Yuyutsu,
I agree. The word mandate is wrong. "encouraged to" is better.

A good father would know if his son was gay or neutral or confused. The overwhelming majority of boys would be overjoyed, let me tell you.

A good father would then deal with the situation accordingly. Times have changed as you well know.

In those rare cases where you have a bad father nothing will save that boy. Thats life.

Its a rapidly changing world and more integrative ways of managing social issues are required so more people can be fulifilled in life and not downtrodden and discriminated against.

To FredM

The idea of having an agreement on many aspects of life is a good approach to a marriage. But leave the lawyers out of it. Instead have marriage consolers on a regular thing. Before marriage and possibly several times throughout a marriage, if you trust them to help keep the relationship healthy. A second approach is to go to a class together on managing money. Partly for their education on aspects of money that aren't taught and what to do for certain goals, like getting approved for a loan if they want a home or some other expense. But also so that they are on the same boat on those matters. Aside from those options there might be many other things a couple can do to strengthen their commitment.

But bringing a contract and lawyers into the mix will make it harder on the commitment to each other and instead make it about a commitment to an agreement that often could be hard to keep. Imagine a first argument that they get into and the husband or the wife brings up the contract and how they aren't living up to it. If that doesn't cause a rift in the relationship and harm their resolve to love each other, then I don't know what will.

As for the sex for a 16 year old, that's a bad idea. Most kids probably will be excited for the idea. Instead of having the issue of kids thinking they have a responsibility if they get a girl pregnant, you have kids learning about women purely as a thing for sex and not to commit to a relationship. That and a epidemic of STDs at a young age for men. No responsible parent who respects women or wants their sons to be healthy should consider it. Sorry for being harsh, but it should not be considered.

To David.

I don't know of anyone (outside of a movie or a tv show) who thinks they've seen Santa clause or the tooth fairy. If this happens that is news to me. Could you provide an example of a physical manifestation of a person's belief, that wasn't really there. Be sure that this isn't coming from someone who is known for hallucinating due to a medical condition or drug use, because it's being applied to everyday people you see in the world (yourself included) as if reality is determined by our beliefs.

What I'm suggesting is not to just believe someone because they say so. But if they have a life of experience, take that into account. Either to consider it and reject it because you don't think it happened that way, or you think they are a bad witness for a specific reason, or consider it a possibility if they don't hold any reason to doubt that person. To quote logic from the bible. As iron sharpens iron, one man sharpens another.

(Continued)

(Continued)

Correct me if I'm wrong, (please tell me I have this wrong) but my impression of your logic is that if I can't prove to you my beliefs then not only should you reject them, but I should reject them too. Is that basically your stance? But here is my issue with this logic. I know from experience, not just through study that God exists. I'm sorry if you haven't found Him and have found reasons to doubt Him. No matter how long that process took it's a tragedy. But for me it's along the lines that I can't un-see what I've seen. Or un-hear what I've heard. Your not being convinced does not counter observations of those that are Christian.

Moving on to theology, here is one simple explanation. Jesus came to this world knowing why He was here. I assume this was known for His entire life, from childhood to hanging on the cross. He came to save us. Both by miracle and teaching, as well as by the great sacrifice He made. He died and He rose again. God didn't abandon Jesus. He let Jesus take our consequence for being broken in a broken world. Then Jesus came back to life in just a few days and even went up to Heaven to be with God once more. That's a lot of love, even to us who aren't like Jesus in His love for God.

To Not_Now.Soon,

Jesus' primary aim was to ease suffering in a barbaric Roman world. And that has spread beyond his time.

Any attempt to use his 'words' to bind people to situations of suffering like one person entering marriage without due knowledge of sexual encounters and the other without knowledge of money matters is a misinterpretation of his purpose.

You should attend a divorce court sometime and see what the suffering and hate that basic ignorance of money matters and sex in entering marriage produces.

Knowledge is power over suffering. And that was Jesus forte. Astute fathers and Lawyers using 'enlightened' legal contracts can reduce worry and thus suffering in marriages.

I also do not see any reason why enlightened mothers could not take their over 16 daughters to a male professional if they were worried that thoughts of sex were interrupting their daughter's school performance and discipline --- if the child consented. I have actually known some women who have expressed that very wish to help their daughters only to be left suffering without any options. And I will bet there are a lot of mothers out there suffering with that very problem right now.

End suffering . don't promote it!

To FredM.

I've watched a friend go through a divorce. It wasn't for the reasons you've referenced. Doing a google search for the top reasons for divorce brought up several web sites, but for a reference of reasons here's the site I'll reference for the top 10 common reasons of divorce.

https://www.marriage.com/advice/divorce/10-most-common-reasons-for-divorce/

The reasons it describes (in the order that the site says) follows.
1). Infidelity
2) money issues.
3 & 4) lack of communication and constant arguing.
5) weight gain.
6) unrealistic expectations.
7) lack of intimacy.
8) lack of equality regarding who's trying to make it work and shouldering the responsibility.
9) not being prepared for marriage.
10) abuse.

The web site recommends marriage consoling even when the relationship is fine to keep it healthy. I agree with that approach, even to have a marriage consoling session before getting married, to help the couple be prepared for the marriage they enter. The two exceptions to this is regarding money issues, (that is solved by shared education, not by lawyers); and abuse. With abuse consoling can be tried also, but if it is real abuse the one being abused should leave (either to a friend or a family member) temporary while deciding what to do next.

I'm not trying to argue with you for the sake of arguing, but I think your approach of a lawyer's contract will just aggravate the situation and not provide any help. It definitely won't help with sex or money issues.

As for the 16 year old's education. Parents can just talk to their kids. Bringing a prostitute into the situation will only spread sexual diseases. It would be worse then kids just shaking up together on their own because at least when kids do it they are relatively clean and not exposed to STDs. A prostitute will infect the younger generation making an epidemic of disease when they eventually follow the parent's lesson on sex and go shack up with one another. Regardless of our differences on morals and respecting the other sex, disease is a reason to not prostitute your kids.