Danfun128 said:
As I have mentioned in a different thread, my parents are hard Christian right. When I was in middle school and early high school, I blindly followed their ideology. Now that I am questioning everything, I am curious about what you think of sexual purity and abstinence. Maybe it's indoctrination, but I think that sex should wait until after marriage. Do you believe that "atheist abstinence" is an oxymoron, as if abstinence is strictly a religious thing? Can something (like marriage) be sacred without God? If there is no God, is marriage meaningless?
This is a fair question. Certainly atheism describes only a state of belief in the absence of a god so nothing might bind all atheists to a given perspective, but as you are questing after my own personal views, allow me to proffer an appropriate response:
Three items should enter into any discussion on the topic of sex and marriage:
The psychological well-being of the man; the psychological well-being of the woman; the psychological well-being of the children.
Given that a woman has limited child-bearing years and limited resources available for procreation in general, it seems reasonable to understand why a monogamous marriage state might be her preferred choice.
Given that a child has the maximum prospect for normal growth under as stable an environment as possible, it equally seems reasonable to understand why a monogamous marriage state might be its preferred choice.
Now enter in the man. Most males seemingly have relatively little difficulty with a concept of procreating with as many females as they should desire, and appear to suffer little long-term consequences to their psychological state as a result, so it might at first appear that the natural course for a man is a poly-amorous situation.
But my own consideration is that if a man is more than his needs--indeed if a man is more than a self-absorbed shell--he must allow for more than mere physical desires.
For a man, a monogamous marriage may be considered difficult, but no more so than any of the numerous sacrifices one is often willing to make for those one might love. Further, it is not without rewards: it provides for a deeper relationship with his spouse and a more dedicated attitude towards his children.
So to return to the original question, in order to consider whether pre-marital sex should be discouraged in the mind of an atheist, one must first consider one's end goal.
If one is seeking a permanent, monogamous marriage, is it not probable that if one is able to show self-restraint before marriage one may be better relied upon to show its equal afterwards?
Further, is not the definition of character the ability to do that which is difficult, but which might serve to advance a cause which might be considered worthy?
And finally, if a man is to convince a woman that he is of a quality that should award him a marriage with her, should he not first demonstrate his strength, resilience, honesty, and commitment to her long-term happiness by doing sufficient battle with his own nature to prove that such a fight might be won on future fronts?
For if a man might be capable of wrestling with his very strong desire to mate and flee, is he not proving foremost to himself that this relationship is of sufficient importance to warrant such difficulty, as well as demonstrating that he, and not his nature, are the true master?
So if one is wondering if marriage is but a paper in the eyes of an atheist, all that might be possible for a response from this poster is that while it may be so, is not the individual with whom one is entering into such a commitment, as well as their future progeny, far more important than the freedom made available from an absence of godly consequences to constantly seek greener pastures?
Essentially, it is not the fear of the wrath of god which should drive the atheist in this matter, but a sincere desire to serve those whom he professes to love.
...and is it truly a man who might stand before you who might later claim that he no longer loves his spouse and so should no longer honor his commit to her? For is it reasonable to solely honor commitments to those we love while only in the act of loving them?
If so, must one love all of one's business associates as well to remain faithful to one's contracts?
