Is fornication sinful?

[Хahar 🤔]

The degree of sin is not relevant to this question; the question is simply whether sex between unmarried people is inherently improper.

[Simfan34]

Almost certainly, but that doesn't stop most of us (myself included) from attempting to persuade ourselves otherwise.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Certainly one-night stands for mere sexual satisfaction, as well as prostitution, either with a single client or as part of as porn production count as sin because of the serious potential consequences of such an act, even if a pregnancy is impossible for whatever reason.Other circumstance depend upon how narrow a definition of marriage one takes.

[BaconBacon96]

What? Of course not.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Nope. "Fornication" as such doesn't exist.

[afleitch]

Not really.

[Antonio the Sixth]

No (21st century normal)

[Cassius]

No, I wouldn't say that its inherently sinful.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

No, I wouldn't say that its inherently sinful.

I'm surprised to see this response from you. Care to elaborate?

[Never]

Yes, fornication is inherently sinful.

[DC Al Fine]

Yes, especially when we consider what tends to happen to the children produced in such unions.

[Cassius]

No, I wouldn't say that its inherently sinful.

I'm surprised to see this response from you. Care to elaborate?

Well, I guess I'm of the opinion that 'fornication' is wrong when it takes the form of adultery or casual promiscuity, but, on the other hand, I think that if two people who, you know, actually love each other (or like each other, I dunno how one is to define 'love' as such in these situations), then I don't think sex outside of marriage is necessarily wrong.

The thing is, I'm not particularly well-versed in the Bible, or that knowledgeable about a lot of Christian teaching. I'll admit that. I mean, I occasionally go the Church, and I believe in God and the afterlife, but I recognise that a lot of what I do and believe in (not neccesarily on this issue, but more generally), could perhaps be argued to go against the grain of accepted Christian teaching (in my case, specifically Catholic teaching). I'm not expert on the Bible, so going from my gut I'd say extra-marital sex isn't always wrong.

Going onto a broader, and only somewhat tangentially connected point, I'm a big believer in the concept of purgatory, and, well, my own view is that I'll be spending a long time there when I die. I'm not a 'good' person (although I'd like to think I'm not a 'bad' person either), I'm a rather grey, flawed character; I occasionally attend Church and pray, but I often fail to obey Church teachings; I try to be pleasant and scrupulous in my direct dealings with others, but on occasion my behaviour falls well short of the standards set by Jesus or saints more generally. Sorry for going off track and wasting you're time listening to my rubbish, but yeah, sex outside of marriage is one of those issues where I'm, generally speaking, not sure, and thus lean towards the more lenient side of the debate (which, of course, is the side that is probably easier for me to hold to ).

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

No, I wouldn't say that its inherently sinful.

I'm surprised to see this response from you. Care to elaborate?

Well, I guess I'm of the opinion that 'fornication' is wrong when it takes the form of adultery or casual promiscuity, but, on the other hand, I think that if two people who, you know, actually love each other (or like each other, I dunno how one is to define 'love' as such in these situations), then I don't think sex outside of marriage is necessarily wrong.

The thing is, I'm not particularly well-versed in the Bible, or that knowledgeable about a lot of Christian teaching. I'll admit that. I mean, I occasionally go the Church, and I believe in God and the afterlife, but I recognise that a lot of what I do and believe in (not neccesarily on this issue, but more generally), could perhaps be argued to go against the grain of accepted Christian teaching (in my case, specifically Catholic teaching). I'm not expert on the Bible, so going from my gut I'd say extra-marital sex isn't always wrong.

Going onto a broader, and only somewhat tangentially connected point, I'm a big believer in the concept of purgatory, and, well, my own view is that I'll be spending a long time there when I die. I'm not a 'good' person (although I'd like to think I'm not a 'bad' person either), I'm a rather grey, flawed character; I occasionally attend Church and pray, but I often fail to obey Church teachings; I try to be pleasant and scrupulous in my direct dealings with others, but on occasion my behaviour falls well short of the standards set by Jesus or saints more generally. Sorry for going off track and wasting you're time listening to my rubbish, but yeah, sex outside of marriage is one of those issues where I'm, generally speaking, not sure, and thus lean towards the more lenient side of the debate (which, of course, is the side that is probably easier for me to hold to ).

All of this makes perfect sense and all, I'm just a little surprised that someone as hardline conservative as you on so many things holds this point of view. Interesting.

