Steven Crowder Has Sex
As for me, I’m personally delighted for Steven because now maybe he’ll stop badgering me with all those embarrassing questions. And as someone who did not follow the path he advises, and yet somehow ended up with, really, a storybook marriage that has now lasted approximately 472 years (for my wife — for me, it’s gone by in minutes), I’m in no position to offer him experiential support.
And yet, I can’t help feeling our young hero may be onto something. At the very least, I can say that the older I get, the more I feel an insouciant sex-is-just-sex attitude to sex is vastly more destructive to both the individual and society than our elite thinkers are willing to admit. And there is no question we have allowed these elites to teach us to place the value of being non-judgmental over the value of having values. Surely, even without any hard and fast rules, teaching our young that their bodies are meant to be vehicles for their spirits and not the other way around, might improve a world ravaged by depression, illegitimacy, and loneliness.
In any case, drop in on Crowder’s @scrowder Twitter feed and give the whippersnapper a hard time. It’s the internet equivalent of shivaree.
****
Cross-posted from Klavan on the Culture
Related on sex, marriage and relationships at PJ Lifestyle:
Hard to believe this is worthy of a specific column!! My wife and I have been married 35 years and we waited until we were married. I have a 30 year old son who has been married 3 years with a 9 month old son and they didn’t even kiss until they got married!! (not my idea!!) I have a 26 yr old son who is waiting for the right girl. This is not news to us and it is the right thing to do, no matter what the tv and radio and internet says. This drivel that each of us has our own truth…baloney. Something deep in your soul is affected when sex takes place outside the marriage commitment. We have seen far too many marriages and relationships blow up because of that fact, like it or not. Blessings to Steve and his new wife!!
Yeah, funny huh? These days celibate singles feel like they have to hide in shame. I was a virgin at marriage 30 years ago. No big deal then maybe, but my oldest and his wife were both virgins on their wedding day and my 22 and 19 year olds are waiting for marriage too. And no, we don’t follow them around. We trust them. It is possible to raise kids who have strong morals.
Ah, here we go: “File Photo: Apple’s long-rumored iWife, scheduled to ship January 2014.” Nothing to see here, people.
God bless them. I hope and I pray that I can figure out how to raise my children to choose this path. It will not be easy having a path of personal destruction behind me and institutions and a culture that mocks self respect and self control beside me. Glad there are living examples of this mostly lost way of life.
I was shocked at the level of sustained hate directed at the guy. The religious bloggers were really surprising, with their ‘no Christian should judge, you’re a lousy Christian’ line or the popular ‘all you talk about is sex, you don’t understand real marriage and are doomed to divorce’ narrative.
Funny because Christians are allowed to judge. We are allowed to discern what is sin and what is not, based on God’s revealed Word. What we’re not allowed to do is devolve into moralism or superiority over others, especially since we are only considered sinless in God’s eyes through His grace, and not by our own efforts.
Unfortunately too many Christians have abandoned their command to share the Gospel and instead lord their perceived morality over others, or attempt to use the political process to legislate morality, something that humanity hasn’t exactly excelled at.
Yes, Christians are supposed to use judgment, but they are not supposed to condemn. That is what God is saying when he says “Judgment is Mine.” He is really saying, “Only I get to pass sentence.” We are also told to “hate the sin but love the sinner.” So we are to judge the sin, to condemn the evil of it, but not the person.
There is a lot of criticism of Christians out there because they sometimes do get self-Righteous. Just bear in mind that those are not the majority, or even a substantial minority. If a Christian refuses to judge you, and simply goes about his life, I doubt you would even notice. That’s exactly what most of us do. Even those who do not usually learn the wisdom of it and come around.
Don’t paint us all with the same brush. A few get it wrong, but most do not. Those who get it wrong tend also to be very vocal. A little discernment is in order on both sides.
I don’t get the vitriol either. More power to them. I started pretty young, and looking back years later, wish I had waited. I was incredibly immature and selfish. There might be a few less women walking around who still despise me for using them.
