This topic was brought up in the HPV vaccine thread, and I wanted to get everybody's opinion on it.

I think that sex before marriage is not necessarily a bad thing. I think it, along with living together, gives couples a chance to see what their marriage might be like. Sex is a huge part of marriage, and bad sex can undermine a marriage, IMO. Plus, it helps you figure out if what you are feeling is true love or just plain lust.

I personally believe that the push to make teens abstain until marriage may actually be contributing to the high divorce rate. If people think that they have to be married to have sex, I think they might rush into a marriage because they might not know the difference between lust and love. Take my former roommate, for example. She and her boyfriend dated for 4 years before they got married. To my knowledge, they were both virgins when they married. They separated within 6 months of marrying and were officially divorced the day before their first anniversary. I really believe that the disgrace in having sex before marriage and living together (he was Mormon) contributed to the failure of their marriage. I think that if they had been allowed to see what each other was truly like, apart from dates, they wouldn't have gotten married.

L8BloomR: It is really nice to hear your very positive comments about the role the Catholic Church has played in your successful marriage and family. I've also appreciated hearing Carlene's favorable remarks about the Church.

We do not have bad feelings toward the Catholic Church and if we decide to go to church, that's where we'll go. But we do have negative feelings about some of the clergy in the Catholic Church and how they have affected us personally over the years. I know some people are able to overlook those types of things and write them off to "man" made decisions, not Biblical ones. We made a choice not to accept much of what we feel are poor decisions, and so since we are at odds with the Church in that way, we generally prefer to stay home. I admit that I miss attending mass from time to time, but then someone tells me something or I hear of bad things in the press, I know that for me, I am doing the right thing.

Sunta: Although both of our kids are Catholic, neither of them will go to church at all anymore. Their decisions have nothing to do with our influencing them. We didn't stop attending mass until after they were grown, and until they made their own personal decisions about attending church, we never spoke a negative word about a priest or a sermon in front of them. They both decided, of their own volition, that the Catholic Church is based on many principles that they feel are not in the best interests of the Church's parishoners. I am very proud that they have the ability to think for themselves.

Carlene: How long ago was your husband's marriage annuled? I'm wondering if over the years, the church has softened a little on the matter of annulment. We certainly did not have the choice of whether to pay for my annulment.

I never spoke with my ex about his or his family's responses to the paperwork. I don't even know if they did the questionnaires. My ex did call me when he received them and whined that it would take too long to answer all those questions, etc. Besides, as far as his church affiliation was concerned, he and I would always be married, no matter what. I don't know if his current wife accepts that premise, however. Hmmm, another thought... perhaps the Southern Baptist Church has decided to recognize civil divorces nowadays. Since I've been saved and Baptised in the Baptist Church it doesn't really matter to me, I am never going to Hell anyway.

Bjean and Sunta,

I wonder if we have a big difference in our ages. I grew up hearing that a mother's most important job was to raise her children....but that was the norm in the '50s and '60s. My mom did work outside the home, so that was normal to me too. I never fell oppressed, in fact I looked forward to having children and being home with them. When the '70s hit, there was a whole new view about women's roles, and the pendulum swung to the opposite side. I remember reading a book called The Baby Trap, by Ellen Peck, and she basically called any woman who stayed home with her kids a bore and a dullard. I had just had my first baby then and reading this book made me question my decision to stay home. I began to think about going back to work, as did many other "formerly-happy-to-be-home" moms. Many did but I really felt my kids needed me more at home and so I didn't go back to work until my youngest was 8 years old. My point is that I think that women born around the time of the Woman's Movement grew up differently, with the idea that they should go out and have a career and do other things with their lives. Those of us born before then never really thought about those things, at least not as something we wanted but weren't allowed to do. And so I just don't think the Church should be blamed for talking about traditional roles for women, since that was the accepted norm for all of society up till then.

Oh, and by-the-way, when I did decide to go back to work, I started my own business... and our local priests were so happy for me they went around to their parishoners asking them to give my service a try. They helped get my business off to a great start!

Karen

L8BloomR: I'm a little older than you. I went through all that stuff in the 50s, 60s & 70s. I wasn't talking about society's influence, I was talking about my specific experiences with a couple of organized religions.

I honestly am always very happy for people who are firmly entrenched in their church and personally involved with their clergy. It just didn't work out that way for me. It isn't that I haven't given it a lot of consideration and study. In fact, when I was 12 years old and deeply committed to my First Christian faith, I knew that I was destined to become a missionary, like my cousin and her husband. I still have a personal relationship with God, I just have found many organized religions too hateful and critical of other human beings. It goes against my own "religion."

