When I was growing up, there were certain words in my family that were considered swear words. Surprisingly, when I was serving in Ireland I had a conversation with Elder Pixton about the words I had always considered swear words. He made fun of me because I'd been raised to think "bastard" and "hell" were swear words. Pixton told me that his grandpa lived with his family when he was younger and always used those words in casual conversation. As a result, they weren't considered "swear words", necessarily. I thought it was funny how two people with similar religious backgrounds could be so different when it came to what we considered "right" and "wrong"... or maybe, "acceptable" and "not acceptable". I thought "bastard" was a worse word than "dick" because I'd been raised to think that "bastard" was a swear word and "dick" was a garbage word. That's what we called them. Garbage words. "Dick" was in the same category as "butt hole" and "wiener face".I guess I shouldn't have been surprised when I found a similar phenomenon with Law of Chastity stuff. Everyone in the church knows that "sex" is wrong when you do it before marriage. But when some people think about "sex", they think about "intercourse". When someone else thinks about "sex", they also include oral sex. So many people in our church have been raised with the same General Conference talks and same church magazine articles, but for some reason... they have different ideas about what is included in the definition of "sex".
It's not that any truly faithful members kid themselves into thinking that only "intercourse" is bad. We all should know that pretty much everything leading up to intercourse should also be avoided... except for vertical cheek and forehead kissing before 11pm in a public place.
I also realize that there is the whole "spirit of the law" vs "letter of the law". I don't know for certain, but I can imagine the Bishop's Handbook has very specific guidelines about how a bishop is supposed to handle intercourse out of wedlock. But I doubt the handbook is specific regarding every single moral and sexual transgression. It's probably just a series of suggestions... letting the bishop decide, with the help of the Spirit, how to handle any given situation. So I don't even know that bishop's, themselves, have phrases and terms followed by specific definitions of what each action is comprised of. That would actually be pretty gross.
So can a person engage in oral sex and still consider themselves a virgin? Some people would laugh at the thought. Of course he's not a virgin. He got a B.J.! But what if that person has never considered oral sex as "sex"? He's always purposely refrained from having sex, telling himself that he wants to be a virgin when he gets married. Does his definition matter at all? Or is it only your definition that matters?
Calvin
63 comments:
It is interesting how some people think oral doesnt "count" and to me oral is the same if not more intimate. I think the personal definition matters...some people abide by leaving both "off limits" and others use the justification that they are not the same for their own peace of mind.
A virgin is a person who has never had sexual intercourse. (That might be the official first definition on dictionary.com and 4th in Merriam Webster) Plain and simple.
My thoughts (take them for what you will):
Talking about definitions when it comes to commandments or rules is getting into a major gray area for some people. But it often comes down to one thing: justification. It is like the (frankly absurd) argument that rated R movies are ok to watch because "by definition" in another country they're allowed. (I will not go into that can of worms any further...)
Justification can get you anywhere except where you ultimately want to be. It alters the relationship between agency and accountability. And when it comes down to it, it is a not-so-white lie.
You touched on it, Calvin, but many people misunderstand the spirit of the law. They see it as a way to justify shopping on Sunday or any other way to "get out" of keeping commandments. Instead of looking for the spirit of the law to justify sins (or transgressions), how about looking to the spirit of the law to better keep the commandments? The letter of the law may only state that sex is when you have intercourse. The spirit of the law is that sex involves intimacy between 2 people. And oral sex is definitely as intimate as intercourse.
(Disclaimer: I do not advocate taking things to the opposite extreme of "...except for vertical cheek and forehead kissing before 11pm in a public place." Just be smart, people.)
Another thing about the spirit of the law. It involves the Spirit -as in the Holy Ghost. Seek the spirit in your questions as to what is the spirit of the law. In order for the Spirit to teach, you need to be worthy of it's guidance and in tune to it's language.
You all have your agency and ultimately will make your own decisions. Just make sure they are the right ones. And you can know if they are the right ones by consulting with the ultimate Source of Truth.