I am sure they did not have a prenuptial agreement drawn up. Those things put the thought of divorce into a marriage before it even starts, they are evil.
It is jealousy that drives the hatred – not disagreement with their choice to wait. I have not met one woman who has expressed how thrilled she was that she experienced premarital sex – not one. Very sad to see the attacks in this allegedly “tolerant” yet woefully hostile environment.
I always thought the “elite academics” only liked unlimited sex because it gave them young college nookie, ad nauseaum. Since many would have died virgins without the power trip that comes with being “teacher”, and knowing how venal and scummy they tend to be, what else could we ever expect? Any charitable thoughts we might have had to the contrary have long since been dissipated by the events in Wisconsin and Chicago. Big, fat, nasty Union thugs are only concerned with their own scummy grift. They only see your students as a source of income. I think better of my work product: steel.
These lovely people seem perfectly lovely. I don’t ever want to get in an argument with some people about remaining entirely chaste before marriage. If you really are in love and ENTIRELY committed to each other, the deed is already done. I don’t think God really needs a stamp of approval from a Clergyman. If your heart is pure, God is happy. I’m a coward, so I want at least some stamp.
Like everything else about the Left, they use Alinsky bullshit (yes, I mean that entire word) of “hypocrite” to create an environment where sinners in any tiny particular, are never allowed to even comment on anything like this. As if these commie scum are not the greatest hypocrites the World has ever seen! How many more must they kill, in a sheer exercise in hubris, for History to make them obsolete?
In any case, entire commitment is what it’s all about. No church has ever been COMPLETELY successful in that goal, but they have employed every rhetorical weapon at their disposal to assure just that. Entire commitment: no ifs, ands, or buts. “DO YOU? Or do you not?”. “Falling Out of Love” has always earned a derisive snort from myself. I simply don’t remember, given the “…’til Death do you part”, “…in sickness and in health”, or, perhaps more pertinent today, “…for richer or for poorer”, anything at all about falling out, or, for that matter, into, Love. I’m certain it isn’t mentioned in the Book of Common Prayer, not even the commie versions now being used so frivolously by the strange, gay adherents to the old WASP religion.
We have become a mere world of weaselly, self-absorbed gonads, seeking to do unto others as even the Goths and Visigoths would have found disturbing.
These lovely people will do well. With a winking eye, I wonder that they aren’t being coy, much as I was. But if they stay coupled until the end, everyone will envy their lives. And think them Blessed.
As they should.
“The deed is already done.” That is not your call. You don’t have the authority of binding and loosing; that was vested in the Church, and the Church says that marriages are not to be consecrated in secret, but rather before witnesses. So yes, God does require a certain bare minimum of ceremony, because the Church says so, and He gave the Church the authority to make that decision.
“the Church says that marriages are not to be consecrated in secret, but rather before witnesses. So yes, God does require a certain bare minimum of ceremony, because the Church says so, and He gave the Church the authority to make that decision.”
The Church said that the Church said? Sounds like Catholicism to me. When did God give authority to anyone but prophets to speak for him?
Matthew 16:19 : “I will give you the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven.”
The verse refers to God’s disciples applying the word already established in Heaven. It is certainly NOT give the church carte blanche to popishly dictate new rules to the Church
By your rationale pedophilia is just a-ok, because the Catholic Church has allowed it to continue in its priesthood (also unbiblical as the Bible does not allow for unmarried elders and bishops in the Church). Let’s also legitimize plenary indulgences, even though the Bible is specific that man can do nothing to cover for his own sins.
Sorry, Catholic tradition does not substitute nor supplant the actual word of God. There is one mediator between man and God, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5).
Read the entire passage in context. Jesus is speaking to Simon, who he changes his name to Peter, the rock. He tells Peter that he is the rock the Church will be built on. He gives Peter the keys to the kingdom and he telwls Peter that what he binds and looses on earth will be done in heaven. At no time does it say Jesus turned to the other disciples and say what you claim. He is speaking directly to Peter. He becomes the leader of the disciples. He eventually makes his way to Rome and became the Biishop there. He is considered to be the 1st Pope.
