Debate about pre-marital s.ex

[jack_bauer]

---

but how can one use "it's ur choice.. u have a choice" to tell her that "it's ok to have s.ex with him".

It's obvious to see that she made her choice na - marriage first, THEN s.ex.

but since we're on the "go s.ex!" team, how can we come up with a reason for her to change her choice to "ok, cge!"

the humanist have a general premise that HUMAN's are capable of deciding for their own.. actually modesty aside i can help you in this if we are to talk in person but that is not possible..hehe so i suggest read article about humanistic psychology and existentialism.. i guess, that's your best bet.. though i have a bias on that since mao man nah na field mas familiar ko.. im not so much familiar sa philosophical aspect but im sure you can check some philosophy that will help you defend your stand.. as YES to PMS

[ulyssa_marie]

oT:

i was actually happy to get the "yay to s.ex!" slot... but when sir gave the scenario.. i was banging my head on the table asking "WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY"

[jack_bauer]

it would be SOO much easier to be in the "NO" team. whyyyyyyyy did i have to pick the "YAY S.EX" team. gahh!


anyway.. by reading through.. u get to realize the leslie is very very very religious or "conservative" /"traditional" .. since she insists that it's for married couples.

So if u were in the position to say "it's okay, go have s.ex with him" -- how could u convince a mind like hers?

@_@ whew.. ka libog.

OT:
if iam u malipay ko kay challenging imo position..

[braveheart]

sauna noon, ok pa kaau ni cya.. pro karon.. dah ambot nlng.. nkadghan naman gud karon panahona... lisod na kapugan.. murag lisod2x na jud na cya..

[jack_bauer]

actually, that WAS an argument.

True, that S.ex is within the lowest level, which is Physiological Needs. Which is along with food, water, shelter, etc.

but since the situation called for "If u love me.. prove it" -- what the guy is asking for is not to fulfill his physiological need for s.ex.. but his "love and belonging-ness" need.

Sadly.. we cant use this argument already coz Sir blurted it out in front of the whole class as a "TIP".


GAH!! tip?? that's like one of the strongest arguments we can think of! pshhh

maybe you can have this as you last line of defense... and expound the need to *** as not just physical but emotional and psychological.. likewise, involve the touch aspect of it.. there are journals that describe negative effects of touch deprivation..

[ulyssa_marie]

OT:
if iam u malipay ko kay challenging imo position..

*bangs head on wall*

i can't believe that i'd actually prefer to say "NO s.ex"!

I asked one of my group mates - it's not like having s.ex with the guy will ruin her commitment to her family. they could always use rubber. but she's obviously religious. She insists that s.ex is for married couples only. i don't think 'peer pressure' will be a good weapon in this debate. hahaha

and the point in the scenario really isnt about getting pregnant. its more like - have s.ex to prove i love him? or save it till after marriage?


my personal answer would be "dont have s.ex to prove u love him. but s.ex can be BEFORE marriage if u want"


whew ka lisod!

[ulyssa_marie]

sauna noon, ok pa kaau ni cya.. pro karon.. dah ambot nlng.. nkadghan naman gud karon panahona... lisod na kapugan.. murag lisod2x na jud na cya..

One thing DID pop in my head.

Diba HIGH SCHOOL SWEETHEART man si Joey? so they've been together for AGES! and to think, that he hasnt left her after all this time coz of s.exual deprivation. isnt that an assurance that he's serious enough to get married in the future? hahaha well.. i cant exactly think like a man in this situation . i can only assume that he IS serious with Leslie even without the s.ex (unless sir didnt include Joey's secret activities behind Leslie's back).


so i kinda feel bad for him a bit.

[3nZ0y]

I have a class debate in my religion class (i go to USC, so religion is un-avoidable )

The scenario:
There lived a woman (let's name her Lesie). Lesie is 28 years old and works as a general manager at BPI. she has 8 younger siblings whom she promised to support before settling down and getting married.
Her boyfriend is her high school sweet heart (let's name him Joey) who works as a volunteer nurse. They both don't have any plans of getting married currently due to Leslie's commitment to her family and Joey's unstable job.

one night, Joey asks Leslie to have s.ex with him. Leslie says "no" since she thinks that it is only for married couples. Joey says that it is a way to prove her committed love to him and they'll get married in the future anyway.



now... the class was broken into 2 groups.. by drawing slots! so we had no personal choice in choosing a side for the debate. Let's say that YOU were put into the team where u were "YES PRE-MARITAL S.EX!!" how will u defend urself?


To those who are in my class, and who can read this. BWAHAHAHA!

Okay, I would just like to clarify, usa. Are you asking for points/tips to defend the stand YES to premarital *** or you need to convince Lesie to have *** with Joey? I am quite confused somehow.

I somehow find the situation as biased. So please enlighten me. TIA!

[ulyssa_marie]

Okay, I would just like to clarify, usa. Are you asking for points/tips to defend the stand YES to premarital *** or you need to convince Lesie to have *** with Joey? I am quite confused somehow.

I somehow find the situation as biased. So please enlighten me. TIA!

can i say.. BOTH?

coz its like we need to convince her that "its okay to have s.ex with him even if ur not married". and defend if Leslie were to ask "why?? why is it ok? with my current commitment and mentality.. why?"

the situation IS bias infact.. it's obviously pointing towards the "NO TO S.EX" group. That's what makes it so hard to win this debate. GAHHH!

*bangs head on the wall*

[hitch22]

It would be worthy of debate if this was a real moral dilemma. But in this case, we have a situation where one is asking for a proof of love through *** and the other doesn't want it. There's nothing to debate because nobody's having any second thoughts.