Debate about pre-marital s.ex

[petite fleur]

---

Imu ma defend? Ana nalang..okay prove it! hahaha
bitaw...A good guy I think would not treat/say that you...lain iyang tono pag ka sulti.
SO para niya Love=*** ??
Pero naa man kas YES team...
waaahaha I don't know.

[jack_bauer]

maybe you can start by establishing a premise that Man is given the freedom of choice, where inherent in a man's faculty of skills and intelligence is his capacity to decide for his own and that man in general won't do something that is against his very nature which is to survive..

you can always visit the humanistic theories about Man and his being..

just my two cents..

by "man" i am referring both sexes ah..

[Elyu]

But if you landed in the Yes team, understand that in intimate relationships there are risks involved (in this situation, having faith in this guy's word that you'll be married 'in the future'),

so take the risk but also take responsibility for your actions.

[kimleeKINO_choi]

For me..mabawan kog tao nga gamiton ang s3x para lang ma prove nga love syas other half.
But IMO, it's fine as long as u do it b/c u love the person not b/c u needed to prove that u love the person.
It's all on the mind setting of the person. But as a Christian and being in a Catholic Institution a big NO NO na sya...expected. But kong kahibaw lang ka sa cons..then just do it. Mas lain if u do it with someone u don't love.

[petite fleur]

No to pms - It's a sign of insecurity to ask someone to "prove" they love you and disregarding their values.

Right Mr B!!

I was thinking of Pre-menstrual Symptoms. hahaha

Anyway para nako Sakto ka bro.

[ulyssa_marie]

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.

[petite fleur]

maybe you can start by establishing a premise that Man is given the freedom of choice, where inherent in a man's faculty of skills and intelligence is his capacity to decide for his own and that man in general won't do something that is against his very nature which is to survive..

you can always visit the humanistic theories about Man and his being..

just my two cents..

by "man" i am referring both sexes ah..

mu ask nya ko nimu bro if naa nya miy debatihan....nice one bro for helping Ulyssa.

[ulyssa_marie]

maybe you can start by establishing a premise that Man is given the freedom of choice, where inherent in a man's faculty of skills and intelligence is his capacity to decide for his own and that man in general won't do something that is against his very nature which is to survive..

you can always visit the humanistic theories about Man and his being..

just my two cents..

by "man" i am referring both sexes ah..

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!"

[jack_bauer]

the problem here is most likely you will be agianst the bias of religion against PMS..

your most strongest defense is that Man (the girl) can be responsible.. and as shown through time she was able to muster it (being responsible) by supporting her siblings..

considering you are in a REED class, lisod gyud ninyo pg oppose sa ilang opposition sa PMS..
likewise, you can also invoke the need aspect of *** based on biology and perhaps based on maslow's hierarchy of needs..

[ulyssa_marie]

the problem here is most likely you will be agianst the bias of religion against PMS..

your most strongest defense is that Man (the girl) can be responsible.. and as shown through time she was able to muster it (being responsible) by supporting her siblings..

considering you are in a REED class, lisod gyud ninyo pg oppose sa ilang opposition sa PMS..
likewise, you can also invoke the need aspect of *** based on biology and perhaps based on maslow's hierarchy of needs..

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