The disciples PREACHED the good news and they eventually started writing things down. They say repeatedly in the scriptures that it does not include everything. They exhort followers to do all they have been taught both in person and by written word. It is these acts of the apostles and the spoken words that we get the tradition the Church also follows. Everything there was to know about Jesus was not written in the Bible. I am certain you agree with the scriptures as compiled by the Church according to tradition right? That wasn’t done for hundreds of years. If you reject tradition, how can you trust your Bible is the correct one?
If you reject the authority of the Church established by Christ, how do you decide which of the mplethora of Protestant innovations is true? If you reject the Church’s teaching authority regarding the scriptures, how can you be sure your interpretation is the correct one? What if you are wrong? After all, sola scriptura and sola fides were pretty late (1600s)innovations. Martin Luther actually removed several books from the Bible! He did that because they didn’t fit HIS personal interpretation. Should we all do that?
When Jesus established his church in Matthew, he says that the gates of hell will never prevail against it. Unless Jesus is a liar, which he isn’t, he cant possibly be talking about the Protestant innovations since they didn’t exist for 1600 yrs. He was speaking of the holy, Catholic, apostolic church and look, despite many failures by flawed, sinful humans within the Church, hell has not prevailed and it never will. Jesus is not a liar.
I used to be a Baptist but they couldn’t answer my questions. I began to look for truth and found out that everything I thought about Catholicism was wrong.
Monarch, if the Bible does not allow for unmarried bishops, then Paul was a false prophet masquerading as a bishop, for he was unmarried, yet claimed to be a bishop. Why would you trust books written by a hypocrite, or by those who endorse books written by open hypocrites? No, the requirement is that a clergyman be married no more than once in his lifetime. A man who has been married twice is banned from being ordained to the clergy, and once a man has been ordained, he cannot take a wife, though if he is already married, his existing marriage is unaffected. Because you reject the Pillar and Foundation of Truth, you reject the virtue of celibacy as proclaimed by the Scriptures. However, the epistle you cite is quite clear that presbyters must be ordained by bishops, and since Protestants don’t have bishops, your churches are entirely unbiblical because you don’t have valid presbyters as pastors.
Indulgences make no sense to you because you reject Purgatory, which perversely causes you to subtract from the Scriptures so as to make the Scriptures conform to your doctrine rather than conforming your doctrine to the Scriptures (so much for sola scriptura). Indulgences, plenary or otherwise, are entirely legitimate acts of binding and loosing. Luther was, however, right to call out simony (the act of buying and selling spiritual graces, named for Simon Magus who solicited an ordination by offering St. Peter money) on the part of Church officials.
On the subject of pedophilia, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is as abundantly clear as the Bible that every sexual act except marital relations oriented toward life is gravely sinful, and rape especially so. The victim being a child is an aggravating circumstance, as is the fact that the child was in the perpetrator’s spiritual charge. Catholic doctrine is also abundantly clear that to receive Communion while conscious of unconfessed grave sin is sacrilege, and furthermore, even if one confesses the sin, the confession is worthless and sacrilegious if the penitent does not intend to turn away from sin. Conversely, any sin can be forgiven if the sinner makes a good confession, consisting of naming every grave sin he remembers committing and wishes to avoid sin in the future because he loves God and/or fears Hell. Regardless, no priest can use information obtained in the confessional to the detriment of the penitent FOR ANY REASON. If a priest confessed to his pastor, his bishop, or any other priest that he had raped a child, the priest hearing his confession would be forbidden from reporting it to the police or the child’s parents (or anyone else) under pain of instant excommunication. The only exception is to discuss the matter with direct superiors (pastor, bishop, or the Pope) after receiving the explicit consent of the penitent to do so. Confessions are normally conducted in private, but if someone overhears one anyway, he is under the same obligation as the priest never to divulge what he has learned from the confession.
