Health

Sex Author: ‘Friends With Benefits’ is ‘Scientifically Impossible’

We know it to be true of cigarettes, alcohol, chocolate and a plethora of other substances, but is it really possible to be “addicted” to another human being? Author and sexual purity expert Dannah Gresh thinks so. In a recent op-ed for CNN, she describes the emotional dangers young people face when they lead promiscuous lifestyles. In discussing the increasing culture of “casual sex,” she writes:

Just like the hippie culture found a pill that conveniently removed the “inconvenience” of pregnancy, today’s hookup culture believes it has found a recipe for removing the inconvenience of emotion: friends with benefits.

Scientifically, though, that’s impossible. We know that thanks to what neuroscientists have learned about a walnut-sized mass in the brain called the deep limbic system.

The deep limbic system stores and classifies odor, music, symbols and memory. In other words, it’s a place for romance, capable of processing a splash of cologne on your lover’s neck, a particular iPod playlist or a bouquet of red roses.

Sex Author: Friends With Benefits is Scientifically Impossible

While many young people claim that they can have sex without feeling a personal connection to their partner, Gresh

says that’s impossible. This “hook up culture,” as she calls it, ignores the inherent connections sex creates and, as a result, can actually lead to emptiness and pain:

Here’s where the hookup culture starts to be a problem. What happens if you get caught up in the friends-with-benefits-game and have multiple partners? What happens when the partners you’ve become addicted and bonded to are gone?

You experience withdrawal symptoms in the emotional center of the brain.

According to Gresh, young women are particularly susceptible to depression when the “source of their addiction” no longer wants to have casual sex. According to The Heritage Foundation, “…25.3% of sexually active teenage girls experienced depression, compared to 7.7% of sexually abstinent girls.” The suicide rate is also much higher among sexually-active girls.

While Gresh points out that the average number of partners is 9.7 for college men and 7.1 for college women, she does cite research that shows a higher proportion of young people are abstaining. Still, this culture of casual sex is problematic, in her view. If she’s right — that people become addicted or bonded to those they sleep with — her view that multiple partners can impact future relationships may hold credence (after all, it’s tough to let go of all of those past connections once one finds his or her soul mate).

What do you think?

Comments (154)

1 2 3
  • LAR15
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:10pm

    We don‘t break God’s law, we break ourselves on them.

    Report Post » LAR15  
  • the_ancient
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:10pm

    I dont feel any emotional connection to my hookers….

    Report Post » the_ancient  
    • godhatesacoward
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:21pm

      good for you. you already know where your morals are. thats fine w/ me.just don’t expect me to foot the bill for you or your tramp w/ my tax dollars.

      Report Post » godhatesacoward  
    • the_ancient
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:26pm

      some women take cash, some want diamonds and gold, I prefer to just pay cash, far far cheaper in the long run..

      Report Post » the_ancient  
  • PAINESMAN
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:00pm

    that cold dead feeling the young and promiscuos folk of all ages are feeling is thier lack of morals. it might come as a surprise to some that SEX AINT EVERYTHING. get off the porn and manshow circuit and take the time to really get to know another human being. this is the essence of true love. besides,. sex is better with someone you care about. but i guess im just old fashioned..

    Report Post »  
  • LightvsDarkness
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:45pm

    Glad to have read this. You better believe its true. If you don’t, than you may already be to far gone and over come with sexual appetite born of self arousal via pornography and fornication to appreciate the grander scheme of sexuality within a faithful husband and wife relationship. Those of us who don’t struggle with this evil are counting their blessing, and we pray for those who are yet in need of understanding and strength to over come it

    Report Post » LightvsDarkness  
  • brian8793
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:44pm

    I’ve always known that friends with benefits is a myth. Girls be trippin!

    Report Post » brian8793  
  • tom
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:42pm

    Does this leave little doubt? Vote him out in 2012

    By Wes Barrett 5-31-2011
    Obama Declares June Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month

    Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/05/31/obama-declares-june-lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-pride-month#ixzz1Nz4PgPf5

    Report Post » tom  
    • OneRepublic4us
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:41am

      you think that’s bad bing Harrison J. Bounel

      Report Post » OneRepublic4us  
    • OneRepublic4us
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:47am

      That’s so sad because my sister and her husband are celebrating their 41st anniversary of marriage this June. June is traditionally the month heterosexuals get married.