I can't even believe you are asking that question...
What church were you raised in?
Calvin. Are you being serious? I can't believe you right now.
Do you not listen in General Conference to the words of the Prophets and Apostles on these matters? Do you not listen in Institute or other Religious meetings that take place?
Maybe you should go to LDS.org and search for these things yourself, instead of getting other peoples biased opinions.
The word of God is better than some idiot who looks up on dictionary.com what sex is.
oh my heck. you seriously are pissing me off so badly right now.
Anon, I'm not advocating oral sex. I'm just saying that if you make that decision, YOU ARE STILL A VIRGIN.
But thanks for calling me an idiot. I haven't had a good day unless I've been called stupid anonymously on the internet.
I think anyone in there right mind knows that either of those are seriously wrong.
"But what if that person has never considered oral sex as "sex"? He's always purposely refrained from having sex, telling himself that he wants to be a virgin when he gets married. Does his definition matter at all? Or is it only your definition that matters?"
If this person wants to be a virgin when they are married they should not be putting themselves in a situation to do either. I think its your knowledge not your definition that matters in the repentance factors. You can justify your way to hell.
But Really This post , the whole Loophole post. If your going to ask questions and opinions, maybe something with not such obvious options would be intersting.
This blog is kinda loosing my interest.
Wow. I understand that you all have your religious beliefs, and I have mine as well. While mine aren't nearly as stringent as yours (or I just choose not to strictly follow them at this point in my life), I think you're all pretty judgmental. Have any of you never had any doubts as to what something truly means? People interpret things differently on a daily basis, so someone should be chastised for questioning which way to believe is the right way?
Have none of you ever looked into why someone else believes what they believe? I understand having your own faith, but I don't understand condemning someone else for questioning it. This isn't a communist society, America is about the freedom of opinion. Let Calvin at the very least question HIS OWN opinion on the subject. Seriously.
I think this is a personal line that people need to define for themselves--what your own comfort level is. Although oral sex is about as intimate as it gets, I consider virginity to be tied to intercourse.
Kelly, Anonymous 12:38, and 20 Something:
I think it's hilarious how you people don't pay attention to the actual meaning of these posts, and instead, pick out one or two things and ignore the rest.
Calvin specifically said that most of the things leading up to oral sex are WRONG! He never even hinted at oral sex being ok to do. Most of you commentors are idiots.
He asked a simple question. If you participate in oral sex, can you still call yourself virgin?
Some of you are acting like Calvin is asking if oral sex is ok. That wasn't the question.
I agree with you Bethany. This guy wasn't asking if oral sex was ok. This was just meant to be a discussion on what defines a virgin. He wasn't trying to justify anything and it's not likes he's super stupid. He knows the answer to the question he asked. Read the entire thing at least 3 times before making a stupid judgmental comment, okay??? I've learned that before haha :]
But to comment on the actual post, I've been taught in this church that you can break the Law of Chastity and still be defined as a "virgin" to the world.
I'm sorry but seriously? If you have oral sex you are still a virgin. Sorry.. that's just all there is to it. You lose your virginity when you have sexual intercourse. That means penis + vagina. Thank you for attending sex ed.
I agree - if you have only had oral sex, you are a virgin. It's a fact. Because being a 'virgin' is a worldly term right?
As Mormons, we're not about being 'virgins' - you aren't asked in temple interviews if you're a virgin, no general authorities will give talks on being a virgin, and youth leaders don't advise 'its better to stay a virgin' for the very reason that it's an ambivalent term.
We have the Law of Chastity, which is definate, and encompasses everything.
As well as the Spirit, as Calvin said.
As a side note - I always say damn & hell - they're totally not swear words to me. It would have been nice for someone to have told me they're swears in America.. When I first visited Utah I got stared at like the Devil when 'hell' slipped out.
I personally think its weird that Americans use the word 'piss' as if its no big deal. That's definately swearing for me, like 'bastard' & 'bloody'.
I answered the question towards the end of the post. "Does his definition matter at all?"
