More souls go to hell for sins of the flesh than for any other reason
#41
(02-20-2010, 10:27 AM)timoose Wrote: From here on out I'm going to be blunt. The 50's and 60's were not golden but immensely better than today. For instance sexual intercourse did not start at 14 for hardly any one. Boys did not get laid on the Prom.

Oh of course they did!

The only difference between then and now is that our generation celebrates it while theirs practiced a bit of discretion.
Reply
#42
(02-21-2010, 03:57 PM)Satori Wrote:
(02-21-2010, 11:57 AM)anamchara Wrote: Likewise, an unmarried couple in the throes of passion can easily rationalize succumbing to the act.  Whom are they hurting?  They can only be hurting themselves, they tell themselves.  In the throes of passion, they're usually willing to take that chance.  (Adulterous acts are completely different, as the married party is violating a solemn vow he or she made to another person, i.e., his or her spouse.)     

They could be hurting the child they might conceive. They are also guilty of putting each others' souls in mortal jeopardy. I can't take the sin of fornication so lightly, although the great temptations people in our present culture have to suffer probably lessens their culpability when they commit this sin.

I'm assuming the couple is taking precautions not to conceive a child.  You're right about their putting each other's souls in mortal jeopardy, with or without the precautions, and I don't take the sin of fornication so lightly.  I'm just exploring the dynamic behind the ready rationalizations for fornication vis-a-vis other sins, e.g., stealing. 
Reply
#43
For my generation almost no one started sexual intercourse before graduation from high school. I was in that age in the fifties. It became different in the sixties.  There were no coeducated schools, and there was no TV constantly pushing toward the premature sex.

(02-21-2010, 06:12 PM)BrendanD Wrote:
(02-20-2010, 10:27 AM)timoose Wrote: From here on out I'm going to be blunt. The 50's and 60's were not golden but immensely better than today. For instance sexual intercourse did not start at 14 for hardly any one. Boys did not get laid on the Prom.

Oh of course they did!

The only difference between then and now is that our generation celebrates it while theirs practiced a bit of discretion.
Reply
#44
(02-21-2010, 08:30 PM)glgas Wrote: For my generation almost no one started sexual intercourse before graduation from high school. I was in that age in the fifties. It became different in the sixties.  There were no coeducated schools, and there was no TV constantly pushing toward the premature sex.

"almost no one"?  Then why the heck did religious orders have homes for unwed (Catholic) mothers?  Why were orphanages and adoption agencies packed?  Do you REALLY believe that premarital sex was a phenomenon  unheard of until 1965? 

If we're going to play the anecdote-for-fact game, I grew up in a very conservative family and I personally know two good Catholic women (one in her late 60s and one in her early 70s) who "had to get married"  (Married in the 1950s, fwiw)

Reply
#45
(02-21-2010, 08:47 PM)BrendanD Wrote:
(02-21-2010, 08:30 PM)glgas Wrote: For my generation almost no one started sexual intercourse before graduation from high school. I was in that age in the fifties. It became different in the sixties.  There were no coeducated schools, and there was no TV constantly pushing toward the premature sex.

"almost no one"?  Then why the heck did religious orders have homes for unwed (Catholic) mothers?  Why were orphanages and adoption agencies packed?  Do you REALLY believe that premarital sex was a phenomenon  unheard of until 1965?   

If we're going to play the anecdote-for-fact game, I grew up in a very conservative family and I personally know two good Catholic women (one in her late 60s and one in her early 70s) who "had to get married"  (Married in the 1950s, fwiw)

You and glgas are not from the same country. That might have something to do with the different norms.

But even your anecdotal evidence is telling: Those women you knew  got married. Now when I say even to good Catholics I know that pregnancy seems to me a good reason to get married, they laugh at me.
Reply
#46
(02-21-2010, 09:05 PM)Satori Wrote: You and glgas are not from the same country. That might have something to do with the different norms.

But even your anecdotal evidence is telling: Those women you knew  got married. Now when I say even to good Catholics I know that pregnancy seems to me a good reason to get married, they laugh at me.

Sure they got married but that speaks to my earlier point.  People fooled around before marriage but they were discreet about it.  It wasn't a morally neutral act.

If people didn't fool around (in and out of wedlock) there would have been no homes for unwed mothers or even, you'll excuse me, whorehouses prior to 1965.  C'mon, it's naive to think that pre and extramartal sex is a modern phenomenon.
Reply
#47
for the poster whos mind is stuck in the gutter, get to confession as often as you can, every day if need be.  Find a spiritual director who can help you get freed from this demonic opression of lust.  If its porn you are stuck on there are some catholic websites to help you break free of this.  Fr Larry Richards has a book called "Be a Man" which is a good start, also "Man to Man" by Fr. James Farfaglia.  
Pray to our Lady for protection against these sins. :pray2:
Reply
#48
.
Reply
#49
(02-21-2010, 09:29 PM)BrendanD Wrote:
(02-21-2010, 09:05 PM)Satori Wrote: You and glgas are not from the same country. That might have something to do with the different norms.

But even your anecdotal evidence is telling: Those women you knew  got married. Now when I say even to good Catholics I know that pregnancy seems to me a good reason to get married, they laugh at me.

Sure they got married but that speaks to my earlier point.  People fooled around before marriage but they were discreet about it.  It wasn't a morally neutral act.

If people didn't fool around (in and out of wedlock) there would have been no homes for unwed mothers or even, you'll excuse me, whorehouses prior to 1965.  C'mon, it's naive to think that pre and extramartal sex is a modern phenomenon.

I agree with you. To clarify, my point was that although people had the same temptations and weaknesses then, at least they had standards. They knew they were doing wrong, and probably more of them at least tried to "fix" what they'd done afterwards, whether by getting married, giving the baby up for adoption, or just keeping their mouths shut. Now we have women boasting to strangers than they had abortions -- anyone remember the "I had an abortion" ad taken out in the paper a few years back, and other such shameless things?

Also there was no casual acceptance of perversions then, from what I understand.
Reply
#50
(02-21-2010, 09:29 PM)BrendanD Wrote: If people didn't fool around (in and out of wedlock) there would have been no homes for unwed mothers or even, you'll excuse me, whorehouses prior to 1965.  C'mon, it's naive to think that pre and extramartal sex is a modern phenomenon.

Have to agree with that. I mean, it's not like I was there..... but come on. The French military officially sponsored some war brothels (Bordels Mobiles de Campagne) in both World Wars, all the way up to the Vietnam War. And of course, sexual slavery in Nazi Germany goes without saying.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)