      Report Post » OneRepublic4us  
  • LightvsDarkness
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:42pm

    Glad to have read this. You better believe its true. If you don’t, than it may be because you already are to far gone and over come with sexual appetite born of self arousal via pornography and fornication to appreciate the grander scheme of sexuality within a faithful husband and wife relationship. Those of us who understand it are counting our blessings and we pray for those who yet need understanding and strength to overcome sex addiction.

    Report Post » LightvsDarkness  
  • mossbrain
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:14pm

    There are 3 rings to marriage, the engagement ring, the wedding ring, and the suffer-ring. Go ahead and get fit for the old ball and chain if you like guys but sooner or later you’ll wake up next to a nagging hag that will sap the will to live right out of you.

    Report Post » mossbrain  
    • godhatesacoward
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:21pm

      it surely is’nt easy, but in the long run the good out weighs the bad.

      Report Post » godhatesacoward  
    • wisehiney
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 10:27pm

      Like all things, you get out of it what you put into it.

      Report Post »  
    • teddrunk
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 7:44am

      Not sure if you’re kidding or not. Well I’ve been happily married to the old “ball & chain” for going on 38 years. I’d still love her like day 1, she’s still the same wonderful person.

      Report Post »  
    • Red1492
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 10:02am

      Wow Teddrunk! Do you allow her to vote or even speak?

      Report Post » Red1492  
    • marjorie faye
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 2:32pm

      Mossbrain, you sound fairly shallow.

      Report Post »  
  • godhatesacoward
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:12pm

    hypersexuality, a form of ocd. weve already figured this out. its an addiction as is alcohol,heroin,crack,meth and so on. If you find your “soulmate” and are not willing to forget your other mates then your so called “soulmate” is not. the gov’t does not need to spend any money to research this. its already been done.

    Report Post » godhatesacoward  
  • Freedom Keeper
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:04pm

    I don‘t know if it’s just my computer but the articles keep jumping into one skinny column on the right.

    Report Post »  
  • Vie_En_Ras
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:40pm

    Not a surprise. I haven‘t met one person with multiple partners who isn’t actually wanting something more. So glad I waited.

    Report Post » Vie_En_Ras  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 7:41am

      And yet there‘s plenty of people that waited for sex that have terrible sex lives and don’t know how much better it could be. I know them. I’m friends with them. I feel terrible for them, since you only get to marry one person in life (ideally), and they bought a losing lottery ticket in life. One of my friends has a wife that literally hates having sex with him. She puts up with it to make a baby, and that’s all he gets for life.

      It’s absolutely crushing for him (and is anti-biblical for her, but try telling her what St. Paul says, I dare you…), but he’s stuck in the situation. If they’d have had premarital sex, he wouldn’t have been stuck in a bad marriage.

      Casual sex is bad in a different way, but it’s not like abstinence until marriage is the only other option.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • Red1492
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 10:00am

      Agreed FooBear. A sibling of mine waited. And she got herself a quack who wanted to electrocute her, go on nudist vacations and other kooky stuff. Another friend who waited – now in her 40′s, all she can think about is being with someone else and how it might be different. I can back fire either way. There is no set path in life. I didn’t wait. I did everything my parents wished I didn’t: had sex before marriage and then found a guy I liked and shacked up THEN got married….eventually. I‘m the only one of my siblings that’s stable and still married with children who aren’t nightmares.

      Report Post » Red1492  
    • marjorie faye
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 2:09pm

      Foobear, anecdotal stories, and your own personal interpretation of them, do not necessarily stand up to scrutiny when compared with actual statistics. The stats say for instance that those who live together before marriage have a higher rate of divorce. Studies also say that girls who engage in premarital sex have a higher rate of depression. These are stats for the general population. You don’t know everyone.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:36pm

      Majorie, since you believe in the dominance of stats, will you now advocate for premarital sex with me?

      Pre-marital Sex in America:
      http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Sociology/MarriageFamily/?view=usa&ci=9780199743285

      No? Then you’re a hypocrite. Sorry.

