While we wait for all the questions to be answered, audience can please ask questions if they have any.

Thanks.

@ TV01

Whatever you believe; creation, evolution or nothing at all, men and women are compatible sexually. It's a myth to to think intimate compatibility needs to be pre-determined

Would you please expatiate on this?

My dear opponent contestant number 7, you have highlighted, from your perspective, why premarital sex is a "taboo" but you have not given enough evidence to back any of your excerptions as premarital sex has little or nothing to do with the consequences listed. As those said situations will arise with or without premarital sex occurring.

If sex creates strong bond between partners, then why do we still have heartbreaks and divorces. Even some married ones want out!

I can assure you that there are cases of heartbreaks and divorces among individuals who marry as virgins, as well as cases of couples who engaged in premarital sex and have been happily married for over 35 years. And so my first question to you.

QUESTION 1
A couple got married in Nasarawa state 15 months ago and now the wife is filling her husband for divorce because of excessive sexual demands. Has not having sex before marriage saved this particular couple from heartbreaks and a most likely divorce?





Trust and Jealousy: Having multiple intimate partners before finally marrying could escalate trivial matters. A partner might think he/she is not better than the others in the past.

QUESTION 2
A married couple may choose to have an open relationship with other sexual partners (which does happen). A person may have pre-marital sex with the person they choose to marry, voiding this argument entirely. I see no basis for the claim "having multiple partners before marriage escalate trivial matters ."
Are you trying to say that it is ok to have multiple sexual partners after marriage, if that is what a married couple desire? Would the question of who is better that who not still arise?


Testimony and Psychology: A source of encouragement. How do you encourage others and your children when you have no good testimony? It reminds of the movie, “ghosts of my ex-girlfriends”

QUESTION 3
Imagine a case of two adult virgin ( this is for my opponent's benefit) who have decided to tie the knot. They announce their decision to their family members and friends, and fix a date for the wedding. These two now decide to engage in premarital sex months prior to the wedding date. They are both healthy, virgins, and have not had any past to create trivial matters. They have sex, bonded and discovered they were sexually compatible as well, and so went ahead to be married. They have children, and are happily married and would be grand parents soon.
Isn't that a wonderful story to tell your children about how mom and dad met? Isn't that enough encouragement on the importance of premarital sex?

I for one, will be more than happy to share that story with anyone while encouraging them to have premarital sex.
Like I stated initially, your reasons for waiting till after marriage are not grounded enough and lack evidence to prove your point.

This is contestant 7 replies to contestant 3 questions

Lerrie John: I can assure you that there are cases of heartbreaks and divorces among individuals who marry as virgins, as well as cases of couples who engaged in premarital sex and have been happily married for over 35 years. And so my first question to you.

A couple got married in Nasarawa state 15 months ago and now the wife is filling her husband for divorce because of excessive intimate demands. Has not having sex before marriage saved this particular couple from heartbreaks and a most likely divorce?

and what makes you think that some men wouldn't inflate their se.xual demands once they marry. And I am certain a case of those couples happens once in a blue moon. that 1 marriage out of 100 marriages failed due to high demand of se.x hasn't called for the importance of premarital sex. And beside. many health factors surround this issue Lerrie.

Lerrie John: A married couple may choose to have an open relationship with other intimate partners (which does happen). A person may have pre-marital sex with the person they choose to marry, voiding this argument entirely. I see no basis for the claim "having multiple partners before marriage escalate trivial matters ."

Are you trying to say that it is ok to have multiple intimate partners after marriage, if that is what a married couple desire? Would the question of who is better that who not still arise?

Maybe you didnt read me well.
complaints from a partner for not being se.xually satisfied could throw the other partner into a realm of self comparison. "does it mean his/her ex gave it to him/her better than i do" and which also COULD lead to jealousy, "why cant i be like his/her former ex?"

Lerrie John: Imagine a case of two adult virgin ( this is for my opponent's benefit) who have decided to tie the knot. They announce their decision to their family members and friends, and fix a date for the wedding. These two now decide to engage in premarital sex months prior to the wedding date. They are both healthy, virgins, and have not had any past to create trivial matters. They have sex, bonded and discovered they were sexually compatible as well, and so went ahead to be married. They have children, and are happily married and would be grand parents soon.
Isn't that a wonderful story to tell your children about how mom and dad met? Isn't that enough encouragement on the importance of premarital sex?