P.S. My FIL has a car business. He is very active (is a Deacon) in his Catholic church. All of the nuns and priests in his parish buy cars from him. They even bring their friends and acquaintences to him for cars.

P.S.S. I was lucky enough to be present at a debate between Phyllis Schafley and Betty Friedan in the 70s. Ms. Schafley was positively venomous in her diatribe about women's "place" in the society. Ms. Friedan allowed her to rant on and on about how women should stay home to take care of the kids and support their husbands, just like it says in the Bible. Ms. Friedan asked Ms Schafley about her own stay-at-home status. Seems Mrs. Schafley was a lawyer and went about the country lecturing on the necessity of women voting against ERA.

BJean,

While I do believe that kids are better off if one parent could be home to do the primary care of them, I totally agree that if a woman would not be happy staying at home raising kids, she should not feel quilty about that, and she should do what makes her feel fulfilled. But neither should a woman who stays home with her kids be made to feel bad, as so many "women's lib" activists did in the '70 and '80s. I am glad we have arrived at a place where I think most women feel free to do what they want. We are a diverse society, and we will not all agree on anything, particularly in religious matters, childraising, or anything else. I am happy that you have found what works for you, and that you have still maintained your relationship with God. That is wonderful and the most important thing, after all.

Karen

Women should have CHOICE - as they do now. Families werent more held together and more wholesome when all women stayed home - women were trapped is all. They were too financially and socially dependent to go anywhere if the relationship was bad or they werent happy staying at home and performing that role. They had to stay becuase they couldnt work and society didnt treat divorcees well.

I'd say women are happier now. Yes the nuclear family as we knew it may have changed somewhat - but why is that a bad thing? I agree its a good way to grow up - two happily married parents, mum at home, but its not the only way and I dont believe you can attribute our present day problems to just the fact that women dont always choose to stay at home anymore. There's millions of other factors that come into play.

Its actually not something I would want to preent to my daughter or my sons as a "superior" or the "only" choice even though I've been home with them, its just one of many choices on how to parent.

Thanks Karen! I agree completely that women were too hard on other women about having a career, husband and children, and the motto was "you can have it all!" At first, I was a single parent working hard and having to leave my baby with babysitters until he was 4 yrs. old. It was one of the most difficult and emotionally draining times of my life.

When I remarried, I was fortunate enough to be able to stay home with my kids. I truly think they benefitted from having a parent available when they needed one. They also realized that I knew where they were all the time.

I also worked in Real Estate as they got older. It was a job that had somewhat flexible hours and a potentially high rate of return for the time invested. I worked when the kids were in school and sometimes on weekends and at night when my DH was home. Not exactly what the women's libbers had in mind, but it kept me from feeling completely cut off from the career-minded adult world. I never was completely happy being a homemaker full time.

Thanks Karen! I agree completely that women were too hard on other women about having a career, husband and children, and the motto was "you can have it all!" At first, I was a single parent working hard and having to leave my baby with babysitters until he was 4 yrs. old. It was one of the most difficult and emotionally draining times of my life.

When I remarried, I was fortunate enough to be able to stay home with my kids. I truly think they benefitted from having a parent available when they needed one. They also realized that I knew where they were all the time.

I also worked in Real Estate as they got older. It was a job that had somewhat flexible hours and a potentially high rate of return for the time invested. I worked when the kids were in school and sometimes on weekends and at night when my DH was home. Not exactly what the women's libbers had in mind, but it kept me from feeling completely cut off from the career-minded adult world. I never was completely happy being a homemaker full time.

What a wonderful career choice! I always thought that working in Real Estate must be a great job, the flexible hours, etc. Perfect for moms with children at home. And congratulations on finding a great husband who allowed you to stay home with the little ones. I know plenty of men who make their wives work so that they can buy more "toys", like cars and boats. Being forced to work and leave your kids is as bad as being forced to stay home if you want to work. So glad it worked out well for you!:clap2:

Karen

Sunta, I can only partially agree with your statements, I agree with you that I am apposed to how the church subjegates women and reinforces a role of subservience. I do however applaud the good that many religious people do in the world and even though they may have a different perspective on certain issues I am happy that many of them spend many hours doing good. As I have said in the past I had three aunts that were Catholic nuns and their views on the role of women were very different than mine. They did however devout their lives to helping the sick, poor and less fortunate and for that they deserve some gratitude.

I think that it is easy to find fault with religion but we must also temper our feelings because there are many good people (Mother Theresa) who we slander when we refer to an entire group as BS.

Well said, TommyO! Not all believers preach hell, fire and brimstone.