      Report Post » foobear  
  • ThoreauHD
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:35pm

    I’ll take your confirmation bias and double down on sterility and excruciating death.

    It’s not a matter of morals anymore. These diseases don’t go away. They turn your reproductive organs into a picnic basket of sputum. And those are the nice one’s.

    You always have the nice fall back of agonizing death with AIDS where every disease on the planet turns you into a carry out meal.

    Dyin ain’t no kinda livin. People spend more time investigating a car than a mate. That doesn’t make alot of sense to me.

    Report Post » ThoreauHD  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 7:45am

      There’s things called condoms. People that practice responsible premarital sex use them.

      Getting married to a woman that (surprise!) hates sex is more painful than an STI.

      If you want to actually know why premarital sex has been good for our society, though, pull up stats on prostitution rates in our country some time. Girlfriends giving it up has put prostitution out of business, and all of the attendant evils with that scurrilous business. Rates dropped from over 50% in the early 1900s to less than 10% today.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • marjorie faye
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 2:28pm

      Oh, so the girlfriends have become unpaid prostitutes. Wow, great logic, Foobear. Unfortunately, that does not address the problems of premarital sex itself, one of which to a great extent is depression in females. Or, so say the studies, but I’m sure your anecdotal experiences and word-of-mouth from your friends has a higher rate of reliability than silly studies that apply to large populations.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:32pm

      Majorie, the studies actually show that women with one or two partners are happier than virgins. Women with more partners are less happy.

      Correlation is not causation, but if that’s your basis for advocating abstinence, you probably ought to change either your reasoning or your belief.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:40pm

      Girlfriends are not “unpaid prostitutes” either. It’s not like they walk the streets, getting beaten by their pimps and having sex for free with strangers.

      Oddly enough, being in a loving relationship is nothing like being a prostitute (I’d imagine).

      The point being that the pragmatic argument against premarital sex (and porn, too, for that matter – it causes a decrease in rape, not an increase) is a failed one.

      If you want to argue that pre-marital sex is bad because Joseph Smith told you so, then that’s okay. Be honest about it. But don’t lie and pretend that the happiness or health of women is the most important thing to you, because if studies come out showing the opposite of what you’ll believe, you’ll drop that argument like a hot potato, you hypocrite.

      Report Post » foobear  
  • MOLLYPITCHER
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:35pm

    Another example, that leads us to God’s design for marriage.

    Report Post »  
  • wisehiney
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:30pm

    Be careful about confusing intelligence with wisdom, and try not to let the devil use your education against you.

    Report Post »  
  • CrackerSmurf
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:16pm

    I find that binding with as few women as possible to be my choice. If you want to throw it around that is on you. In the end the ones who choose you aren’t worth my trouble and I guess congratulations are in order… As for me I’ll be talking to that pretty girl everyone seems to be ignoring. I’m sure she has a lot more to say anyways.

    Report Post » CrackerSmurf  
  • shellster
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:02pm

    Speaking from only my personal experience, most people can’t…I have many times and had absolutely no problems with it.

    If you want to get into psychology, most of you are currently experiencing confirmation bias. Once study comes out and shows that the possibility for addiction occurs, and may be even common, and you all accept it because it fits your world belief system. Just like alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs, emotions can be addicting, but they aren’t for everyone.

    My statements above are no commentary on the morality one way or another. That is for each person do decide for themselves.

    Report Post »  
    • wisehiney
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:36pm

      I would bet that most of these comments that are contrary to yours are based on many years of experience and observation.

      Report Post »  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:55pm

      And I bet that sexual experience is NOT the foundation of Blazer comments. :)

      Just some good ol’ JesusBook.

      Report Post » Bhaub  
  • Psychosis
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:55pm

    Emptyness and Pain …………the perfect description of a liberal

    Report Post » Psychosis  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:56pm

      Says the guy named “Psychosis” with a “No Drama” avatar. What, did MySpace get too full so you’ve spilled into The Blaze? XD

      Report Post » Bhaub  
  • hayesstephen
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:41pm

    I wish the Blaze would fix the problem with the text. Anyone know how to contact them?