I for one, will be more than happy to share that story with anyone while encouraging them to have premarital sex.
Like I stated initially, your reasons for waiting till after marriage are not grounded enough and lack evidence to prove your point.

Does it really make it right, even if it seems rightfully wrong?
A smart and intelligent child should be able to know that he/she is an outcome of deceit.
can you tell your pastor or members of the families openly that u had sex after the approval of marriage.

What about if the premarital sex they had had led to something like this;

Lerrie John: A couple got married in Nasarawa state 15 months ago and now the wife is filling her husband for divorce because of excessive intimate demands. Has not having sex before marriage saved this particular couple from heartbreaks and a most likely divorce?

debosky: A few questions Contestant 1
Why do you consider sex to be excluded from the process of appreciation? Furthermore, can it not be argued that sustained contact with an individual will also result in a binding effect?

You don't need to have sexual intercourse with someone to ascertain if they possess the requisite character, a shared understanding of the marital union and like aspirations or worldview.

In fact, sex can becloud judgement and initiates bonding prior to a real due diligence being completed. It is pre-emptive.

debosky:
Would it? Or would it effectively render players irrelevant? If there is nothing to 'play' for - i.e. it is available without restriction, then why would players play as it were?

And if it is available without restriction, why marry, what value would a conjugal relationship actually have? Sex is already freely available, it doesn't stop players playing.

debosky:
Furthermore, you allude that being 'used' can occur in courtship if there is sex - couldn't one be equally used for companionship, sounding board, etc. during courtship? If so, why not simply identify a mate with no contact and marry immediately to avoid anyone feeling used?

Yes, but there is no real bonding or deep connection if it is companionship only. Not even a financial loss is as painful or hard to recover from. And some do marry successfully as you described.

debosky:
As question above - why not keep all the other aspects of marriage pure? Is only sex worthy of keeping pure? Do non-sexual past liaisons not also result in delayed-manifestation issues?

Rarely if there is no sexual bonding. There'd be no need for ingesting harmful chemicals - contraceptives, abortifacients - painful and potentially risky surgery - abortions - risk of STD's or unplanned pregnancies. A little sadness perhaps, but no real harm. I lived it. None of the disappointments I suffered took a real toll. Sex pertains to the soul and I abstained. I would find it hard to look them (or their spouses) in the eye if I had. I believe it was likewise for the women involved.

Best
TV

@TV1,If a anyones sense of reasoning can be affected by the quality (and quantity) of seex he or she recieves,then the person is neither ready nor ripe for marriage. Why? would he propose marriage to any lady/guy that offers him or her seex after or within the course of marriage,or you think no-seex before marriage guarantees fidelity?

If sex has a binding effect(your words) ,why then do two adults in a relationship not be allowed to bond as soon as possible,why wait till wedding day only to find out they can't bond because of differences in wants and needs?

Talking about diseases,what happens to the couple who didnt do seex during courtship but still got hit with conditions like weak or no erection. What if the other partner cannot deal with it?

When you say,no seex before marriage-does that cover deep kissing,anaaal seex ,fingeeering ,masssturbation and any other thing excluding vaaaginal sex?

In your last paragraph,you qualified sex before marriage as a non-chaste relationship. So, if a woman nags/a drug addict,a man is violent/is a drunk etc so long as they dont do seex,the relationship is chaste and OK?

Lerrie John: This is contestant 3 answers to contestant 7.


contestant 3, please can you educate me more please?

1. “SEX is a private, profound, physical and intimate act, that should be practised between two CONSENTING ADULTS. CONSENTING because anything outside of that is considered molestation, and ADULTS because of the mental and physical risk ( STDs, pregnancy, or heart breaks) associated with sex. “

My question: Consenting adults? Are teenagers also considered as adults in this regards. And based on the knowledge of a teenager, what does he/she know, let alone of consenting to a theory that involves mental and physical risk as you mentioned. And do you think an adult that is not married but prefers premarital should be considered as an adult. Age is just a number.

Dear contestant 7. Answering your question, a teenager is not an adult by law until he reaches the age of 21. Therefore, should not participate in any kind of sex, both marital or premarital until of age. Anything outside of that is molestation. By law age is not only a number,age holds you responsible for your actions. That is why under age children have parents and guardians responsible for them.


