Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Multiple personality disorder?It's not about the shape of the relationship, but the content of the obligations. Married people owe each other their entire beings. It is impossible to give everything of yourself to two different people.
It's not about the shape of the relationship, but the content of the obligations. Married people owe each other their entire beings. It is impossible to give everything of yourself to two different people.
Why? It's not as if you are physically giving yourself.
Yes, you are: that's the most obvious implication of 'one flesh.'
Yes, but it's a metaphorical giving.
It is also a literal giving. Once you are married, you owe your body to your spouse, and exclusively to your spouse.
Agreed.What exactly do you mean by "owe your body"? Because I'm married, but my body remains my own. Other people have access to my body for a variety of reasons and uses, so it is not hers exclusively.
What exactly do you mean by "owe your body"?
Your flesh is your wife's flesh, and vice-versa. When you do something that harms your body, it harms your spouse. When you decide what to do with your body, your decision should also take into account how that will affect your spouse, because she also has to live with the potential consequences. And, in case this wasn't obvious, you're under a mutual obligation to give sexual pleasure whenever the other needs it.
I have never ever seen a marriage that works like this. Especially the last sentence. Nobody should be obliged to have sex with someone else.
If you're not willing to fulfill someone sexually, then you should not make a promise to them that entails not having sex with anyone else. Similarly, and relevant to this thread, if you cannot be sexually fulfilled by a single person, you should not promise to have sex with only them: that's lying to them.
Every successful marriage I've seen has featured mutual sexual obligation--and yes, that does include having sex sometimes because the other person is in need. Most marriages' problems either start with refusal in that area, or get worse when other problems do leak into the bedroom.
Your flesh is your wife's flesh, and vice-versa. When you do something that harms your body, it harms your spouse. When you decide what to do with your body, your decision should also take into account how that will affect your spouse, because she also has to live with the potential consequences. And, in case this wasn't obvious, you're under a mutual obligation to give sexual pleasure whenever the other needs it.
If you're not willing to fulfill someone sexually, then you should not make a promise to them that entails not having sex with anyone else. Similarly, and relevant to this thread, if you cannot be sexually fulfilled by a single person, you should not promise to have sex with only them: that's lying to them.
Every
successful marriage I've seen has featured mutual sexual obligation--and yes, that does include having sex sometimes because the other person is in need. Most marriages' problems either start with refusal in that area, or get worse when other problems do leak into the bedroom.
To answer the veiled flames here, I'm getting married in 3 months, and the view of marriage I'm describing here is very clear in a.) the Bible's commands to married couples,
and b.) every single piece of advice (including premarital counseling) we've gotten from successful married couple--both Christian and non-Christian.
My future wife wholeheartedly agrees with my view on the subject, especially because we have both seen several marriages fail because of an improper view of both the importance of sex within marriage and the emotional consequences of denying one's spouse. It's a view based on both Scripture and the hard data.
I think, though, that you've all gotten at the underlying divide in this thread. If you think of sex as just an activity, of course you don't care with whom you have it or how many people. If you think of sex as God intended it--as the single most intimate thing two people can do together, where you give yourself to someone fully and freely--then polyamory clearly isn't a healthy lifestyle.
I think, though, that you've all gotten at the underlying divide in this thread. If you think of sex as just an activity, of course you don't care with whom you have it or how many people. If you think of sex as God intended it--as the single most intimate thing two people can do together, where you give yourself to someone fully and freely--then polyamory clearly isn't a healthy lifestyle.
Skaloop said:Every couple you've asked has said that if you want sex one night but your wife doesn't then she has to have sex with you anyway?
I disagree. I have been in a monogamous relationship for four years as of July 29th and I do view sex as just an activity.
Is it the single most intimate thing two people can do together? Maybe, but I find the emotional intimacy so much more important than physical intimacy.
Whenever someone makes the claim that they can have sex with no emotion at all,
To be more accurate: they all said that there would be nights when one of us wanted sex and the other did not, and that the former should give the latter unless there was a legitimate reason not to (and "not turned on yet" is not a legitimate reason).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?