    Report Post »  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:52pm

      I’ve tried, but their stories keep showing up anyway. Fingers crossed!

      Report Post » Bhaub  
    • OneRepublic4us
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:36am

      @Bhaub use firefox, I’m not having a problem.

      Report Post » OneRepublic4us  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 11:52am

      OneRepublic4us,

      Apparently subtle humor was lost on you… >.>

      Report Post » Bhaub  
  • Bhaub
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:40pm

    What does the image have to do with the article, Blaze? The journalistic integrity of this place was already suspect, so tucking in your own opinion and commentary doesn’t help.

    Abstinence wasn’t the subject here.

    Report Post » Bhaub  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:12pm

      While I’m not one to throw around Latin, “In the good old days, children like you were left to perish on windswept crags” isn’t the most impressive use of the language.

      Regardless, you’re missing the mark of the article. It’s showing that sex with strangers or, more specifically, non-relationship sex with friends, isn’t emotionally rewarding. Full relationships with sex are. Where in the article does it say, “PEOPLE SHOULD NOT HAVE SEX?”

      That’s absurd. People DO have sex. Perhaps you don’t, and that’s a shame, but normal humans do it. It’s fun. It’s important to do it in a relationship in order to physically express love and emotions. It‘s most important that it’s done safely, which is why condom use and other birth control methods should be explained clearly and frankly.

      With that said, I have absolutely no problem with you being abstinent, Psychosis. I encourage it in you. :)

      Report Post » Bhaub  
    • Vie_En_Ras
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:33pm

      The choice isn‘t as what you’re insinuating, Bhaub. It’s not sex vs. no sex whatsoever. It’s how many PARTNERS. Abstinent people aren’t going without sex (as you see as ‘forever’), they’re going without multiple partners – abstaining for ONE.

      Seriously, try reading for once instead of searching for a “TL;DR” – you might learn something.

      Report Post » Vie_En_Ras  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:38pm

      No, the opposite of “sex” is “no sex.“ The opposite of ”promiscuous sex“ is ”safe, loving sex.”

      And again, the point was that sex WITHOUT emotions isn’t fulfilling, but the article clearly indicates that romantic sex IS rewarding. “…a splash of cologne on your lover’s neck” doesn’t sound like a group prayer session to me, Psychosis.

      I suggest you look elsewhere for the subject you want to argue. This topic isn’t about abstinence. It’s about people already having sex… y’know: *everyone.*

      Report Post » Bhaub  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:53pm

      Vie_En_Ras,

      What are you talking about? I *did* read the article, and the references it makes to abstinence aren’t related to its points about healthy sex versus promiscuous, casual sex. In fact, I think the statistics aren’t very helpful at all, since looking at the number of “abstinent” girls and the number of “sexually active” girls will give you hugely different sample bases. It’s like saying that people with two arms have a much higher suicide chance than people with just one arm, and acting like we should lob one off just to be more stable.

      Again, the point is that “NO SEX” is not a solution or a sound way to live. I realize that the goal of abstinence is to hold out until you get married, but that means you have no experience with your body or the body of others until you’ve already committed for life. It’s actually worse in the long run. What if you’re not sexually compatible? Without passion in a marriage, you’re going to wind up unhappy and/or divorced. Then what was the point of going without for so long?

      So yeah, don’t try to suggest people should just avoid sex totally to make it all better. Just try to encourage safe, happy sex with emotional connections instead. How on Earth would THAT be a bad thing?

      Report Post » Bhaub  
    • BlackJohntheFlyingScotsman
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:20pm

      Lol, BHUAB laddie, ‘sexually compatible’ is a convenient myth to justify pre-marital sex. Pre-marital sex is always about lust -not love. If ye donnae ken what the difference is, then I shall take the liberty of enlightening ye. Lust is about yerself and wanting whatever ye donnae have right now. Love, on the other hand, is only concerned about the happiness and welfare of the other person, at whatever cost to yerself. ‘No greater love hath any man, than that he lay down his life for his friend.’ Lust is never satisfied with anything, even yer beloved of beloveds. Love, within marriage, means ye never need anything more, but ye can never get enough (of the wife of yer youth, or not-so-youth:) This I ken from the lives of every person I have ever known or read about, and from me own life. May I venture to say, lust cannae hold a blooming candle to love! Drink water from yer own cistern, and running water from yer own well. Should yer fountain be dispersed abroad, streams of water in the street? Let them be only yer own and not strangers with ye. May yer fountain be blessed, and may ye rejoice with the wife of yer youth. Let her be as the loving deer, and gracious doe. Let her breasts satisfy ye always, and may ye always be intoxicated with her love. Thats what its about, laddie! :)

