Active Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by HeWhoWaits

  1. Birth control/condoms as a married man or woman

    I'm also recently married. We aren't doing anything....just totally natural. We are just letting it happen so we are prepared to start having kids at any moment. Once we have two, I plan to get snipped so technically we won't even use any birth control ever.
  2. New relationship - how to tell him I'm waiting?

    Congrats OP! Bookish, so sorry to hear you get worried about this sometimes. Don't give up, don't settle either. There are still plenty of us still out there, I'm recently married and I've had my doubts a time or two myself. I agree that society is sure changing to where few treat sex with honor and respect and as something to cherish and wait for verses a third date obligation but plenty of us still value it and wait for it. It is something to treasure!
  3. Yes. We married in the early afternoon, we had the day after off and then left for our honeymoon after that. There was no travel that got in the way or forced us to rush.
  4. Singles, college age bible group at church.
  5. No, not even remotely. The mindset switched over for us very smoothly without any glitches.
  6. A little. I mean before I had my place all to myself, I had all the quiet, alone time I needed to reflect and meditate. Now there is someone always there. The alone time I could get before to where I'd usually meditate is a little harder to come by now.
  7. Tattoos

    I love the look of a woman's skin. I hate tattoos, ruins the beauty of her skin. Horribly unattractive to me personally. I wish this 20 year fad would pass already. I hate how permanent they are. They can never be taken off ever, hair you can change, it can grow out, clothes, you can alter your dress style and go through phases, jewelry you can put on and then take off but a tattoo can never go away, it is a manmade ink scar of pictures or words that will always be there. You never get to change your mind and take it off after five years. Get one at 18 you've still got it at 70. If I didn't think women's skin was so hot I guess I wouldn't cringe as strongly when they purposely screw it up with some permanent ink scar. Print it on paper and frame it I may think it is a pretty design. Auto detail it and stick it on your car, it might be cool, Forever scare it into your own flesh and I'll always hate it and think you've ruined you God given beauty.
  8. Didn't Tom Hanks already deal with this in Castaway? Cop out answer...I have no idea. I'd probably have to go and talk to my church and have some real heart to hearts with the pastor on what to do. Legally what is the case? Is my second marriage immediately moot once it becomes evident my first marriage was still in tact? Either way it would be an awful situation.
  9. I've always known since childhood. It wasn't until I got older I realized that sex within marriage wasn't the normal, routine thing to do.
  10. Long Engagements

    It depends on how long the couple dated before the engagement. If the dating period was short than a longer engagement may be appropriate. If the couple has been dating for two years and then has a really long engagement....it probably just means they are already having sex so things aren't as urgent.
  11. What are you reading?

    How did you enjoy the ending?
  12. What are you reading?

    I'm currently reading 3 books. The Dead Student (John Katzenbach), Wuthering Heights (Emily Brontë) and A Dog's Way Home (W.Bruce Cameron).
  13. The post was would you "date" someone with children. If the answer is no than you wouldn't be spending the time with each other to even fall in love, so this entire "love" angle seems a little moot. It seems this debate that is beginning about whether or not you'd fall in love with someone with kids or if you could "choose" not to seems moot. If you choose not to date them than that kind of nips things in the bud. It would take a set of very special circumstances to spend great amounts of time with someone you've chosen not to date and chosen NOT to spend that time of time with. Someone who would date them could spend enough time with that person to get to know them well enough to fall in love. This wouldn't really apply to those who would not date them at all.
  14. sovereignty of God vs human dominion

    I would say that much of life is all about our own actions, our own will and our own struggles. I would say God tends to keep the overall macro, big, big things moving in the direction he wants but I don't think God really micromanages each person's day to day lives. Much of life is what we make of it. We get to choose and I think that is how God wants it. In essence, we are being tested, tested to see if we'll choose to do what pleases God or choose not to (we have the scriptures as a guide to show us wisdom and how best to live life). Now a person who is very disciplined in prayer and seeks God daily will have much more access to God's involvement in their life but still much is up to us. Even when God "guides" a person, it is usually done by very subtle tweaks and in my experience he directs and guides those who do not have fear and take action and begin to "do", they make decisions, they take risks and "live" life. They may pray and ask for guidance and ask for God's will to be done but in my opinion, he directs those who set their boat afloat and get it moving down the river. They step out in faith, then God will offer those little course corrections from time to time. I don't believe God will do that much or offer a lot of guidance for those that just sit paralyzed, doing nothing, just "waiting" for a word from God before they do anything. Even the parable about the talents "For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away." seems to display a sense of free will to exercise our talents and work and strive or the freedom to hide our talents in fear and not use them (use it or lose it, atrophy vs. exercise and growth). Someone mentioned "predestination" earlier. I've always known people that struggled with that concept. I've never had the slightest question about it. It makes perfect sense and I have no confusion over it. God knows everything, he knows everything that will ever happen, but just knowing it doesn't mean we still aren't choosing freely. We have free will, we choose freely, he just knows what we will do.
  15. How do you know if he/she is the one?