2. “In the African society, sex is highly frowned upon and considered "taboo", if practised before marriage. Not only is the notion of sex influenced by our traditional and cultural beliefs, it is also highly influenced by religious beliefs as well - where sex is considered to be a dirty and unclean act, a sin, and a thing to be shameful about. Notwithstanding these beliefs, statistics have shown that 85% of individuals between the ages of 15 - 45 practise sex before marriage. Why ignore the obvious? This brings me to defend my notion on why premarital sex, with a person with whom you are considering marriage or engaged to, is very important, and beneficial for both parties in the long run.”

My question: When 99% does wrong and 1% does right. Does that make the 1% wrong and 99% right? If that is the case, then I think corruption should be legal in Nigeria.

What is wrong and what is right? Every country has rules and laws as guidelines to establish these. When there is corruption there are laws that prohibit and punish such acts. There is no civil law that condemns two over age, consenting adults for having premarital sex.
Like I said, the notion of sex is highly influenced by our traditional and cultural beliefs, it is also highly influenced by religious beliefs and their repercussions have no civil value.

3. “Marriage is a life long commitment; and one of its fundamentals is absolute fidelity. This is because sex, plays an important role in determining marital longevity. How can one buy a car without test driving first?”

My question: if that is the case, then I want to believe that this refuted all your reasons for having premarital sex. Why do we still have cases of heartbreaks and divorces when sex is supposed to give marital longevity when they must have considered themselves intimate compatible before wedding? Now you are comparing a car to a woman. Like seriously?

Strangely, I asked you that question as well. Waiting for marriage before sex does not guarantee marital stabile, longevity, heartbreaks nor frustrations. Neither does waiting prevent you from diseases or unwanted pregnancy. Whereas premarital sex with a sole individual might prevent you from diseases if he is faithful as well.

I hope I have been able to satisfy all your curiosity. Thank you.

able to pick one or two things....thanks!

Sisi_Kill: @ TV01


Would you please expatiate on this?

Sure.

Men and women form a recombinant whole. Regards sex for purpose i.e. procreation, bar deformity, disease or accident, male + female = children. If there is anything wrong, you should disclose it, leaving your potential spouse to make a fully informed decision (+ fertility tests can be taken if you want to be absolutely sure. Personally I loved her enough to face whatever).

Regards sex for pleasure, coming together with a person whose character you know, one who you have grown to care for deeply and are committed to in a mutually committed exclusive relationship means you will have good sex. Great sex you'll have to work at. The good news is that functionally it's like hurdling, practise means improvement. Dynamically, remember the type of person I cautioned them to be with?

Clear?

Best
TV

Hello TV01 - thank you for your response. Below are my responses to the points you've raised.

TV01:

Firstly, to refer to religious and cultural norms as of a "bygone era" as a point of rebuttal is patently wrong. Practising adherents of the Abrahamic faiths alone number in their billions. Religious faith is very much with us and has every right to inform public opinion


Secondly, neither religious conviction nor traditional cultural norms were the mainstay of my submission, as I clearly stated.

Thirdly, marriage as defined has always been thus and is open to everyone. And it was never about the sort of intimacy you choose to have but the natural outcome of natural intimacy, children. Marriage arose anthropologically as sociey' answer to raising future generations. A biological reality;men + women = children, fulfilling a societal need - a well raised future generation - at least cost and to optimal effect, raised by their biological mother and father.

Fourthly. Any two opposite sex couples - bar a few disqualifiers, age consanguinity etc - are able to marry. people who practise sodomy are not barred. Two people of the same s3x cannot have a conjugal relationship. It does not and can never result in children, whilst in principle male/female s3x can. Indeed true s3x involves the coming together of two opposite s3x Instruments. What homosexuals do is not s3x. It's a perversion of the real thing. So no matter how much tax they pay they can never truly have s3x, be conjugal or be truly married, whatever the legal position. So if they choose to marry it applies to them, if they choose to be sodomites it's a moot point.

I find what you've written here, especially the bolded bit quite contradictory. You state quite strongly that the sexu@l practices engaged in by homosexuals isn't sex. Sex between a couple, be they same sex or opposite sex isn't always based on v@gin@l intercourse. It's common knowledge that penetrative sexu@l acts such as @na.l sex and Or@l sex are practised by both heterosexu@l and homosexu@l couples.