      Report Post » BlackJohntheFlyingScotsman  
    • OneRepublic4us
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:33am

      @BlackJohntheFlyingScotsman
      You, sir are a poet! You tell the man’s side of the story. Love without trust is impossible.

      Report Post » OneRepublic4us  
    • Bhaub
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 11:52am

      Yeah… while typing in an accent may make you seem homespun and wise, you’re kind of a self-absorbed idiot. If you’ve never had sex with someone you cared about, and then later broke up or fell out of love, you haven’t “lived.” You can have sex without lust, and you can have marriage without love. Pretending that there’s only one way to go about it is, again, absurd.

      It’d be super-great if every single person met their “soul mate” and had a whirlwind romance culminating in marriage, but that’s fairytale stuff. In reality, people fall in and out of love, feel passionate about one another and have sex. We have up and down moods, we want companionship and to be left alone. People are complex and full of unique emotions- we don’t boil down to “let grand-dad tell ye ’bout the lass of yore, sonny.”

      Live in modern times, please. It’s alright to have sex with someone you care for, even if you’re not married.

      Report Post » Bhaub  
  • LadyIzShy
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:39pm

    why do peopel study these things? WHO cares this is a NO brainer

    Report Post » LadyIzShy  
    • encinom
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:02pm

      The “research” was conducted by a faith based institute seeking to impose its values on the rest of the country.

      Report Post »  
    • encinom
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:38pm

      @Psychosis

      Follow the links in the article to who conducted the “research.” The research is a scam to seperate chrisitians from their money and to impose one group’s moralitiy on the nation. then a gain a Beckerhead can barely read the article,let alone go deeper into who is behind it.

      Report Post »  
    • Goldwaterite
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 10:30pm

      @ ladyizshy:
      Intellectual curiosity and advancements in social, behavioral, and neurological science aren’t enough?

      Report Post »  
    • Dale
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 10:55pm

      encinom
      The “research” was conducted by a faith based institute seeking to impose its values on the rest of the country.
      ————————
      Are you a member of this institute? More importantly, are you a board member or officer? Did you read (let alone write) the mission statement? If you answered no to these questions (and I’m positive you did), you are a pompous, prevaricating, presumptive piece of propaganda. Aren’t your aims just what you accuse the institute of doing? Ah, this time the answer is YES!

      Report Post » Dale  
    • encinom
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:05am

      @Dale

      And if the “research” was done by an atheist group coming to an opposite conclusion, would not you and Beck be shouting from the mountain tops about the assault from the left on morality.

      The organizations bias is clear and this report is nothing more than junk science attempting to refight the culture war lost in the 1960′s.

      Report Post »  
    • Dale
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 8:11am

      encinom
      And if the “research” was done by an atheist group coming to an opposite conclusion, would not you and Beck be shouting from the mountain tops about the assault from the left on morality.
      The organizations bias is clear and this report is nothing more than junk science attempting to refight the culture war lost in the 1960′s.
      ————————–
      Oh, you are SO wrong! If an atheist group produced this report, I would be shouting from the mountain tops; alright, about how right the report is. Again, since you have NO connection with the institute, you do not speak for them – and therefore your comments represent your wishes! You ASSUME (and you know what that means) that the ‘culture war’ was lost – it’s still going on and the last I checked you are losing.

      Report Post » Dale  
    • paleoconservatarian
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 8:22pm

      @encinom

      Quotation marks are not proofs.