    Sometimes, you just know:
  16. Fiance vs Father

    Hard to judge. We don't have any way to know if the conversation was something that should just be between you and your father or if it is something that should be said to your fiancé. Also, I don't have any way to know how respectful and polite your fiancé was via his text or whether he was snarky and disrespectful. My default opinion, not knowing enough of the details to really go any further is to say that confidential conversations should stay confidential. Lastly, at this point he is just a guy you are dating (as I don't know how well the father knows him...you aren't married, you just intend to marry at this point). He ISN'T your father's "son" (in-law) so I'm not sure (not knowing details) how pushy and confrontational this is to have some guy get preachy about what he does and does not talk to his own daughter about. Without knowing all the relationships and how close everyone is with each other, all I can hypothesize about is that your father is close with YOU and has a deep relationship with YOU, hence I don't know how appropriate or out of bounds this was for some guy he may or may not be close to, to come confront him out of the blue about what he can and can't talk about with his own daughter. If they air isn't cleared and the situation diffused a long-long riff may have just formed between all three of you.
  17. I can't say that this situation or premise holds true at my church. First it is a large church and the college aged, early 20's singles class that I go to in the church is pretty big. What you speak of doesn't occur. Men and women all interact, are friends, hang out. The activities via this group are replete and there is always tons to do and a lot going on and the men and women are always interacting with each other. I've been dating a woman from this class and there was never any "isolation" to have to break through.
  18. Can't enjoy novels anymore

    Have you read the 7 Narnia books by C.S. Lewis. They are young adult novels but there is only adventure, not really any romance.
  19. Can't enjoy novels anymore

    I cannot relate in any way at all. I love to read and I read all the time. What you speak of, however, I have no experience with. These young "romance" novels. I've never read a one. I read lots of classics, and history and spy novels like Vince Flynn, Tom Clancy, fantasy/horror like Stephen King and Dean Koontz, criminal and suspense like John Katzenbach, Harlan Coben and Lee Child. Occasionally the characters have relations but they are all grown adult characters. Some of the classics dealt with Romance like Pride and Prejudice or Jane Eyre but that was in the Victorian age and the novels weren't "sexual", most involved were virgins or they didn't discuss histories. Mr. Rochester was an older man and had a history. I've not read too many YA novels. I've read the three Hunger Games novels and Paper Towns and The Age of Miracles but those didn't really have any sex in them. A character in Paper Towns had a past but was not that kind of novel. Miracles had none at all, I think the characters were like middle school age. I love to read, I'm not familiar with this YA novel trend that has ruined things for you. I hope you don't give it up. Try some different kinds of novels.
  20. How old are you?

    Awesome! The first to get it. You are correct.
  21. How old are you?

    I am : 2x - (5²) = (√9 x 7)
  22. I don't think "judge" is the correct word. If you have dating criteria that doesn't make you a "judge" You can choose not to date those you don't feel compatible with.

    I'd say this is a theory. On some levels there is truth to it. I don't necessarily see apples to apples equivalence between a woman initiating first contact and a life long trend of a woman always taking charge, always initiating. That is just the personality traits of each party. I don't think any woman wants to make all the decisions and wants to be with a strong leader. That being said, I don't really think it has anything to do with the initial dates. If he gives off the vibe of a weak person she can just stop dating him after a couple of dates. I'll back off from the concept of "pursuing". I'll just say this. I don't see anything wrong with either party, male or female, making the initial contact or expressing interest in a person. I'd say any person who has really strong feelings of interest for someone would serve themselves best if they acted and took a chance and told the person. Whether that is a guy telling a girl or vise versa. If the other party never had a clue you liked them, and had never thought of it until you told them then there are a LOT of ships that will have passed in the night because the party that had the intense feelings decided to just sit back and wait. Sitting back and waiting usually leads to nothing happening. I'd say whoever has the feelings should do something or else risk the regret of "what if" plaguing them. I had a crush on so-and-so for a year. What if I had told them I liked them...or at least flirted in a way that let them know I'd be receptive if they asked me out? Now, if you want to just infer from this that once a couple starts dating, if a situation arises to where the woman is always contacting the man, making dates and the guy almost seems as if he doesn't even care if he sees this woman again if she didn't keep initiating interaction with him that's a different scenario.
  24. Becoming an Atheist