Going by your argument then, that any penetrative act of sex that isn't v@ginal isn't real sex, then are you saying that heterosexual couples can engage in them, pre-marriage? And there is nothing wrong with it because they aren't the 'real' thing for which conception can be achieved from?

You've stated clearly that marriage is open to anyone, so that includes the GLBTs (Gays, Lesbians, Bi-sexuals and Transexuals) and yet you do not recognize their sexu.a.l acts, even though heterosexual couples do engage in them? Isn't that a tad bit confusing regarding your stance on this matter?

TV01:
Whatever you believe; creation, evolution or nothing at all, men and women are compatible sexually. It's a myth to to think sexual compatibility needs to be pre-determined. If people take one thing from my participation in this exercise, let it be this. "You have great sex with a great person" guaranteed. If a person is physically unable to consumate marriage or disqualified through disability they should not be presenting themselves for marriage. Anything else is a question of preference and will be resolved in two great people seeking and working to mutually satisfy each other. DOn't be with someone you don't care for deeply, commit to love and are sure has been wholly open and truthful with you.

Re the bolded bit: How would a person know whether or not they are able to physically consumate marriage if they've never tried it out in the first place? A man with erectile problems cannot determine that he has that problem without first engaging in sex, can he? More importantly, how can they tell if they'll even enjoy the act in the first place? And this brings me to the all-important point about one's sexual identity.

There have been cases of partners already married, discovering that they prefer being with the opposite sex. Now, if the 'sins and ills' of pre-martial sex have been rammed down their throats from the very beginning, how do they get to know what they really are? i.e being gay, bi-sexuals, and so on. I'll tell you: They only find out after marriage and as you can imagine, both parties involved end up being frustrated and eventually seek solace 'outside'. This eventually leads to marital affairs and eventually divorce. Do you not think it's a lot better to discover what your preferences are from the onset and risk having a broken engagement rather than a broken marriage (possibly with kids involved)?

TV01:
I never called it dirty, or said it should not be thoroughly discussed. Societies "sexual ills" stem from wholesale moral loosening wanton permissiveness and the commercialisation - hence degradation - of s3x.

She did not have to sneak out or engage in illicit s3x. She chose to do so. A full understanding of the possible consequences and a clear notion of why she should abstain till the right time would have served her well. Abstinence did not cause her situation. It would have prevented it.

Preaching sex within the security of marriage does not mean issues cannot be addressed and understanding imparted. One of the reasons why it's a good thing, is it stops the immature getting in over their heads which is the case in point.

Best
TV

I disagree.

The sooner we as a society recognise that sex is incredibly important to a lot of people, with sexual compatibility a necessity for a great marriage, then the better for us all. Sweeping sex under the carpet as though it doesn't exist or adopting a prudish attitude by not being open with our youngsters about sex does more harm than good - as cited by your example of the pregnant teen. How can you tell if you're sexually compatible unless you have sex? The insistence that premarital sex is dirty or perverse makes it so much harder to have necessary and much needed conversations.

Finally, going back to your earlier point about Abrahamic religions - these are pre-medevial religions founded over two thousand years ago. At the end of the day, sex is something which we, as individuals need to make up our own minds on, rather than consult a bronze-age book written by some tent-dwelling nomadic goat-herder in the middle of the desert. If they couldn't get the slavery thing right, how much moreso, or better still, what makes you think they've nailed the sex issue?

Efemena_xy: Hello TV01 - thank you for your response. Below are my responses to the points you've raised.

Please correct the positioning of your quotations for clarity.

Thanks
TV

Thanks - see my responses below in blue.

TV01:

Presumably 18 is adult, and two 18 year olds can consent? So a consenting 18 year old with a denied pregnancy is not raped or abused according to your submission. So there is no problem then is there? Or perhaps it's down to those who preach abstinence? Please give context to this live example on the basis of your submission.

The topic of this debate is geared towards sex between two consenting adults intending to tie the knot. There are three parameters there:

~ Adults
~ Consenting
~ Intent on getting married.

Your example only meets two of the listed criteria. I do not advocate sex for everyone, be they young adult or not. I advocate sex for adults planning on getting married.