      Report Post » paleoconservatarian  
  • momprayn
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:31pm

    Yes, it’s problematic. This does not take some “brain surgeon”. This problem is as old as dirt. It‘s also been pointed out that it’s also a spiritual mystery in that you develop a “bond” that is not only physical, which alludes to what this article says & the Bible alludes to. Another reason God warned against it. Explains a little about how the majority of abused women will still stay with their abuser…..all the domestic violence cases where the abused don’t leave or stay away “for good”. I’ve dealt with this personally in my family. These cases are epidemic..not to mention all the STD’s, etc. but hey….they get to sing that song “I Did it My Way”. Yeah…..and then where did you go?

    Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:33pm

      This from someone that blames women for being raped?

      Report Post » foobear  
  • let us prey
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:28pm

    Deep limbic system.
    Will the goverment cut these out soon?

    Report Post » let us prey  
    • commonsenseguy
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:30pm

      that is funny, but you may be right,only after a 10nyear study and billions of tax dollars.

      Report Post »  
    • shakedowncrews
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:25pm

      more like install a warning system that lights up on our forehead so everyone can be warned if we’re horny…

      Report Post » shakedowncrews  
    • Tradman
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 1:43pm

      @ Shakedowncrews:

      Freaking Hilarious! Dude, that’d be most every man every few minutes, now wouldnt it?!?! I wonder if it gets better as you get older…???

      Report Post »  
  • MikeDiesel
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:24pm

    For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

    Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 7:54am

      Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian slave named Hagar; so she said to Abram, “The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.”

      Abram agreed to what Sarai said. So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • MikeDiesel
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 11:22am

      Yeah, Foobear, and look what that little piece of promiscuity got us…Ishmael and Islam.

      Report Post »  
    • STAND4TRUTH
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 11:56am

      Foobear please note: This was Sarai‘s and Abraham’s decision, not God’s. God’s promise was that Sarai would have a son (Isaac) through which the nation of Israel would come – and it did happen as promised. This is a perfect example of what consequences can happen when one doesn’t trust in God and treats Holy things (like sex) in an unholy way. But the really, cool thing in all of this is despite our sinful and evil actions – He can make all things (including sin) come together for good. More on Ishmael? – Genesis 16:13-16; 17:18-21.

      Report Post » STAND4TRUTH  
    • marjorie faye
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 2:24pm

      Foobear, when the Bible reports events and behaviors, it is not simultaneously expressing God’s approval of those events and behaviors. More often than not, it isn’t. It is just stating what happened. Abraham and Sarah ended up having a lot of trouble because of their failure to wait obediently on God.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:21pm

      You’re reading the wrong meaning in it. Abram’s sin was not to sleep with Hagar, but for not trusting in God’s promise. God blessed the fruit of their union anyway. (If you think Ishmaelites have any connection to Islam, other than he founded the desert tribes, that’s just silly, like blaming Romans for Hitler.)

      Other examples abound, such as the story of Judah and Tamar, at the end of which Tamar is acclaimed as a devout believer, despite dressing up as a prostitute and seducing her father in law. She was obeying the Levirite Law, that Onan and then Judah selfishly denied to her. There is no condemnation in the Bible at all for her extramarital sex.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • The Burning Sword
      Posted on June 2, 2011 at 9:03am

      “Thou shalt not commit adultery”

      Report Post »  
  • adouglass1
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:24pm

    Well lets see sleep around or be committed to one person hmm? Tough choice in this loony liberal do whatever makes you feel good world with no consequences. But yes thier are always consequences but this new world where good is bad left is right up is down would have us all believe bad is good right is left down is up etc etc!!

    Report Post » adouglass1  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:30pm

      Says the guy who forced his ex to carry a child to term and then dumped her >_>

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 2:44am

      Hey locked,

      I see you finally came out of the closet and are now embracing your inner troll.

      Glad I could help

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
  • wisehiney
    Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:16pm

    Dadgum common sense keeps getting in the way.

    Report Post »  
    • Elena2010
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:26pm

      So does how GOD made us! He uses the word “holy” to describe human sexuality betw a husband and wife. Now you’ve got the science to back it up!

      Well, here’s a no brainer, God loves us so much, He uses our language in our worldview to warn us fm things that will harm us. The ancients understood “holy” but not “limbic.”