Paul was a church planter and a missionary, not an elder. Just as missionaries today are not pastors, but work under the guidance of one or more elders. His celibacy was a rare gift of the Spirit, and remains a rare gift today. Certainly more rare than would explain the hordes of priests that aren’t allowed to marry, because of Catholic tradition that contradicts Scriptural ecclesiology (a tradition that was instituted solely to protect the Vatican’s assets from heirs).
Purgatory? Show us where that exists in Scripture, please. Man can do nothing to satisfy God’s justice for sin, thus our need for a Savior. To suggest that a saved soul must still do penance for his sin insults Christ’s sufficient work on the cross.
I’m sorry, but your unbiblical Catholic traditions will not save you. Only faith in the Savior.
Best wishes to the newlywed couple. May they be Blessed through many years together!
My wife and I waited, and we have been married (yes, as virgins)a little over one year. People shouldn’t tie the knot unless they know they are committing to something bigger than themselves, and even then, not unless they can hold themselves to it. The culture does not support such efforts, these days.
Young people are told to wait, and often they make it to about 30 years of age before they decide they are “ready.” That’s a subjective eternity to vigorous and healthy young adults. Most decide that the pleasures of the flesh can’t wait that long, and forgo marriage. Our culture pays the price.
He did not “have sex”. He consecrated his marriage.
1. to make or declare sacred; set apart or dedicate to the service of a deity
2. to make (something) an object of honor or veneration; hallow
3. to devote or dedicate to some purpose
As somebody who has boinked and ba-danged and even fa-nizzled before marriage with no regrets, I have to wonder…. what is wrong with some people? I make my decision and he makes his. Why do people feel threatened by his personal choice? Idontgetit.
As someone who went around the block–a LOT–before marriage(and regrets it when all is said and done), I can tell you that Mr. Klavan is right: They throw all this hate at the Crowders because, deep down, they’re not happy with their own choices.
People who are secure with their lives and the way they’re living, don’t have to whiz on someone else’s campfire. Just sayin’.
Conctgratulations to the Crowders, and may their lives together be long and filled with joy.
European christians don’t wait until marriage, so what’s the fuss?
What amuses me in a sad way is these historical ignoramouses’ firm belief that marriage as virgins is a sure sign the marriage will fail because of “lack of experience”.
Histoically MOST men and women were probably virgins when married — due to lower marriage age, social conditions, etc. — and yet if anything marriage worked better then (statistically speaking) than today.
But then again, that’s a “hate fact” (it seems to imply something bad about Sandra Fluke like folks), so it is not to be recognized.
You are terrific and I enjoy seeing you on Fox. I congratulate you on your recent wedding and wish you great happiness.
The theory that lies and personal attacks on chastity are based in shame is interesting, but are as unprovable as the theory that political perfidy is also shame based. I offer an alternative theory that has become almost cliche’ in conservative circles: Secularism is the new American religious orthodoxy, and it uses hatred, lies, and violence to advance its cause. Perhaps this explains its affinity for the great “religion of peace.”
Both huge numbers of statistics and my own anecdotal evidence lead me to believe that if you want your marriage to last for a lifetime, you wait for sex until after the knot is legitimately tied. Good for Crowder. His wife is stunning and he did just what he should have to make sure they’ll get off to the best possible start.
May God’s blessings be on the both of them and may they have all the children they want!
“a storybook marriage that has now lasted approximately 472 years (for my wife — for me, it’s gone by in minutes),” Well done, Mr. Klavan. You must be taking Advanced Compliments In-Passing from my husband.
The point needs to be made that, after the honeymoon, the realization should set in that chastity must necessarily become a component of marriage for it to survive and thrive. Temptations must be overcome, periods of abstinence must be honored, not simply endured, and, finally, priorities must be reset for child rearing. Obviously, those who go into marriage with hard experience practicing abstinence and honoring chastity will be successful in “bridging the gaps” that are part of real life.
Everyone wants you to come down to their level, like not overdressing for the party and making them look grubby.