TV01:
If sex prior to marriage is to test compatibility, but you have already made "the commitment", what happens if there is no compatibility? This is plainly contradictory? So no, it does not stand to reason, as you are clearly saying non-compatibility voids the commitment. Please defend this point.

It is a lot better to address and deal with any aspects of sexual discovery before marriage than after. A clear example of this is of couples with very different levels of sex-drive. A man with an extremely high libido and sex drive married to a woman at the opposite end of the scale with a low sex-drive (or vise versa) will ultimately feel cheated in the relationship. This will eventually lead to the person with the high sex drive seeking solace outside of their matrimonial bed with outsiders in a bid to gain sexual satisfaction in the form of extramarital affairs which in turn will lead to divorce as is well known. Yes, communication is good within a marriage but how much talk can a couple ‘talk’ if the issue isn’t resolved? Sexual satisfaction is just as important as financial security.

So if there is no compatibility, that can be reconciled, the parties involved are best, better off without each other.

TV01:
1. Sexual compatibility - I have responded to this in my question above.

2. No Nasty Surprises - honesty will circumvent this. Pre-marital sex will not reveal a bigamist, undisclosed health problems, children out of wedlock etc.

3. Intimacy and Bonding, Chemistry, Sexual Identity, Health Benefits - All these are benefits of "sex" regardless of the context. This is an argument for sex - regardless.



Sexual morality is understanding what sex is and enjoying it in it's proper context,Marriage. This means it is safe secure, pleasurable and with wonderful outcomes. No one says sex can't be "good" out of marriage, but understood for it's ultimate purpose it is best within it. Responsible, ethical sex, is sex within marriage. Their are heightened dangers and risks with every other sort.


So just the two questions then. I see nothing else pertinent.

Best
TV

Tgirl4real: We are waiting for you Efe, then we close.

Thanks.

Responded, Tgirl

It is midnight, I know we started a bit late, but it's time to round off so that the judges can get to work.

Thank you all for your time, commitment and contribution towards today's debate.

The debate is officially ending now.

Results will be announced tomorrow morning.

Anyone with questions can still drop it for the contestants. They will answer whenever they can.

Thank you all for coming.

Good night.

Efemena_xy:

Responded, Tgirl

Yea, thanks.

Sisi_Kill:

Do you have empirical evidence that waiting guarantees marital longevity?

I wouldn't say I have any.
but waiting has more advantages.

waiting indicates that one has a strong will, and it commands respect.

There is this particular lady I respect so much for not GIVING ME despite how much she loves me.....wetin i no do?

She says, " I should wait till the wedding night"

One's partner will even have courage and confidence in one!

"I know my wife/husband for one thing, her/his is no is always no and yes always yes"

Tgirl4real: It is midnight, I know we started a bit late, but it's time to round off so that the judges can get to work.

Thank you all for your time, commitment and contribution towards today's debate.

The debate is officially ending now.

Results will be announced tomorrow morning.

Anyone with questions can still drop it for the contestants. They will answer whenever they can.

Thank you all for coming.

Wait 0! Efemena has responded to my response. Either it gets struck or I get to do likewise?

Good night.

Wait 0! Efemena has responded to my response. Either it gets struck or I get to do likewise?

@ ALL
Thanks for a very very interesting and enlightening discourse!!!!

good night everybody.

to the judges, tgirl, the co-debaters )especially Lerrie), sandijey. alutacontinua and viewers, I take a bow!

KAI, this is very demanding o...this is gonna be my final debate on NL!

TV01:

Wait 0! Efemena has responded to my response. Either it gets struck or I get to do likewise?

This round is not for free style. You only have 3 attempts to knock off your opponents point and vice versa.

I believe you used it adequately.

Notin to fear.

Efemena_xy:
I find what you've written here, especially the bolded bit quite contradictory. You state quite strongly that the sexu@l practices engaged in by homosexuals isn't sex. Sex between a couple, be they same sex or opposite sex is not always based on v@gin@l intercourse. It is common knowledge that penetrative sexu@l acts such as @na.l sex and Or@l sex are practised by both heterosexu@l and homosexu@l couples.

Going by your argument then, that any penetrative act of sex that isn't v@ginal is real sex, then are you saying that heterosexual couples can engage in them pre-marriage? And there is nothing wrong with it because they aren't the 'real' thing for which conception can be achieved from?