But My personal opionon, no your not a virgin if you participate in oral sex. That's what I was taught as early as 9th grade seminary and have heard it through institute and talks since.
Hey 20 Something. Do you want me to sum up your answer to that question? Here you go:
"No, Calvin. Your definition doesn't matter. Only mine does."
If you think the answer to the questions are obvious, then it's clear you don't care what anyone else thinks. In other words, the answers YOU think are "right" and "obvious" aren't quite as "right" and "obvious" to everyone else. Even those who share your beliefs.
In all technicality, I think you're no longer a virgin when you engage in sexual intercourse. But I'll still go by my own beliefs that certain things shouldn't occur before marriage. Oral sex is one of those things.
I have had oral sex and it was something that had to be confessed to my stake president and it got our temple recomends taken away for a long time. the process for repetence was difficult but i am glad that i confessed and got it taken care of. anyways the point is that it is oral SEX. you can't do it outside of marriage and be ok.
Nonsense, who am I to judge. Calvin I know you hav participated in oral SEX or you know someone that have *coughs*. We should all work out our salvation with the Lord and having lived in three continents swear words and other social convections change with location, time, and demagogue. So I use most swear words not everywhere but where I know nobody will think it is inappropriate or get offended. So who am I to tell you anything is wrong or right. If the holy spirit witness to you that it is right it is. If while performing any activity you do not feel the comfort of the spirit, it is very likely the wrong thing to be involved in. Man know thyself and develop your relationship with the spirit. Not based on your well thought-out opinion or those of others (even youe family or friends).
PS:If you don't feel like a Virgin after some horizontal NMCO-guess what you no longer a virgin. The spirit just gave you a witness.
yeah, Same answer to the question "if you have oral sex can you still consider yourself a virgin."
I can't believe he would even have to ask.
Also bit of an FYI. In middle school out here (MD) they teach that oral sex is considered sex. Sex in the title would also imply yes, it's sex. If you've had sex are you a virgin? Hmmm lets think... I say no. Just an opinion though : )
Uh oh, Kelly. Ever heard of "simulated sex"? Otherwise known as Dry Humping?
I guess by your definition that would also count as "sex", right?
If it doesn't count, then your definition isn't as cut and dry as you think.
Maybe a better question would be..."are you considered Chaste if you engage in oral sex outside of marriage?" The answer of course, would be NO.
I love Amy's answer. You can still be considered a "Virgin" to the world even when you break the law of Chastitiy. The world's view is far different than those of the LDS Church. And I agree with Darcy/Adam answer, they sum up my feelings exactly!
However, I can understand Kelly's perplexity to the question that Calvin asked, but if Calvin's asking, that means there are tons of Youth & Single Adults who are asking the same question and the question deserves an answer.
And my two cents worth, you are not a Virgin when you engage in oral sex and I could care less what the dictionary defines as a virgin.
I just think that the word "virgin" doesn't even matter in the LDS church. Like I said above, the Law of Chastity can be broken, and many people will still consider you a virgin. But will being just a virgin to the world help you on your way to the temple? Now we can't judge anyone here on their sexual trangressions-I know I certainly can't. And we can't judge anyone on their definitions of a virgin either.
But just remember, "no unclean thing can enter the temple of God." Is oral sex clean? You guys tell me..
"But just remember, "no unclean thing can enter the temple of God." Is oral sex clean? You guys tell me.."
Very well said, Amy. But if you will, please let me add "out of wedlock" to that statement.
Last night Elder Ballard urged fathers to talk to their sons about the big things facing them, including drugs, the media, preparing for missions avoiding pornography, and even sex. He emphasized that sex in marriage is a wonderful and beautiful thing (I second his words). If we teach and more fully understand the part of sex in the plan, the law of chastity is much easier to keep.
Just because it leaves you technically a virgin does not mean it leaves you guilt free. The thing I would urge you to think about is trying to explain to your future wife why you thought it was okay. Would you be okay with her giving oral to someone else, or would it bother you to know that she had ben that intimate with another guy? That's what I would caution you to think of -- you can't ask her to be a honest virgin if you aren't. Watch the double standards.
