Contracts for dating are the only logical solution

MisterLogical said:

Again I not talking about DATES, so that is completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

"Contracts for dating are the only logical solution"

When do you propose to pull out this contract?

wolfsgirl said:

"Contracts for dating are the only logical solution"

When do you propose to pull out this contract?

Click to expand...

When someone says "Hey do you want to be my GF/BF" and you say "If you agree to these terms" and you say "Yes or no". When you date a Christian you know there is certain things they wont do or need to do barbecue of religion. However those rules are already known/laid out. This is simply for cases where the rules are not already laid out. For example if you date a Christian most of the time there is the rule about "No sex before marriage". So you cant really get mad if they say "I cant sleep with you until we get married" unless for whatever reason they decide to break the rule, but you already knew going into the relationship what the rule was. So if you choose to proceed that is your choice.

MisterLogical said:

When someone says "Hey do you want to be my GF/BF" and you say "If you agree to these terms" and you say "Yes or no". When you date a Christian you know there is certain things they wont do or need to do barbecue of religion. However those rules are already known/laid out. This is simply for cases where the rules are not already laid out. For example if you date a Christian most of the time there is the rule about "No sex before marriage". So you cant really get mad if they say "I cant sleep with you until we get married" unless for whatever reason they decide to break the rule, but you already knew going into the relationship what the rule was. So if you choose to proceed that is your choice.

Click to expand...

First of all, you are hugely stereotyping Christians. There are a lot of Christians out there who have sex before they are married.

Second, most relationships between adults are not started with the actual words "do you want to be my GF/BF". The majority simply develop from dating into much more exclusivity that is talked about in snippets or even possibly a major discussion or two, but not just with a simple question.

MisterLogical said:

When someone says "Hey do you want to be my GF/BF" and you say "If you agree to these terms" and you say "Yes or no". When you date a Christian you know there is certain things they wont do or need to do barbecue of religion. However those rules are already known/laid out. This is simply for cases where the rules are not already laid out. For example if you date a Christian most of the time there is the rule about "No sex before marriage". So you cant really get mad if they say "I cant sleep with you until we get married" unless for whatever reason they decide to break the rule, but you already knew going into the relationship what the rule was. So if you choose to proceed that is your choice.

Click to expand...

In all of my relationships all of those things were figured out before the exclusive relationship phase by discussing goals, wants and needs.

I guess if it works for you, go for it. I just don't see it as becoming a a thing in the dating scene.

roguenuke said:

First of all, you are hugely stereotyping Christians. There are a lot of Christians out there who have sex before they are married.

Second, most relationships between adults are not started with the actual words "do you want to be my GF/BF". The majority simply develop from dating into much more exclusivity that is talked about in snippets or even possibly a major discussion or two, but not just with a simple question.

Click to expand...

I believe the OP is still very young, and may not have had many adult relationships yet. Looking at other posts where they were complaining about being 18 and not getting student aid because they still live at home gives a hint to the age and maturity involved.

wolfsgirl said:

I believe the OP is still very young, and may not have had many adult relationships yet. Looking at other posts where they were complaining about being 18 and not getting student aid because they still live at home gives a hint to the age and maturity involved.

Click to expand...

There is no good reason for 18 year olds to date anyway.

I wish I had not wasted any time or money dating before I was 25.

Big waste of time and money.

wolfsgirl said:

"Contracts for dating are the only logical solution"

When do you propose to pull out this contract?

Click to expand...

"Pull Out" being the operative words -- no pun intended.

roguenuke said:

First of all, you are hugely stereotyping Christians. There are a lot of Christians out there who have sex before they are married.

Second, most relationships between adults are not started with the actual words "do you want to be my GF/BF". The majority simply develop from dating into much more exclusivity that is talked about in snippets or even possibly a major discussion or two, but not just with a simple question.

Click to expand...

No its not a stereotyping. Its just a fact. If you dont like that fact, you dont like it but it does not mean its not true. A lot of Christian religions they tend to have a set of rules which most of them will follow. The "No sex before marriage" is the most known rule so I just used that as most people would know it Christian or not. You might not understand other peoples religion but it does not change the fact that these are the auctual rules. I guessing you never met any Christians or know anything about Christianity so not surprising you would try to argue against it.

The rules say to be a good Christian you must follow these set of rules. However you are also suppose to go to church too and many Christians do not actually follow that so it depends. However if someone is Christian and says to you "I cant have sex before marriage since my religion says that its wrong" it is because they are faithful to that religion. If you are too intolerant of the fact someone might believe or live differently than you based on something like that I recommend you just not date them. It will save you both a lot of trouble.

Generally there is slight variations in each one but a lot of the Christian followings broke off from Catholicism. A lot of them did not like how the Catholic church was running things and they kept breaking off over and over saying they believed in worshiping in their own way. However many of these coming from the same root have many similar core beliefs. I not going to bother naming all the similarities though. We still have a lot of Catholics and Catholic churches today though.