    To each their own, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. I, on the other hand am always amazed people "grow" to believe in the existence of God less and less. For me it is the exact opposite, the more I learn and understand the more my belief in God is confirmed and strengthened. Just the natural world is amazing evidence to me. People who don't believe God "created" things just cough up every amazing thing to "it evolved that way". I'm just the opposite. If there is no creator and designer the way things evolved really make no sense. There are too many things that have a specific, needed purpose, things that need to be to just say they evolved. Creatures die and have to pro create to keep the species. We know that, it is obvious. But a world that just "is" and has no creator would have no reason to just creatures having full blown systems and drives that serve one purpose, the continuation of the species. That is an elaborate purpose. One who plans would know that it is a needed function for plants and living creatures to procreate. Without intelligence behind it, it makes no sense for this system to spring forth. Some things are just too complicated and specialized to just "evolve". Flight for example. A bird flying is so, so, so complicated and so many criteria must first be met before flight can occur. They must have a unique aerodynamic shape and the wing itself is so specialized with the curved leading edge with the perfect proportions of curved top and flat bottom to create the difference in air pressure to create lift. The smooth drag resistant feathers that cover the body, the small size, the light hollow bones that are strong but light enough to allow flight. "Birds just evolved that way". Any creature jumping off a 100 foot elevated surface that didn't ALREADY have all of these specialized criteria would just fall to the ground and die or be injured. How, why could such a creature "evolve"? Fight cannot occur until all of these endless criteria are FIRST met. Giraffes stretching out for high food on trees and those with shorter necks dying off because only those with long necks makes sense. You can logically see how a giraffe could evolve. Flying birds? No. Birds can't fly until feathers, shape, wings, light bones, etc. FIRST occur THEN it can fly. That makes no logical sense for a bird to just "evolve". Just the immense complex and spiritual nature of men and women, love, sex, dating and marriage. Without a maker it is very illogical to me for evolution to just (back to my first paragraph) spring forth that creatures should procreate (even though there is no creator to decide it is necessary) then for it to occur by there being two distinct genders and for each to have completely separate complex systems designed to join with the opposite counterpart with the sole purpose of bringing forth another human. So much complexity, each perfectly fitted and knitted with the interaction with the other. Testicles, Ovaries, scrotums, vas deferens, fallopian tube, seminal vesicle, cervix, ejaculatory duct, uterus, penis, vagina, follicle, sperm, egg. The way we are hardwired to desire one another, to desire love, affection for the opposite gender. It seems a little simple to just say "it evolved" without acknowledging how all of these things are needed, and they exist and are because they are necessary. If there is no intelligence determining these very complex themes and systems are "necessary" it doesn't seem logical for them just to evolve and be that way. It makes no sense to want each other, dream of each other, have such intense emotions regarding each other, to be so different in appearance and make up from each other yet the same without recognizing there is a specific NEEDED purpose behind all of these things. To just blindly say these extremely complex needs were fulfilled and these multiple, extremely necessary systems came to be and organism A having body parts designed to specifically match organism B and for each be hard wired to crave these things because it just evolved, no planning, no wisdom, direction, understanding.....it just happened. It just is. We just lucked out in that we evolved to reproduce and not become extinct, we evolved the complex systems to make children, we just evolved to do it as two separate, different genders, our bodies just evolved to know how to imprint our genetic code in our chromosomes and DNA chains just evolved, we just evolved to have romantic feelings for each other and to crave sex, we just lucked out that we evolved to have pleasure receptors in our private areas. It was all needed and we just flat out lucked out that all of this just evolved. How do you evolve it if nothing is there determining this is all NEEDED? How did any living organism just EVOLVE to reproduce when nothing dictates reproduction is NEEDED? It happened because it was necessary? It was needed? Who told evolution reproduction was necessary? Who told evolution creatures shouldn't become extinct? How did evolution think and decide it needed to come up with a solution to death and extinction, that a species NEEDS to go on? If there is no designer and intelligence that understands the weight and mass of air and understands thrust vs. lift vs. drag vs. weight and actually WANTS actual flight to exist, it makes no logical sense for a creature to evolve feathers, aerodynamic shape, extremely light weight, hollowed out bones, foil shaped wings perfectly shaped for flight but not able to hold, grab or manipulate any objects, only air. Giraffes having long necks to reach higher food sources makes micro evolutionary sense. Creatures first developing all of these specialized features BEFORE it was able to fly makes no sense at all. So for me, all of the wondrous things of the world and creation point to a creator to me. There are way too many things that make zero sense to even exist without a creator because the purpose, need and specialization is too great to just evolve. That's just me though.