[politicallefty]

Yes, especially when we consider what tends to happen to the children produced in such unions.

I was a child born out of wedlock. My parents had been together for a couple years, but they didn't get married until I was almost 5. I like to think I turned out okay, and my parents are fortunately still together.

To answer the question here, no, I do not think so.

[DC Al Fine]

Yes, especially when we consider what tends to happen to the children produced in such unions.

I was a child born out of wedlock. My parents had been together for a couple years, but they didn't get married until I was almost 5. I like to think I turned out okay, and my parents are fortunately still together.

To answer the question here, no, I do not think so.

I was talking about the tendency to murder the children produced by such unions, not how the children themselves turn out.

[DC Al Fine]

To respond to the topic at large, I think liberal attitudes towards fornication are perfectly logical if one accepts a liberal basis for sex in general and marriage and divorce in particular; "being in love" as Cassius put it.

However since I reject those notions as the basis of sex in marriage, I must view fornication as immoral.

[bedstuy]

Why are you guys assuming that sex will result in pregnancy?  Ever heard of birth control?  Gay people?

As for using the Bible to say that all sex outside of marriage is wrong, that's thoroughly misguided.  The Bible was written in an entirely different context when people treated women like chattel, lived in small villages and had no birth control.  In that context, it makes sense from a societal  point of view to restrict sex to married couples. 

Today, it's perfectly normal and healthy to have pre-marital sex.  In fact, it's quite strange to abstain from pre-marital sex.  Did you know the average age of first marriage is 27?  Who is going to wait until they're 27 to have sex?  That's nuts.  Sex and relationships are so important to being happy and having a good quality of life.  It's waaay too important to sacrifice at the altar of Taliban-like religious asceticism.

[TJ in Oregon]

Well, I guess I'm of the opinion that 'fornication' is wrong when it takes the form of adultery or casual promiscuity, but, on the other hand, I think that if two people who, you know, actually love each other (or like each other, I dunno how one is to define 'love' as such in these situations), then I don't think sex outside of marriage is necessarily wrong.

What about persons of the same sex? Or is that covered by natural law since sex must be done with the telos of procreation, but not between adults of different sexes who aren't married? If marriage unnecessary for sex to be licit, what purpose does it then serve? Is it just a contract of two people who love each other? What does it mean for the two to "become one flesh" if they can licitly do this without marriage if they 'love' each other? What about masturbation? Do you think that is inherently sinful?

[Cassius]

Well, I guess I'm of the opinion that 'fornication' is wrong when it takes the form of adultery or casual promiscuity, but, on the other hand, I think that if two people who, you know, actually love each other (or like each other, I dunno how one is to define 'love' as such in these situations), then I don't think sex outside of marriage is necessarily wrong.

What about persons of the same sex? Or is that covered by natural law since sex must be done with the telos of procreation, but not between adults of different sexes who aren't married? If marriage unnecessary for sex to be licit, what purpose does it then serve? Is it just a contract of two people who love each other? What does it mean for the two to "become one flesh" if they can licitly do this without marriage if they 'love' each other? What about masturbation? Do you think that is inherently sinful?

Well, to my mind, marriage is very important, as I believe it serves a number of different roles; as a stable structure in which to bring up children, a legal contract, and yes, as an affirmation of the couple's love for each other. I think that sex is, shall we say, placed upon a higher level in God's eyes when it takes place within the bounds of marriage, but that does, in my view, not make it a grievous sin for sex to occur in certain situations outside of marriage. When we talk about 'becoming one in flesh', I take it to mean that a (theoretically) unbreakable bond has been established between the man and the woman that would not be present prior to marriage, even if the two had already being doing it.

I can't give you a more full answer because I really am not well informed enough about teachings on this particular area. As I said before, I'm far from being a perfect Christian

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Surprised to say, for perhaps the first time since Cassius joined, I actually sort of agree with him.  (And I really admire his honesty!)

Premarital sex has never been something I take lightly in spite of my liberal attitude on pretty much everything else.  Indeed, sex shouldn't be taken lightly, and I don't think one has to believe in X, Y, Z to agree with that.  It is - or at least, should be, in my opinion - taken as a strong expression of love.  And, I can't help but feel that it's given such little value nowadays what with its commercialization and popularization.  Of course, it's always been abused and taken to bizarre extremes, but we've evolved to the point where sex is merely another way of pleasing oneself.