Bethany your so defensive over everyone who is going against you. Your attacking everyone. Calm down were just sharing our opinions.
Good Lord I am HOT and HORNY...
The majority of this discussion is just an argument over semantics.
I have a feeling though that everyone feels the same way on the topic.
If a guy gets BJ's from 1 or even 10 girls before he is married. If his fiance asks him if he is still a virgin... he is. He may be a dirty dirty boy, but he is a virgin.
Regardless of whether or not he is a virgin, according to LDS standards any stimulation of ones genitals to orgasm is breaking the Law of Chastity. Period. HJ's, BJ's, Dry-humping, intercourse, whatever, have fun talking to Jesus at Judgment if you think you don't have to repent exactly the same for one and not the other.
Seriously you guys. We all know all of this. Don't be so silly. Calvin... this is my least favorite post so far. Stick to stories and stop attempting to wax all intellectual and stuff. If you don't have anything interesting going on then tell us something about Nick... it's like he doesn't even exist.
-Blazzer
Any sexual intimacy outside of the bonds of marriage—I mean any intentional contact with the sacred, private parts of another’s body, with or without clothing—is a sin and is forbidden by God... All of the sexual transgressions we have discussed require sincere repentance with the participation of the bishop.
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=0e09180ec23fb010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=024644f8f206c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
The above was from Richard G. Scott. Apostle of God.
hmmm interesting....your opinion should count for.....nothing...its gods opinion that matters.....youve already had a shot at free will...look what happened...
HIlarious. It's funny to think of a bunch of people who haven't experienced sex arguing about what is and what isn't sex!!
When you have sex, you know, actual intercourse, then you will know why oral sex is not sex. It's just a completely different experience. And, regardless of what people may tell you, great sex is totally life altering and on some occasions, totally mind-blowing. For your sake, I hope you don't have to wait much longer!
Signed: a woman who waited far too long to have it and wishes she'd gotten a much earlier start!
P.S. Don't marry a girl who is uptight about sex. There are many of them in the LDS community (I would know...I used to be one!)
@Anon 12:11 -
You don't have to have cancer to have some sort of fundamental understanding of what it is about. Sex is the same way. You can have some ideas about it without even having it.
(and no, I am not saying sex is a horrible disease-this was for illustrative purposes only)
Who said we are a bunch of people who have never had sex? I am married, and I am sure there are others here too.
And to unmarried individuals reading this:
don't base your relationship on just the physical aspect. Sex is a wonderful, important, and beautiful part of marriage, but it is not the only thing. If you get married just to have sex there will come a time where the "fun" has subsided and you are left with the person you married. This is why so many marriages fall apart after a few years. When the "thrill" is gone (i.e. the Honeymoon period that lasts differing amounts of time for different couples), you see your spouse for who they are. This is when the work part of marriage comes into play, and if one or both parties was only in it for sex... No wonder 50% of marriages end in divorce.
This entire post makes me sick to my stomach. Whether or not you're still a virgin makes no difference if you're breaking the law of chastity. Seriously? I'm disgusted by your need to bring up such conversation.
I'm with Scott. To anonymous at 12:11...you're stupid. Even us unmarried individuals know that there's a HUGE difference between oral sex and intercourse. Are you encouraging sex to those of us who are unmarried, telling us it's 'mind-blowing and life altering'? DUH- that's why some of us are going to WAIT and share it with someone special. And are you suggesting that calvin stay away from chaste, clean girls? What is that all about? Trying to encourage him to find a horny slut? Uh-uh...go away.
I hope you knew you'd be attacked by posting what you did.
Umm, Anonymous at 6:49 PM, this blog is supposed to be funny. Get a sense of humor, dude!
"Calvin" did not ask whether or not oral sex was considered a sin for the unmarried. However, many of those who commented seemed to want to answer that, because we know how judgmental people can be...
I was simply answering the question. Is oral sex the same as sex? No. It is not.
