begin offering actual arguments and stop with the preaching. You are not helping your case at all with this argument.
Those 4 Gospels are 4 different people with four different testimonies on what they saw saying the same thing that Jesus is God and He died for our sins,and if you believe in him you will be saved. If you saw a car accident happen and you gave a police a report it will not be the same as a another person who saw the same thing it will be slightly different but saying basically the same thing who was at fault. How do we know that you exist? 200 years from now someone can say that you do not exist and what evidence do we have to prove that you existed 200 years ago. We have records that state that you exist and there are witnesses that prove you exist. Its the same thing with the Gospels.
This is patently false. Mark was the first book written of the gospels, and another unknown source referred to at least in my courses as O. Neither was written until hundreds of years after Jesus supposedly existed. They are copies of copies of translations of translations handed down mostly by word of mouth until they were compiled by these sources. Matthew, Luke and John simply rewrote from these two sources. Not a single thing was written about Jesus during the time he was alive, not a single word. In all likelihood he never existed and the entire thing is an adaption of the book of the dead - right down to Jesus being a carpenter it is eerily similar.
I have learned something that Jesus was God and he came down to earth to show how to live life properly and how to get to heaven and Jesus talked what God did so we do know what he does and what he is like.
You've learned nothing. You've believed what youv'e been told for no apparent reason and even made assumptions sure, but that is not knowledge, it's mimicry. You're a good parrot perhaps, but what you are repeating over and over is senseless, both without proof and without any logical platform.
I know your not flamming you said you were trying to help me but how can you help me when you think God's word is not true and God doesn't exist.
Telling you to question existence is helping you. Pretending there were a god, which I do not believe, but even pretending, if he were all knowing and all powerful and good, he would not want you simply repeating things like a parrot. That's what parrots are for. I'd imagine if the Christian god existed he'd be quite disappointed in the Christian general lack of use of the greatest gift, a brain.
No one has shown me that there is solid evidence that there is no God. But I have seen evidence that there is a God.
Proving a negative is impossible. I might as well say "I've seen no evidence elves riding unicorns don't exist therefore they exist." When making a claim of existence it falls upon the claimant to prove existence. You haven't seen evidence of god, you simply feel he exists the same way a Scientologist believes in an alien being who harvests souls, the same way a schizophrenic may believe he has a chip in his head. Their ideas of what exists is no more or less silly than yours, you've just not been indoctrinated into their points of view so it seems that way.
Let me ask you something. Who is always the first people who go to the disaster sites in foreign countries that have flooded or had earthquakes and they need help? The Christian are always the first people there to help them out of there homes or pray and tell them about Christ. Where are the atheists,agnostics,the liberals? Those people don't even go to the sites where the natural disasters hit. Hollywood stars go to the site just to seek attention and to let people think that there are helping them and to let people know that they are good.
That's completely false. Non-religious and the religious of all denominations are all relatively equally charitable with their time or money in these situations.
As a percent of population I would argue, non-religious are probably more likely to volunteer for programs like red cross and other similar programs.
Speaking of helping people in need however, since you've changed the subject again,
Why is it the Christian right so against all of the social programs that help people in need? Why is it the Christian right against fixing healthcare so everyone can live longer happier lives? Why is it the Christian right who cheers at Republican debates when they mention the death penalty?
You are either woefully misled regarding the socio-political stance of your religion on actual issues that effect those in need, or you are confusing your religion with some other. Maybe your accidentally typing Christian instead of Buddhist or something.
Again, you only use a schizophrenic novel as your evidence, and you sound just as indecisive. First you say marriage is good, then you say it separates you from God, make up your mind
It is stealing. You took someone else's intellectual property and copied and pasted it without citing your source. You should apologize, or flog yourself at least for this transgression.
To your silly argument; whether some made up person in the Bible raped someone has nothing to do with anything. Consensual sex has nothing to do with rape, much less your imaginary characters.
And married people "leave the house" for the other to take care of the child nearly as often as the unmarried. It makes very little difference it seems whether one is married or not.
You didn't answer my question. If a couple knows they cannot have children due to some impotence in one or the other of the couple, is it a sin for them to have sex even though they are married?