Thanks Karen. I know I'm very fortunate and I am always thankful. I guess all the bra-burning and yelling that went on has helped women overall. With my weight loss I'm afraid I would scare the natives if I burnt my bra.

I grew up during the 1950s and 1960s. When I was very, very young I was an angry kid and terribly jealous of my brother. I was a tomboyish kid and did not, you see, want to grow up to be a wife and mother.

I wanted to have my father's life; it looked much more interesting and glamorous. He seemed to have much more freedom, and much more control over his life, and respect, of course. My father had a lot of respect.

He was a real estate broker and so he seemingly came and went as he wished. My mother cooked only those dishes which he liked and bought only those clothes of which he approved. It was he who controlled the money and it was he who understood the arcana of the world of business. Why, he actually read the financial section of the newspaper!

On the other hand, my mother's life was made up of many small items. That she was a stunningly competant woman took me many, many decades to recognise.

Around the time that I was entering university militant feminism was entering hitting its own stride. I, for one, sure did profit from it in my own life and I am certain that this movement has assisted both men and women to better acknowledge that inside each one of us resides some characteristics and interests which have been traditionally assigned to the opposite gender. This movement has freed women up to engage in careers, activities, and lifestyles that once were considered to be unavailable to them. It has also freed up men to involve themselves in more nurturing roles.

Neverthess, the movement did become too, too doctrinaire. Women who did want to stay at home and look after their families found themselves being dissed for opting to follow a 'traditional' path.

We have moved far beyond the feminist movement of the 1960s-70s and much of what the feminists were on about in those days seems both shrill and mind-numbingly doctrinaire now. I don't think that there are many young women who style themselves as feminists these days. They don't have to, do they?

I have never, ever been told by anyone in my church -- or my life -- that I shouldn't work. I grew up in a family where my parents worked together (my dad was a doctor and my mom was his secretary/office manager). My mom told me it was more important for me to learn to use my brain than to learn to cook and clean, and consequently I'm still not a good cleaner or chef! But I know how to hire a housecleaner and can reheat in the microwave really well :mad:

I have been a Christian for about 15 years and I have never, ever heard a sermon preached on or even had any pastor tell me I should stay home and tend to house and/or kids. When my first daughter was born, I couldn't wait to get back to the office because it was the one place I felt competent:D. My husband and I own a business together, and when we had kids he became a "stay-at-home-dad" of sorts. But I found myself longing to be at home with our kids. So we were able to sell a portion of our business to get me home full time so I could homeschool and still work. I run two full-time businesses and a third part-time, as well as homeschooling both kids. I still don't cook and clean very well.

I firmly believe that it is best for kids to be at home with one parent (or both, if possible). I think if most families were to subscribe to this philosophy it would mean the mom staying home (for a variety of reasons). But I don't for a milli-second believe that means the mom is "inferior" to the dad. When my husband stayed home with the kids in their younger years, he was in no way inferior to me. And if the positions were reversed, I would not be inferior to him. Raising children is a worthy, intensely important, and extremely difficult job, regardless of which parent is doing it.

The other night we were doing our nightly Bible study with our girls, and the passage we read was about the empty tomb. I stopped after my husband read the account and I asked my girls who the first people were to see the empty tomb, talk to the angel, and know Jesus was resurrected. They answered that it was women. I asked them why they thought that was the case. My older daugther answered that it was because women weren't very highly regarded in that society and Jesus was saying that they have just as much value as men. And I agree with her. I don't think that any institution that denigrates women is getting it right. Just because women have different roles and functions in society and in a marriage doesn't mean one gender is inferior and the other is superior.

Gadget, I agree with you. I do think that it is best for kids to be raised in a stable environment with an on-site caregiver and that this individual should ideally be the kids' parent. And I think that women often prove to be better psychologically equipped for the job than men. I am kind of a conservative grrl on this issue. I do believe that kids have a better chance in a two parent home and I think they do much better when they are not farmed out to a nanny or daycare.

But, I was an atypical kid growing up in the 1950s. I wasn't cut out - I still am not - for family life. And I have met many wonderful heterosexual men who are very, very maternal. (For that matter I have met many gay women who were more maternal than I am!) I personally owe those feminists a lot!

A healthy society is one which permits people to live to the best of their personal capabilities. You sound like a fortunate woman. It is obvious from your posts that you have never found yourself in a position where you were cornered by the lowered expectations of your parents, your mate, or your church. You are intellectually gifted, financially fortunate, and you are having a great time raising your kids. This is good stuff but you are who you are and you live where you live. Other women who live in other parts of the country may well still be getting different messages from their churches, their families, and their men.

And it was certainly no fun growing up grrl during the 1950s.:phanvan