And I'm not AT ALL suggesting he marry some horny slut. But the way you are raised really determines your attitudes about sex. There are many women who never embrace it as something that should be enjoyed with no inhibitions. They are "cold", if you will, because they can't let go of the idea that it's somehow shameful or sinful. And I think there are ways to figure that out before you get married to someone.
Anyway, you're a little too uptight, pal, which probably has something to do with all that pent up sexual frustration!
So, is a lesbian (who has only had oral sex with other women and no sexual intercourse with men) still a virgin?
I dated a man who had had oral sex with many different women and did consider himself to be a virgin. He knew he wasn't chaste, but he did want to save something for his future wife. I disagreed with his technicalities. Still do.
When a penis goes into a hole that is not a vagina it is called sodomy, and that would de-virginize any man or woman. If a guy has "sex" with another dude, and his penis doesn't go into a vagina, is he still a virgin? No he is not a virgin. And if he engages in sexual activity known as sodomy by giving or receiving a BLOW JOB, is he still a virgin? NO. The original Hebrew meaning of the word virgin has more to do with sexual cleanliness and has to do with a woman's devotion to her religion. I hate to burst your bubbles, but you are using the term virgin incorrectly. Being a virgin has more to do with purity than it does with sex. Read the parable of the virgins. Its meaning is one of being pure and without guile.
Sorry to be so graphic, but sometimes I am surprised any of you even have sex or are planning to when you can't even say sex WORDS OR PARTS. Stop analyzing the hell out of a pretty clear cut answer. The question is never whether you are still a "virgin" after engaging in a sex act, but are you morally clean and clearly one who engages in sexual activity of any kind before marriage is not morally clean. Get over the "virgin" thing. It isn't rocket science, but it is fun to talk about and I like it when Mormons like to analyze their way into sins of the blow job kind. It's fun to read.
@ anonymous 12:46 AM: You rock!
Wow, wacky discussion ... my opinion on the first question is that you're still a virgin in the technical sense of the word. The logic behind this? Well (semi graphic talk alert, for those out there with virgin eyes, hee hee) if a virgin guy/girl receives oral, is the virgin girl/guy who gave it still a virgin? Yes. So how can the receiver not be a virgin afterward? The same act cannot leave one person a virgin and the other not.
(PS - Has the word "virgin" lost meaning to anyone else at this point? It's like saying bubblegum too many times.)
My opinion on the second question - "Is it only your definition that matters?" - is also yes. If you've done what you need to repent and you feel good about calling yourself a virgin, go right ahead.
Honestly, I'm torn at this. On one hand, I personally do not necessarily consider oral sex as sex. BUT, I have to say that yes, you would have to put it in that same category. Why? Because whether it is or not, you should know it's wrong. It SHOULD, hopefully, give you a "bad" feeling. ha. That sounds so funny. Honestly, I'm not Mormon. I'm fine with oral sex, and sex, but I have serious disrespect for anyone who considers themselves Mormon and engages in activities such as that and tries to validate it in any way. If you think it's okay to engage in such behavior and pick right up and go on a mission, especially, I would hope your conscience would get to you. (I don't mean "you," I'm speaking generally. Dang english langage for not having a more specific words in these situations!)
So it kind of put sthings in a weird situation. Because while I personally am alright with it, I also do not claim to have the beliefs and "slate" that he claims to have. And if I were Mormon, I'm sure I would say he should not consider himself virgin. The feelings given from oral sex and those from sex should be more of a determining factor than what crevise your penis happened to enter.
I just think it's pushing the line as far as you can there a bit. I htink it's an attempt to get all you possibly can and still get to walk away screaming "I'M A VIRGIN! I'M CLEAN!!!" And I think that's a flawed thinking on the part of a little Mormon boy due to a poor technicality.
He obviously wants sex, and is willing to disrespect everything he can to still get the feelings, but be able to say "nope, my penis didn't go in THERE.... so I'm good."