Why don't you read what I copyed and pasted and see that it is important information. You can have sex when your married. Also if you and your partner are having sex and you are not married and no one saw you doing it the girl could go the court and say to the people your name and then they will charge with rape and there will be no evidence except for you two.
The Bible also condones slavery, sexism, shaving and forbids Christians from eating pork and shellfish, and would have all who disrespect their parents be put to death. And clothes made from two materials, which is pretty much all clothing. Don't you tell me that you haven't done any of these things and still preach about the sex in marriage, because that is cherrypicking and it is wrong.
I dont do all those stuff. I dont eat shellfish at all. Plus I dont eat shrimp or lobster. Shrimp I dont eat because its really close to the bottom of the ocean which all of the other dirty stuff goes down there. Well I do wear clothing made out of that but we moved into a society today where you need to have those types of clothing,we live ina sociey to have same sex marriage or having sex before marriage or living together before marriage. Also todays society of people dont know God or dont believe in him or just think he is doesnt exist.
husbands can also rape their wives. of course no one hopes that happens, but it does, a lot. and oftentimes it is because of that marriage that it is harder for a woman to pull herself out of a bad situation. marriage isn't the answer to everything
Do you ever get tired of being so incredibly cynical? I understand the part about the link but you really have to go out there and insult every single Christian raised by their Christian parents. There may be millions (care to cite a source) of parents who raise children successfully not married, but on average children with married parents are in a better place then those that aren't.
I realize the source isn't perfect but it gets my point across.
Cynisism can be hillarious. And if you don't see the irony of the second sentence I apologize. I enjoyed writing it too much to ignore the temptation. I've confessed to the flying speghetti monster though and accepted him in my medulla oblongata (that's where the soul lives)... I could do this all day.
Here's my problem and why I make fun of most of the overtly zealot christians here on CD:
but on average children with married parents are in a better place then those that aren't.
That has nothing to do with making sex illegal before marriage, and I dare say about your comments on Christian parents Christians participate in pre-marital sex just as often as atheists, muslims, jews etc. I'll bet around 83% of the girls I've had pre-marital sex with were Christian, amazingly that's the aproximate Christian population ._.
Many people claim to be Christian that doesn't mean they all are, it is a narrow path remember? Actually having sex before marriage can often damage a relationship, which of course would put any child in a worse position than he or she would otherwise be in.
I think sex is a form of pure pure love. Sex entirely based on lust is not good , even mentally. Sex is something so intimate that marriage best suits it. Marriage is all about extreme love. Sex is being used as a tool for pleasure and while there is nothing wrong with that it should be used with love in it, not pure lust. Really my point is that marriage is about love which leads to sex. And pre-marital sex is like a scar. Let's not forget it stops spreading diseases. A scientific reason, not a moral one.
If something doesn't harm another human being, it's not wrong. While I personally detest the lifestyle of being promiscuous, it doesn't always hurt people to be apart of such a lifestyle. Sometimes it does, in which case, it's also wrong alongside being detestable in my mind.
But having sex with someone you romantically love before a wedding... why not? You love them. Sex with someone you love, even if before marriage, at an appropriate age strengthens a relationship. There is even scientific evidence to suggest that our brains are programmed to be more emotionally attached to someone we've shared a relationship with and then had sex with.
So once again, if something does not harm another human being, it is not wrong. The very idea something could be wrong without harming another human being is just... well... silly.
If you love someone so much you would like ot have sex with them but don't want to get married is "just... well... silly". also, there is "scientific proof" that being a single mum effects the intelligence, criminal record and health of their children. If your partner leaves you then you can do nothing, and are left a single mum.
Besides, love and lust are different. Today's society are throwing their virginity and bodies round without a though as they are in "love". No. they cannot contrrol their lust.
If you love someone so much you would like ot have sex with them but don't want to get married is "just... well... silly".
You're right. I never said anything that goes against this point. I don't know why you're putting words in my mouth and disputing me in this fashion.
also, there is "scientific proof" that being a single mum effects the intelligence, criminal record and health of their children. If your partner leaves you then you can do nothing, and are left a single mum.