Signing a contract won't make the jerks go away, just make them more cunning and determined.

When dating you have to accept that it is usually a whole lot of pain, even if some of it is pleasure or a lot of fun.

But when you find someone it can be all worth it, and if not there is always divorce (an issue for Catholics though, who have to sure before they tie the knot that 'this is it').

MisterLogical said:

No its not a stereotyping. Its just a fact. If you dont like that fact, you dont like it but it does not mean its not true. A lot of Christian religions they tend to have a set of rules which most of them will follow. The "No sex before marriage" is the most known rule so I just used that as most people would know it Christian or not. You might not understand other peoples religion but it does not change the fact that these are the auctual rules. I guessing you never met any Christians or know anything about Christianity so not surprising you would try to argue against it.

The rules say to be a good Christian you must follow these set of rules. However you are also suppose to go to church too and many Christians do not actually follow that so it depends. However if someone is Christian and says to you "I cant have sex before marriage since my religion says that its wrong" it is because they are faithful to that religion. If you are too intolerant of the fact someone might believe or live differently than you based on something like that I recommend you just not date them. It will save you both a lot of trouble.

Click to expand...

Actually, the original rules were simply that you were basically married to someone you had sex with.

But, either you accept that not all Christians are like you, believe what you do (including this set of rules you presented) or you don't and realize that this would mean that there are far fewer Christians than non in this country.

Here are the stats for Christians having sex before marriage.

How many Evangelical young adults have sex before marriage? Study: Almost everyone | Christian News on Christian Today

And that is just "evangelical" young Christians. Which means less "enthusiastic" Christians and older Christians likely have even higher numbers.

There are in fact many who view being engaged as close enough to being married that it doesn't fall under the sin of fornication. Some feel that as long as they only have sex with this one person, then that is all that matters.

roguenuke said:

Actually, the original rules were simply that you were basically married to someone you had sex with.

But, either you accept that not all Christians are like you, believe what you do (including this set of rules you presented) or you don't and realize that this would mean that there are far fewer Christians than non in this country.

Here are the stats for Christians having sex before marriage.

How many Evangelical young adults have sex before marriage? Study: Almost everyone | Christian News on Christian Today

And that is just "evangelical" young Christians. Which means less "enthusiastic" Christians and older Christians likely have even higher numbers.

There are in fact many who view being engaged as close enough to being married that it doesn't fall under the sin of fornication. Some feel that as long as they only have sex with this one person, then that is all that matters.

Click to expand...

I dont really understand how that is different from saying wait for marriage to have sex. Since saying you are married to who you have sex with, means if you choose to have sex with someone are married. So that would still mean having sex with people you are not going to marry is against the religion.

Also I never said that some Christians can choose to not follow it, I specifically mentioned that in my original response to it. However it is a RULE, and to say its not just shows you know anything about the subject.
So what your saying its not really relevant, you can choose not to follow something regardless of what anything tells you to do. Christians are human you know. They can follow stuff or not if they so wish it. I also said its believed good Christians go to church but not everyone does that either. So you are as they say "Preeching to the Choir" and there is no purpose in doing so.
I really dont care how many Christians are in the country, but saying there is no Christians is a lie. So what is wrong with correcting it?

MisterLogical said:

I dont really understand how that is different from saying wait for marriage to have sex. Since saying you are married to who you have sex with, means if you choose to have sex with someone are married. So that would still mean having sex with people you are not going to marry is against the religion.

Also I never said that some Christians can choose to not follow it, I specifically mentioned that in my original response to it. However it is a RULE, and to say its not just shows you know anything about the subject.
So what your saying its not really relevant, you can choose not to follow something regardless of what anything tells you to do. Christians are human you know. They can follow stuff or not if they so wish it. I also said its believed good Christians go to church but not everyone does that either. So you are as they say "Preeching to the Choir" and there is no purpose in doing so.
I really dont care how many Christians are in the country, but saying there is no Christians is a lie. So what is wrong with correcting it?

Click to expand...

Just like someone can choose not to follow some dating contract regardless of what it tells them to do. Getting to know the person and discussing your wants and needs is better than handing them a paper to sign.

No. Piss on that. I don't even like government being involved in marriage. I don't want the government in my relationships.

MisterLogical said:

I dont really understand how that is different from saying wait for marriage to have sex. Since saying you are married to who you have sex with, means if you choose to have sex with someone are married. So that would still mean having sex with people you are not going to marry is against the religion.