Maybe you're still a virgin from not having intercourse, but you are not any better off. You are not any better than the little Mormon boy who DID have sex. You just got off on a technicality. And really, if you faced it, you never really got off on anything. You can maybe just still say you're a virgin, if you feel it's okay.
But you're still the same scum walking around having sex and saying he's active LDS as the next guy.
So yeah. The guy can think and say he's a virgin if he wants. That's okay. It's HIS interpretations, not anyone else's. But he still needs to consider that yeah, he might be able to say he's virgin, but should he really be passing the sacrament still? Should he really still think he's okay with the Lord and the Commandments just because he didn't QUITE go THERE?
Who are you guys? This is all very interesting to me. I'm trying to read guys all the time. It's looks like you are an open book. I'm glad we met.
-Rexi
Guide to Mormon boys, you aren't fooling anyone, you are a total copy cat. There are others trying to mimic and it is just so childish. "Who are you guys" like oh my gosh I have never seen this site...Bullshit.
I'm back again, but with only one comment. Is your opinion the only one that matters? I'm assuming you are saving (or at least trying) to save yourself (or at least actual intercourse sex) for your future wife. So is it only your opinion that matters on whether you're still a virgin or not? What about your future wife's opinion? If she's been refraining from sex, saving herself for you, but let some guy give her oral, would you consider her a virgin? If that bothers you, then ask yourself -- is it still only your opinion that matters? Cause in her circumstance, it wouldn't be your opinion that matters, only hers. Now what do you think?
It's not my place to judge, I just want to point it out, so I apologize for coming off as judgmental. Just wanted you to see another point of view.
I guess my once comment ended up not really being only one comment, but oh well....
What I want to know is what you think of it. Calvin has mentioned his 'scale' before. Do you think oral sex is somehow below a 10?
virgin
"Does his definition matter at all? Or is it only your definition that matters?"
I'm maybe just a little confused as to who you mean by his and your. but then it's late here and I wanted to comment so whatever I'll interpret it how I want.
I think both definitions (if you mean yourself and your furture unknown spouse) are important. I vaguely remember hearing that don't just focus on the list youre looking for in the other person but conduct yourself and be the criteria you think the other person is looking for. how would you feel to learn that your other has participated in sexual activites that still technically make them virgins.
I think oral sex is sex and that you are no longer a virgin. while no reproduction process is occuring, the intimacy and the pleasure that can only be found during sex is. I know not what the textbooks would say, but to me it means that it was. you participated in a sex act and now have experience in an area of sex.
I would like the area of sex with my other to be, as much as possible, an even playing field. with the other experienced in oral sex puts them on a completly different plane.
thank you and good night
My roommates and I have the same problem, they sometimes get really offended when I use "hell" or "bastard", but to them "prick" is perfectly ok, but where I'm from that is just as bad as like "the c word" for a girl. Anyways, as far as the virgin thing goes, I don't think oral sex takes your virginity away, but it definitely is just as serious as intercourse and should be handled with a bishop in the same manner.
My roommate totally just had a Bishops interview where he explicitly described every sexual act that is against the Law of Chastity. Needless to say, it was super awkward for her. Especially seeing as it was a limited use and her first temple interview ever.
But I think we all know whats right and wrong. I firmly believe in Spirit of the Law but I also recall hearing a talk that said that oral sex is sex. But people come up with their own definitions to appease their own conscience. I like what was said in an earlier post about how we dont lose control we choose to do things we know are wrong. Its completely true. And I think basically we all know where the line is. Just some of us choose to walk a little closer than others.
I started reading all the comments and then my brain hurt so I just sped to the bottom so I could comment.
This issue you have brought up is one you will need to deal with on your own.
What are your reasons for abstaining? sex is in the word oral sex, it causes arousal and has an end result. When I teach my daughter about the water works of sex in a couple of years.... the touching of private parts will be included. And I have decided that on my own. Not from church, not from my parents... those parts of your body are yours and you should seriously think about who gets to touch and why you are letting them.
