Comments on: STD-Aversion As Primary Reason To Avoid Premarital Sex

By: Jim Cobabe

Jim Cobabe — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 20:27:34 +0000

The study is obviously fraudulent or deliberately misrepresented.

I can speak for myself. If approached by someone representing the Guttmacher Institute, I would not participate in such a “study”.

Thus the findings would seem to suggest not necessarily that sexual promiscuity is “normative behavior”, but rather that people inclined to participate in such a “study” tend to be sexually promiscuous.

It is difficult for me to even imagine how the canvassing process alone could avoid strongly selecting for such a response. In fact, that the “study” returns results that exactly conform to the organizational agenda says quite enough for me, right up front.

It seems unsurprising that most such survey-based “studies” tend to return just the kind of findings the sponsor paid for.

By: al_miller

al_miller — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 17:32:54 +0000

21 Yes the peculiar people. I think that shunning premarital sex is a great way to be elite.

By: bbell

bbell — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 18:44:01 +0000

In my view this study hits the nail on the head.

The sexual revolution started in the early to mid 1960′s. So its participants were born in the 1940′s.

The real test is to determine pre-marital sex rates of people born in the 1920′s and 1930′s. They would of come of age in the 1940′s and 1950′s prior to the sexual revolution. Mark B is essentially correct in his comments

I would also probably state that the majority of LDS (this includes inactives and those that marry outside the temple (the real majority) have participated in pre-marital sex. I would argue that the couple who gets married in the temple while both are virgins are a minority and represent an elite subset of the core of the active church.

By: ian Cook

ian Cook — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:31:22 +0000

One of the problems of using something like STDs as a deterent to sex is that if or when STDs are eliminated or protected against, that deterant will no longer work. I would support using STDs as one of the factors in the larger whole of the “free love” movement.

By: Jared

Jared — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:24:53 +0000

If “it may be ordinary” then doesn’t that by definition make it the “norm”?

By: Mark B.

Mark B. — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:50:34 +0000

The Guttmacher Institute article also takes a huge leap in calling premarital sex “normative behavior.”

It may be customary, it may be ordinary, but that doesn’t mean that the “norm” in society is that people should have sexual relations outside of marriage.

Either he’s pushing for a change more radical than even the Guttmacher Institute would admit to, or he’s as sloppy with his language as he is with his data.