I forwarded Steven’s piece to my daughters who are 17 and 20. It’s nice to have someone in popular culture who speaks for the rest of us. On the other side planned parenthood is starting a Facebook campaign so people will stop shaming sluts using the rationale that girls who sleep around just “need” to have more sex than others!
I think the reason some people are mad is because of the last couple of sentences. Just because woman slept with a man before marriage does not make her a floozie. Really, the last paragraph was just not necessary. I am happy for the guy, but i do not share his feelings about this.
“This swimsuit was so cute and fit perfectly. I am 5’6.25″ and weight around 135lbs. I ordered a medium and it fit perfectly. The cut on the bottom is very flattering. I decided to return it because I swim at the local YMCA and this suit is too sexy to wear there. I’m 23 years old and most of the other swimmers are older than me and I didn’t want to offend them.”
That’s a comment from a customer that the swimsuit pictures link to (at Amazon), and that’s how I tailor my dress, according to what others find acceptable.
If I’m swimming with my hippie friends, I swim naked, because that’s what we do. If I’m on a public beach I dress so as not to offend others. That’s pretty much my only gauge when it comes to swimwear.
As far as little girls goes: If a little girl, eight years of age were in my charge, I would allow her to wear swimsuits cut like the ones on the left, but not the one on the far right. Why? Because it’s too revealing, IMO. That’s why. And, my opinion WILL prevail, when I’m in charge of minor children.
Whoops.
Sorry…wrong thread!
So it was the wrong thread, but you perfectly nailed the classic meaning of the virtue of modesty. Well done!
What I meant to say on THIS thread was: Congratulations, and may the newlyweds have a long and happy marriage!
Clearly photo-shopped! Layered PDF!
Come on – Crowder? Really? A babe like that? No way. I saw that girl on the cover of Bride Monthly.
Once again, this story, and all the mindless, judgmental hatred poured out on a couple because they did things right, highlights my developing theory – that things have completely flipped on their heads – that the new judgemental, pompous, overweeningly hypocritical Pharisees of our times are the Leftist elites who control most culture and public opinion, with incessant teachings on THEIR morality of amorality. Just like the Pharisees of old who Jesus excoriated by comparing them to idle, ignorant children demanding everybody dance to their tunes, anybody who doesn’t fit into the New Pharisees’ tiny box of how they define right living is judged, hated and cast out. They strain at the gnats of about you must submit to your “natural urges,” and then swallow the camels of the massive, unfathomable, undeniable human destruction that has resulted from the “sexual revolution.” They paint themselves with the chalky whitewash of “Tolerant” but inside they are as putrid, and onerously rotten with hate and judgementalism as those who crucified the Christ.
Obviously, such reactions tend to confirm Crowder’s outlook. Why hate on the guy if you don’t secretly feel ashamed of yourself?
Those who go around whining “Don’t judge me” do so because they expect to be found wanting.
Crowder is entitled to decide to wait until he is maried. But I wonder why he found it necessary to call women who don’t wait “floozies”. That is an uncharitable generalisation and dare I say a tad on the defensive side.
Waiting is the right thing to do. In that way there is no possibility that one or both of the couple will marry out of feelings of guilt. My wife and I have 46 years of proof to back up that thought.
“Feeling judged? I couldn’t care less.”
The guy came out looking for a fight and got it. Now he’s whining about “haters” of his lifestyle. Please…
With all the enthusiasm of someone who discovered sex just a few days earlier, he tried to condemn others who don’t respect his “authority” to the extreme fate of some distant newlyweds he met who first lived together.
So he believes that he’s found happiness. Good for him. Welcome to the club, but it’s filled with members who know that there are 1000 ways to skin a cat.
–“Feeling judged? I couldn’t care less.”
The guy came out looking for a fight and got it. Now he’s whining about “haters” of his lifestyle. Please…–
^This. This This.