      The Bible is the love letter fm our Loving Lord. Pay attention to it. Follow it. Believe it!

      Report Post » Elena2010  
    • MikeDiesel
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:26pm

      Genesis 2:24, Mark 10:7, Ephesians 5:31

      Report Post »  
    • commonsenseguy
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:27pm

      @wisehiney, commonsense is a rarely used word,much less a product of our society

      Report Post »  
    • biohazard23
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:41pm

      I’m sorry, but I had to LOL at the Atheist! I don’t agree, but that was some funny stuff right there!

      Report Post » biohazard23  
    • coryf076
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:44pm

      I call BS on this article…big time BS!

      Report Post »  
    • HappyStretchedThin
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:45pm

      Denial can be more powerful than emotional consequences…in the short term. But immorality never leads to true happiness in the end.

      Report Post » HappyStretchedThin  
    • encinom
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 7:59pm

      Its a bogus study by a faith based front. The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, is a religious group, hiding as a medical research institute to push their extreme chrisitian agenda.

      Report Post »  
    • Professional Infidel
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:33pm

      Remember the 4 F’s, the last F says “Forget um” thats if your going to engage in the first three. (3)

      Report Post »  
    • paleoconservatarian
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:46pm

      Enciom,

      You’ve raised awareness as to the source, but absolutely failed to demonstrate in any way why the study itself is ‘bogus.’ Did they use a flawed sample? Did you note any errors in their statistical analysis? Did you bother looking at anything involved in the study at all or did you just point to where they were ‘Christian’ and believe yourself enlightened enough on that basis alone to be able to so authoritatively discredit their works as ‘bogus?’

      Report Post » paleoconservatarian  
    • Atheist
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 8:58pm

      Aw! The mods removed my joke. Jeez, I thought you guys would have a sense of humor.

      In all seriousness, I’m pretty sure that When Harry Met Sally said this years ago: “It is impossible for a man to be friends with a pretty woman. He pretty much wants to sleep with all of them.”

      “What about the ugly ones?”

      “Eh, he wants to sleep with them too.”

      The Atheist

      Report Post » Atheist  
    • tierrah
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 9:03pm

      @Wisehiney: Wonder if this was another government funded study??? Almost as frivolous as the shrimp on the treadmill, huh?

      Report Post » tierrah  
    • GPS-Tech
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:19pm

      I can tell you from plenty of experience that any woman that agrees to a no strings attached sexual relationship is seriously effed up to begin with. They almost always had baggage from some failed long term relationship or abandonement complexes. Some of them though were simply just total sluts.

      Report Post » GPS-Tech  
    • Locked
      Posted on May 31, 2011 at 11:28pm

      Eh. How many people here haven’t had sex outside of marriage? I’m guessing (at least with the male population) we’re approaching an number somewhere between “zero” and “I played D&D all during school years.”

      You can have sex without a lasting connection and still enjoy it (hey-oh, dopamine). Any relationship carries a chance of sadness, but the good times far outweigh the bad.

      But, full confession, if I could do it all again and completely abstain? I might. A friend of mine is still a virgin at 26, but every experience he shares with his fiancé is new and exciting. Would I want to experience those fumbling and awkward moments I had at 16 almost a decade later? No… and yes. Not knowing what you’re missing makes the experience more involved. But it also can make it SOOO much worse… hence why I’m the one giving him tips now, because he is CLUELESS on how to please a woman :-P

      Report Post »  
    • OneRepublic4us
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 12:19am

      @encinom
      As a woman that has been single all of her life I can attest to this study. The last relationship I had was a “FWB” and he got paranoid and kept rethinking it. IT DOES NOT and HAS NOT WORKED, EVER! At least in my life time…..finally I’ve learned!

      Report Post » OneRepublic4us  
    • GETLIFE
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 6:02am

      No new science here. The workings of the deep limbic system have been known for years. Glad someone is putting it out there though….

      Report Post » GETLIFE  
    • GETLIFE
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 6:06am

      CORYwhatever and ENCINOM,
      Why don’t you guys go read a book or something.

      Report Post » GETLIFE  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 7:31am

      The Heritage Foundation really shouldn’t be a primary source for an article like this. They say that teenage sex is, quote, “unhealthy”, which is a very odd choice of words to use.