You've stated clearly that marriage is open to anyone, so that includes the GLBTs (Gays, Lesbians, Bi-sexuals and Transexuals) and yet you do not recognize their sexu.a.l acts, even though heterosexual couples do engage in them? Isn't that a tad bit confusing regarding your stance on this matter?

It's not confusing if you grasp the reasoning. I'll explain further

Only vag1nal intercourse is conjugal and procreative. Sodomites do not/cannot practice this.
Other acts may well be deemed s3xual in nature if they give pleasure or arouse, but they are not procreative. That is the basis of marriage.
I believe any type of intimate act should be abstained from prior to marriage.
Bar deformity, disease or accident, all men and all women are functionally the same. Self identifying as a homosexual or practising sodomy does not change this fact of nature. They are free to marry members of the opposite sex. Check out the Mayor of NY' wife!

Efemena_xy:
Re the bolded bit: How would a person know whether or not they are able to physically consumate marriage if they've never tried it out in the first place? A man with erectile problems cannot determine that he has that problem without first engaging in sex, can he? More importantly, how can they tell if they'll even enjoy the act in the first place? And this brings me to the all-important point about one's sexual identity.

I think you should re-consider this or talk to a man about it. Not sure you'll take my word. But in the spirit of debate here goes. Men know when they are aroused or if they can't be. Generally, or by someone in particular. I've repeatedly stated the kind of person people should be getting with.

Efemena_xy:
There have been cases of partners already married, discovering that they prefer being with the opposite sex. Now, if the 'sins and ills' of pre-martial sex have been rammed down their throats from the very beginning, how do they get to know what they really are? i.e being gay, bi-sexuals, and so on. I'll tell you: They only find out after marriage and as you can imagine, both parties involved end up being frustrated and eventually seek solace 'outside'. This eventually leads to marital affairs and eventually divorce. Do you not think it's a lot better to discover what your preferences are from the onset and risk having a broken engagement rather than a broken marriage (possibly with kids involved)?

Everyone knows who and what they are attracted to, or indeed, if they have no such feelings at all. And no one needs sex to determine that. You are grasping here. Did you not realise you liked men until you had sex with one?

Efemena_xy:
I disagree.

The sooner we as a society recognise that sex is incredibly important to a lot of people, with sexual compatibility a necessity for a great marriage, then the better for us all. Sweeping sex under the carpet as though it doesn't exist or adopting a prudish attitude by not being open with our youngsters about sex does more harm than good - as cited by your example of the pregnant teen. How can you tell if you're sexually compatible unless you have sex? The insistence that premarital sex is dirty or perverse makes it so much harder to have necessary and much needed conversations.

You are both wrong and mostly disagreeing with yourself.
Sexual compatibility is assured if you approach mate selection in the proper manner. I've touched in this repeatedly.
Not once have I said sex should not be openly and thoroughly discussed. Just not engaged in prior to marriage.
Not once have I said it is dirty or perverse, just best restricted to marriage

You don't need to have sex, just be caring and committed. Deep people can even proceed without being attracted initially. But once they deeply know, care for and commit to you they know the attraction will follow. But like I said, that's not for everyone. It's for those that understand and appreciate sex in context and are not controlled by it.

Efemena_xy:
Finally, going back to your earlier point about Abrahamic religions - these are pre-medevial religions founded over two thousand years ago. At the end of the day, sex is something which we, as individuals need to make up our own minds on, rather than consult a bronze-age book written by some tent-dwelling nomadic goat-herder in the middle of the desert. If they couldn't get the slavery thing right, how much moreso, or better still, what makes you think they've nailed the sex issue?

Since I have the benefit of the medieval goat-herders and neo-modern thinkers such as yourself, am I not privileged? I make a fully informed choice. And I judge their take infinitely superior to yours.


Best
TV

ifyalways: @TV1,If a anyones sense of reasoning can be affected by the quality (and quantity) of seex he or she recieves,then the person is neither ready nor ripe for marriage. Why? would he propose marriage to any lady/guy that offers him or her seex after or within the course of marriage,or you think no-seex before marriage guarantees fidelity?

If sex has a binding effect(your words) ,why then do two adults in a relationship not be allowed to bond as soon as possible,why wait till wedding day only to find out they can't bond because of differences in wants and needs?

Talking about diseases,what happens to the couple who didnt do seex during courtship but still got hit with conditions like weak or no erection. What if the other partner cannot deal with it?