Also I never said that some Christians can choose to not follow it, I specifically mentioned that in my original response to it. However it is a RULE, and to say its not just shows you know anything about the subject.
So what your saying its not really relevant, you can choose not to follow something regardless of what anything tells you to do. Christians are human you know. They can follow stuff or not if they so wish it. I also said its believed good Christians go to church but not everyone does that either. So you are as they say "Preeching to the Choir" and there is no purpose in doing so.
I really dont care how many Christians are in the country, but saying there is no Christians is a lie. So what is wrong with correcting it?

Click to expand...

If the person feels that they are going to marry them though before they get married, and that is why they are having sex with them, then that would be them still adhering to their beliefs of what the rule actually is.

Rules change by the way. As well as interpretations of what rules are.

And I didn't say anything about no Christians in this country.

MisterLogical said:

So you are saying you are restrained since your partner explains they want a closed relationship and tell you what cheating is to them? So in other words you cant stay committed. If that is the case why get in a relationship?

Click to expand...

No, my relationship is easy & comfortable - the way I believe it should be.

We have mutual core values, try to use respect, care, and consideration for each other, and try not to be containing or demanding of each other.

From the day I met her we had a great symbioses, even though we come from different cultures and races a half a globe apart. There was no 'work', 'rules' or 'demands' - we just 'fit'. We thought alike, even with a slight language difference.

So I married her (in 8 mos).

Whenever I start hearing about relationships requiring 'rules' or 'hard work', I shudder! I've had relationships like that, and they failed. This one has been fun, easy, and breezy, and I like it just that way!

She had to go back to Asia (without me) relatively early in our marriage to dispose of & liquidate her family's estate - it took 5 mos. We only got to talk once a week. During the entire time I never felt stressed or worried about her, our relationship, or how she was conducting herself; because her values & the way she conducts herself are shockingly similar to mine. And sure enough, when she got back & discussed the details of her trip, her actions & judgement were virtually how I would've handled every one of her situations.

We never much discussed the things on your list when dating prior to marriage, though they may have come up 'here & there' in conversation, but I do not recall them specifically. All we did was open-up our finances to make sure there were no surprises, and we assured ourselves there were no other kids or marriages in our pasts that could resurface (we were both married once before, each with children).

And that was that - nearly two decades ago, and nothing has changed since (except the kids got raised!).

[In full disclosure: We are both Roman Catholic, so perhaps that may explain the core values symmetry - I don't know]

Maybe private contracts, but not government. There have been a bunch of times I wish I had certain things down in writing. People I date often have a selective memory, so a contract could prove useful.

One has to wonder what kind of people would be interested in so rigidly controlling human relationships?

What needs are they attempting to fill? What obligations and responsibilties are they attempting to avoid?

Do they need a contract to structure their personal lives because they dont want to or cant run it themselves?

Love isn't based on logic.

:lol:

Lursa said:

One has to wonder what kind of people would be interested in so rigidly controlling human relationships?

What needs are they attempting to fill? What obligations and responsibilties are they attempting to avoid?

Do they need a contract to structure their personal lives because they dont want to or cant run it themselves?

Click to expand...

A committed relationship where there is no confusion of what the rules are. That is what its meant to do.

shrubnose said:

Love isn't based on logic.

:lol:

Click to expand...

So cheating is?

Laws about dating? Well alrighty then. Yup, the Supreme Court's gonna love this.

betuadollar said:

Laws about dating? Well alrighty then. Yup, the Supreme Court's gonna love this.

Click to expand...

I dont think there is laws about that, other than you cant date a child and cant marry a blood relative.

MisterLogical said:

A committed relationship where there is no confusion of what the rules are. That is what its meant to do.

So cheating is?

Click to expand...

Who said it was? Not me. Has that been an issue for you? LOLOLOL Do you think that any contract would stop it? :doh

As for rules in a relationship, the contract would be no more binding than anything else and people would just walk away, or not, when someone broke the rules.

If you cant have that conversation with a partner....that's your biggest problem right there.

Lursa said:

Who said it was? Not me. Has that been an issue for you? LOLOLOL Do you think that any contract would stop it? :doh

As for rules in a relationship, the contract would be no more binding than anything else and people would just walk away, or not, when someone broke the rules.

If you cant have that conversation with a partner....that's your biggest problem right there.

Click to expand...

The Second reply was not even to you, so I dont see why you are answering it.

Also that is basically the conversation with your partner, but its written down. So it really makes no difference. Except when you write it on paper, they cant say they did or did not agree to something since they read the rule and cant use "Selective memory" to win an argument in the future. Which a lot of people often do.

MisterLogical said:

The Second reply was not even to you, so I dont see why you are answering it.

Also that is basically the conversation with your partner, but its written down. So it really makes no difference. Except when you write it on paper, they cant say they did or did not agree to something since they read the rule and cant use "Selective memory" to win an argument in the future. Which a lot of people often do.

Click to expand...

I see you have had some specific problems in the past.....