      Teens have the highest rate of condom use of any population group, so I‘m guessing the choice of word wasn’t over STI levels but rather the notion that teens are “too young” to be having sex, ignoring the fact that in earlier times, that people were married and having kids at an age we still consider them “children”.

      Well, fair enough. I’ve seen both sides to it in my life, with some friends showing exactly why teens shouldn’t be having sex, and other friends doing it quite responsibly, with the latter in the majority.

      For those of you who think the Bible prohibits premarital sex – it doesn’t. You can look all you like. Calvin gave up on the attempt and banned it anyway in his Geneva, imposing his morals on the Bible, instead of the other way around.

      So if one deals with the pragmatic and religious objections to premarital sex, then what other objection is there? The emotional one, outlined in this article above, which rightly says that our emotional systems get engaged via sex. This is true. But not all premarital sex is casual (in fact, most is not), and women with one or two partners in their life are *happier* than those with more or less (i.e. virgins).

      So what is your objection, again, other than tradition?

      Report Post » foobear  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 8:22am

      Tried twice didn’t work either time

      Report Post »  
    • BlackJohntheFlyingScotsman
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 8:57am

      Lol, Foobear, where do ye come up with this information? I donnae ken which Holy Book ye are referring to, but ye certainly cannae mean the Bible. Shall I list just a few of the references that condemn fornication? Beginning with Exodus 20:14; Thou shalt not commit adultery (the Hebrew word thnap means any form of extra-marital sex, i.e. fornication, adultery, etc.) Deut. 22: 23-29, I Cor. 6:13; “Now the body is not for sexual immorality, . . .v18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.” I am afraid that your claims arenae looking so strong any longer, but I shall continue yet farther to relieve any doubtful thoughts that still stubbornly linger on in yer mind:) I Cor. 10:8; “Nor let us commit sexual immorality, . . .” but wait there’s more:) I Thess. 4:3; “For this is the will of God, your santification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality. . . .” Foobear, laddie, I would advise ye to research yer statements before ye proclaim them as so much fact.

      Report Post » BlackJohntheFlyingScotsman  
    • Red1492
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 9:47am

      This woman lives in OZ. What a bunch of bologna.

      Report Post » Red1492  
    • marjorie faye
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 2:19pm

      Foobear,
      Ever encountered the word “fornication” in the Bible? Look it up. It is all sex outside of marriage, which includes premarital sex, and it is forbidden. Period. End of discussion.

      Report Post »  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:15pm

      @BlackJohntheFlyingScotsman, marjorie faye:

      You think “fornication” means “premarital sex”?

      Sorry to have to inform you this way, but if your pastor told you that, he was lying to you. The word translated as “fornication” in the Bible is “pornea” which is the word “porn” comes from. It doesn’t mean premarital sex – it is a general word meaning sexual perversion or immorality.

      Don’t believe me? Either do your own study on the subject, or just consider Matt 5:32: “Matthew 5:32: “But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery…” If fornication is narrowly defined as premarital sex, your definition of fornication wouldn’t make sense, since the woman and man are married.

      There‘s a reason why the word fornication isn’t used in modern translations, and it has nothing to do with political correctness.

      You’re right to be appalled, but your anger should be at your pastor for lying to you about the meaning of the word. They should know better.

      Report Post » foobear  
    • foobear
      Posted on June 1, 2011 at 4:30pm

      @Blackjohn: Avoid sexual immorality. Ok, great. Yes. Now show where premarital sex is sexual immorality.

      You can’t find it.

      Adultery is absolutely not “all extra-marital sex”. Mormons believe this, but this belief is not based on either the OT or NT, which are both explicitly clear having sex with a married woman that is not your wife: thou shalt not defile thy neighbors wife. Read your Leviticus 18, or 20:10.

      The closest bit to condemnation of premarital sex is seducing a virgin, which is punishable by fine, or marriage, but not death. (Exodus 22). Quite clearly and very obviously not adultery.

      Again, I apologize if these facts make you uncomfortable, but I refuse to allow the word of God to be distorted.

      Report Post » foobear  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love