When you say,no seex before marriage-does that cover deep kissing,anaaal seex ,fingeeering ,masssturbation and any other thing excluding vaaaginal sex?

In your last paragraph,you qualified sex before marriage as a non-chaste relationship. So, if a woman nags/a drug addict,a man is violent/is a drunk etc so long as they dont do seex,the relationship is chaste and OK?

It's TV01.

All your questions - the ones I can make sense of anyway - have been answered within my submissions on this thread. Please take time to read if you so please.

Best
TV

Oh no! I slept off!

U guys did well!


Oga Seun, u were busy viewing this last nite, why u no even encourage or cheer them up?
Or do u think it doesn't matter?

nice points and counter points

Please switch the contestant numbers for the next round to avoid bias..

smoking!

pickabeau1: nice points and counter points

Please switch the contestant numbers for the next round to avoid bias..

smoking!

Yes, the numbers change for each round.

We have 2 rounds left. By the final round, each contestant will post their arguments themselves.

CC, I will def ask u a question.

Where did u get your stat that singles abort more than married ladies?

Sowrie o.

Tgirl4real: Please have in mind that this topic should be discussed in the context of sex between couples planning to get married or engaged to be married.

@Chaircover I had to quote the coodinators's post for you to have a grasp of the context of the debate.

I am not endorsing sex between teenagers who are not yet ready to get settled. I'm not endorsing sex between youngsters who don't know the meaning of the word "commitment." My debate is for two consenting adults who love each other and are courting. So the issue of abortion or unwanted pregnacies needn't arise. The pregnancy may even be the much desired trigger factor for the couple to tie the nuptial knot.

As regards my calling God's name. I wonder why you say I shouldn't call His name. I'm yet to see a verse in the bible where God spoke against sex between two adults who are already engaged. The bible only spoke against adultery and fornication. Fornication or sexual immorality is between two people who don't even have any intentions of getting married.

Finally you talked about virginity. I encourage ladies to keep their virginity intact. However I'm of the opinion that a lady may lose her virgin to a guy who has already proposed. After all, they will eventually get married. The essense of having sex before marriage is to ascertian if all the couples told each other about their sexuality is actually true. For instance, a guy might claim he is potent and fertile. The lady might claim she has high libido. All these can't be verified unless they do it . Marriage is a life-time commitment, we don't want after regrets. We don't want a woman to go into a marriage with a man who never give her orgasms for the rest of her life without her pre-knowledge, it would be cheating on her. The same applies for the man.

Obinoscopy: @Chaircover I had to quote the coodinators's post for you to have a grasp of the context of the debate.

I am not endorsing sex between teenagers who are not yet ready to get settled. I'm not endorsing sex between youngsters who don't know the meaning of the word "commitment" My debate is for two consenting adults who love each other and are courting. So the issue of abortion or unwanted pregnacies needn't arise. The pregnancy may even be the much trigger factor for the couple to tie the nuptial knot.

As regards my calling God's name. I wonder why you say I shouldn't call His name. I'm yet to see a verse in the bible where God spoke against sex between two adults who are already engaged. The bible only spoke against adultery and fornication. Fornication or sexual immorality is between two people who don't even have any intentions of getting married.

Finally you talked about virginity. I encourage ladies to keep their virginity intact. However I'm of the opinion that a lady may lose her virgin to a guy who has already proposed. After all, they will eventually get married. The essense of having sex before marriage is to ascertian if all the couples told each other about their sexuality is actually true. For instance, a guy might claim he is potent and fertile. The lady might claim she has high libido. All these can't be verifies unless they do it . Marriage is a life-time commitment, we don't want after regrets. We don't want a woman to go into a marriage with a man who never give her orgasms for the rest of her life without her pre-knowledge, it would be cheating on her. The same applied for the man.

Hmmm...

Lol

chaircover:

Did I not say not to ask me questions

I dont have stats, but it makes sense doesn't it, that if a married woman and single lady both find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy, there will be a higher number of single ladies going for an abortion than the number of the married ones.

U will be shocked CC. It's easier for a married woman to get pregnant than for a single lady. There is a legal ground for the sex already. And married women tend to relax after marriage.

Tgirl4real:

Hmmm...

Lol

This is just an academic exercise .