Once again, I did not advocate single parenting. I don't know where you're getting your argument from, because it certainly has nothing to do with anything I said.
Besides, love and lust are different. Today's society are throwing their virginity and bodies round without a though as they are in "love". No. they cannot contrrol their lust.
You're right. And? Are you actually going to make a real disputing point yet? You haven't said anything yet that has anything to do with what I said. I don't see what the point of your jabbering is.
I was saying that yes, it can hurt peopel in ways deeper than you may think. Sometimes, people like to look at things in 'context'. Ever heard of that? The single mum thing is that you are hurting both you and your kids. that is HURTING SOMEONE funnily enough. Also, the fact peopel are treatign sex like a candy bar is harming both society and people.
He or she is asking if the "legal" age to have sex should be changed to 18 and over, since that is the age one can sign into the contract of marriage I'm assuming.
I believe it's ignoring age of consent, and instead is focused on say, two high school sophomores having sex with eachother - those devils would be sent to jail or something I guess.
That's idiotic. By the same logic we must also outlaw out-of-wedlock sex between adults as well, which would be unconstitutional. Age of consent laws are intended to prevent adults from taking advantage of children. If we are to make laws they cannot be based solely on particular tenets of religion, but rather on reasons agreeable to people of all faiths or of no faith (i.e. earthly considerations).
No offense to anyone on the "yes" side, but you can't bring religion into this argument. Sure, it applies to the heavily-religious, and yes, you can reference the Bible and make the argument swing your way if it was a religious argument, BUT it isn't. This argument is over the general public, and the fact of the matter is, not everyone is a religious Christian like some of you are. So yes, sex before marriage is a sin, but it does not mean that the law should be altered just to fit your desires.
maybe as their life is built upon God, they ought to be allowed ti bring him into the argument. He is part of their life. and majority of this nation is christian.
Religion can be used as a reason why you yourself are for aor against something. However, it cannot be used as a basis for a ban or legalization that affects those that do not adhere to these religious ideas or beliefs.
You favor a dictatorship? Next, you will try to kill off the dissidents. Or, are you even aware of what that type of goverment will bring?
But really, prohibiting sex before marriage will not stop people from doing it if they really want to. In my state, it is actually illegal for a couple to have sex unless it's for procreating. People still do it. And that's where it gets personal. I know a lot of people like you who believe no sex until marriage also believe that sex is only for procreation. What a miserable way of thinking! I'm celibate, but I don't want children. People like you (unless you, heaven forbid, are not one of those people) are one reason why I don't want babies.
Why would you marry someone if you don't know how good the sex will be? (Or won't be- I don't even want to have to imagine being stuck with someone who was forever a 2 minute man) That's just not practical. Divorce rates are already so high!
so you only have sleep with someone to see how nice it is with them, and that is the main factor in deciding who to marry? "Divorce rates are already so high". this is why.
What about people who don't care for marriage, or aren't allowed to marry?
For example, my mom and her boyfriend have been together for over sixteen years. They're not allowed to have sex, just because they aren't married?
I personally don't know their reasons for not getting married, but they have been together longer than some married couples. And I seriously believe that the PROOF of commitment like that is more worthy of being able to make love than a stupid legal document, or a stupid ceremony.
Or what about gay couples? They actually CAN'T get married in some areas, so they should never be allowed to move on to that stage in their relationship?
I personally think you should be able to have sex with anyone that is worth it to you. Whether you're married or not. And whether you're going to spend the rest of your life with them or not.
No one said to make it law, only to keep the ages the same to encourage no sex before marridge. I never said anything about making it a law. Its a choice but it encourages people not to because they can get hurt from it.
Besides, if its not law HOW THE HECK can it affect gay couples as if the can't get married, its a different matter. I never mentioned civil partnerships.
Where did I talk about making a law in my argument?
And I explained why sex before marriage is okay. I said nothing about ages or anything like that, mostly because I was only replying to the second part you made as the debate title. Which, now that I'm talking about it, you fail at making a debate. There was really no question to answer, and you kind of made two topics in one debate.
And once again, I was talking about why sex before marriage should be acceptable. -__-