And he’s not considering the few shades of gray in between. While I have no love for the Sandra Flukes of the world, the mere act of having sex before marriage doesn’t make one a floozy, or whore, or whatever. I didn’t wait (I’m a few years older than Steven) but I’m not going to sleep with anything on two legs either.
And by insulting folks who chose not to wait, he indirectly insults people like my parents, two of the best people who ever lived… and they’re still together after 30 years.
Why all the hate?
“Waiting for the Wedding Night — Getting Married the Right Way.”
Funny how no one seems to see that “Getting Married the Right Way.” was the first volley.
Steven, in 70 years we’ll come back and see if you can actually lay claim to having gotten married the ‘right’ way. Right now, you’re a newlywed who’s disparaging people who did things differently than you. You don’t know that you’ve done anything the right way yet. You’re barely married.
It is the smug self satisfaction that rubs people the wrong way. Go to any town in the country and compare wedding dates to the dates of the birth of the first child and you will be astounded at how well doctors in the 1800s dealt with the crashing wave of premature births. And the 1900s. Not so much anymore. The marriage mechanism was undermined.
When you say people made fun of you for being celibate–you mean your friends, don’t you? Not the big, bad, fornicating world–you mean people whose opinions you valued. And yet, you blame folks who don’t even know you.
And your composite other bride–who was she talking to? Her husband was still upstairs–who was she telling that she’d slept with the guy before the wedding at breakfast the day after? Do you know the word shenanigans? I think you do.
What you did was right for you, and I offer congratulations to you and your bride. And what I did was right for me and my bride, and I hope you attain what we have, that grew out of an amazing day lo these many years ago.
I think your bitterness is inappropriate so early in your marriage. Your marriage is not something to thrust in the faces of your >obviously poor< choice of friends, or even to flail wildly at strangers. It's between you and your wife(and you will get used to writing that–if you do things right, you'll revel in it), and you're through the wedding–now build the marriage.
I caught a lot of hell. Not from friends, but from co-workers and people I discussed it with. They couldn’t fathom actually practicing self-control (see: maturity) and doing things the way God instructed.
My wife and I got to experience firsts on our wedding night. For you it was just another night.
Stop being so bitter if you aren’t ashamed.
For me it was just another night? How do you know? Do you just assume that? And, if so, how dare you.
I laid down that night with the woman who would walk with me to eternity, who would be part of me, now and forever. To this day, I can look into her eyes and experience that feeling.
No. It was not ‘just another night’.
If your wedding night was ‘just another night’ then your wedding was a mistake–whether or not you abstained before getting married
Again, your bitterness pervades your answer. I will not denigrate your choices, I have not denigrated your choices–and, I suggested that those who did were a poor choice of friend. And you repay this by doubling down with the nastiness.
Because I suggest that maybe some people who made different choices also have good marriages, and had special weddings, and wedding nights.
What is wrong with your marriage that you need to denigrate other to feel good about your choices?
Exactly. Thank you, Azathoth. I take issue with Mr. Crowder’s use of the word “floosies”. My grandmother and grandfather didn’t wait until the Wedding night. And My grandmother was an amazing woman – not a floosie. She and my Grandfather were married for more than 50 years at the point when she passed away. Is Mr. Crowder really wanting to paint all women who didn’t wait as “floosies”? Really? Give me a break. I wish Mr. Crowder all the best – I’m sure he and his beautiful bride will be married forever. I don’t think the rest of us are “hate-mongering” – just pointing out that calling folks names is childish. Grow up Mr. Crowder.
you know, I read the article and thought ” no big deal” and “mazel tov”- have a good life, have a good marriage, blessings upon your family…
then I read the hate-mongering. I’m in awe. It’s practically a OWS encampment of filth, in letters.
she’s beautiful, he’s handsome and hardworking, their families approve- may he have a good, long life. May they have beautiful, sheltered, cared for, loved children.
Wow. I dont understand the anger aimed at the guy. They should do what works for them. I wish them luck and happiness.
That said, my wife and I did not wait. We are 12 years into a very happy marriage and looking forward to many many more.