So, I guess I can't come up with a one-word answer for this.  Promiscuity is something I will always take issue with, but it's not the be-all end-all of society and a universal condemnation of premarital sex isn't going to change much of anything.  You can be as pure as you want (or think you are) for not masturbating.  If you think abstaining from that stuff will make up for your countless other faults, good for you.  But, if that's as far as Christians are willing to go, then we really need to assess whether or not this is all worth it.

[DC Al Fine]

Why are you guys assuming that sex will result in pregnancy?  Ever heard of birth control? Gay people?

Well, I was just referring to one of the many reasons pre-marital sex is a bad idea. I'm restricticing my commentary since homosexuality is a whole other kettle of fish. As for birth control, in aggregate sex results in pregnancy.

Today, it's perfectly normal and healthy to have pre-marital sex.  In fact, it's quite strange to abstain from pre-marital sex.

Everyone is doing it? What on earth does popularity have to do with morality? I hear incest is quite popular in some parts, but it's still wrong to bang your siblings.

Did you know the average age of first marriage is 27?  Who is going to wait until they're 27 to have sex?  That's nuts. Sex and relationships are so important to being happy and having a good quality of life.  It's waaay too important to sacrifice at the altar of Taliban-like religious asceticism.

Indeed it is nuts. It's also completely irrrelevant to my point. Why is the median marriage age 27? In part because we are in a secular culture in which pre-marital sex is a given.  Ultra-Conservative Christians structure their lives differently. For example: the median marriage age in my congregation is about 21. Heck, my sister in law got married at 18.

As St. Paul said "But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion." It's your culture that makes waiting until marriage difficult, not mine.

[bedstuy]

Why are you guys assuming that sex will result in pregnancy?  Ever heard of birth control? Gay people?

Well, I was just referring to one of the many reasons pre-marital sex is a bad idea. I'm restricticing my commentary since homosexuality is a whole other kettle of fish. As for birth control, in aggregate sex results in pregnancy.

As your chart shows, there are several effective means of birth control.

Today, it's perfectly normal and healthy to have pre-marital sex.  In fact, it's quite strange to abstain from pre-marital sex.

Everyone is doing it? What on earth does popularity have to do with morality? I hear incest is quite popular in some parts, but it's still wrong to bang your siblings.

Pre-marital sex is tantamount to incest?  That's hilarious.

Did you know the average age of first marriage is 27?  Who is going to wait until they're 27 to have sex?  That's nuts. Sex and relationships are so important to being happy and having a good quality of life.  It's waaay too important to sacrifice at the altar of Taliban-like religious asceticism.

Indeed it is nuts. It's also completely irrrelevant to my point. Why is the median marriage age 27? In part because we are in a secular culture in which pre-marital sex is a given.  Ultra-Conservative Christians structure their lives differently. For example: the median marriage age in my congregation is about 21. Heck, my sister in law got married at 18.

As St. Paul said "But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion." It's your culture that makes waiting until marriage difficult, not mine.

I think under 25 is usually too young to get married.  You don't generally have a solid job or your education completed, and you're not anywhere close to emotionally mature.  You also need to figure out what you need in a relationship and dating a number of people is important for that.  If you marry someone at 18, you're likely to make a mistake because you're woefully inexperienced in intimate relationships.  It's just better to date for a few years, have some experience before you take a step like that.  You don't want to have a failed marriage by 25 or 30, that's for sure.

[afleitch]

How many people who have posted here have had sex?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

How many people who have posted here have had sex?

Well, I for one haven't, and in all honesty sex has become less and less appealing to me as time goes on, probably because I'm becoming less idle than I used to be and have better goals to think about.  So, whether I die a virgin or not is of zero concern to me.  I don't see how that discredits an honest, personal opinion, though.

[7,052,770]

That chart is kinda misleading ... people think it means "oh, condoms only work 98% of the time," and think that condoms fail once every 50 times even if used correctly.

It means that couples who have sex regularly for a year have a 2% chance of getting pregnant if they correct use a condom every time. The odds of getting pregnant with a single sexual encounter while using a condom are far less than 2%.

Let me add that I'm fully aware you didn't try to make the "2% of the time you still get pregnant with a condom!" argument, but people on your side make that false argument pretty often, so I felt the need to point it out.