I would hope that regardless of religion or creed, a person would have enough respect for themselves and their partner to do any sexual act when they both are comfortable and it feels right. It should be mutual and consensual.
Wow... pry my longest comment ever.
cheers and good luck!
Oral sex is definitely sex. Even if you want to argue the "it depends on a persons interpretation" it would at the minimum be regarded as heavy heavy petting which is still something that needs to be discussed with a Bishop.
P.S. I work at the MTC and I know missionaries have been sent home for oral sex. It's sex.
"My roommate totally just had a Bishops interview where he explicitly described every sexual act that is against the Law of Chastity..."
WTF kind of pervert is her Bishop. I am sorry, no I'm not, that is straight up INAPPROPRIATE! I hope he wasn't pitching a tent during the interview. Someone needs to get with their Stk. Prez and report that Bishop.
I think your question is very interesting. It is said all the time that you won't be judged for what you don't know. Granted, the church often says that oral sex is against the Law of Chastity, but what about people who are not members? What if they are just trying to do what's right, and all their life they have been taught that oral sex isn't considered sex, and is completely fine? I couldn't imagine getting upset at someone for this. Yes his definition matters. After all, who are all you people to tell him otherwise, when you just had different people in your life, teaching you different standards?
What is your definition of virgin? We know that sexual intercourse and oral sex are different. In the latter you have no chance of getting pregnant. But remember what you covenant in the temple to do? Sexual RELATIONS only with one person.
So back to the definition of virgin. Virign hasn't always meant "someone who hasn't had sex." Even back in the Lord's day, you could even refer to a married lady as a virgin. It was a description of her purity and chastity. So, are you still pure and chaste after having oral sex before marriage? You know you're not.
As for deriving morals from social beliefs, when has the Lord ever excused sins because they were acceptable by society? I have a new brother in law that converted a couple of years ago. He grew up not knowing there was any problem with sex before marriage so that was the life he lived. When he learned the truth, even though his actions were socially acceptable, he still had to confess and go through the whole repentance process just like someone who commited the sin raised in a setting where it was not accepted.
There is no justification for sin, but there is mercy for those that repent and change.
That's why the law of chastity is called "sexual relations" instead of "sexual intercourse." That one word changes everything!
Plus I know of people who have been sent home from their mission for having oral sex before their mission and not reporting to priesthood authorities until they were on their mission. That is how serious it is.
I'm not a member and after reading all of these comments definitely understand what's not allowed for Mormons before they get married, but I was curious about what the rules are after you're married? I've heard the certain things, including oral sex, are still considered sinning and against the law of chastity because they are considered "unnatural." Is that true? Hopefully this comment doesn't offend anyone or cross any boundaries...
Coming from a married mormon chick: Definitely allowed, not unnatural.
*big grin*
wow wow. okay so, oral sex is not "sex". i'm pretty sure you know what sexual intercourse is. so just because someone gets head does not mean they lost they're virginity. However, oral sex is still VERY intimate and can stir up alot of emotion and it is still against the law of chastity. trust the lord calvin. he knew what he was doing when he gave us all those rules to help us.
Well, this is coming from a different perspective than the majority of commenters here, but I would define sex as activity with two or more people that results in an orgasm. I heard this definition when The Female Orgasm came to my college, and I think it's valuable for including sex between women while excluding solo masturbation. By that definition, oral sex is sex. However, I've had oral sex, and I consider myself to be a virgin. It all comes down to your personal definition of what constitutes "sex" and "virginity."
This was all written and commented on a long time ago but if anyone gets to read this then I guess it's good I put it up.
I always strive to live by the law that our Heavenly Father is always watching what we do. If you are about to do something you would feel bad about him seeing later, than it's probably best you stop what you're doing and assess the situation before you continue any further. Anything you wouldn't do in front of you mom, you shouldn't do before your married.
Granted, no ones perfect. I've made my share of mistakes but luckily, we have the atonement for that. Anyway, just thought I would share my two cents for any meandering Internet user out there who happens to stumble upon this.
Post a Comment