Last week, Ryan Robinson wrote an article entitled, "Why Waiting Until Marriage To Have Sex Is Unrealistic And Flawed". As someone who has always held a no-sex-before-marriage view, this article jumped out at me. Sex may be the natural progression after a long period of time in a serious relationship, but that doesn't mean waiting for it until marriage is either unrealistic or flawed.

Here's why.

Numerous studies have been done on the effects of casual sex on one's well-being and psychological distress. One study demonstrated that there is a negative association between casual sex and one's well-being (meaning that as the frequency of one increases, the frequency of the other decreases), and a positive association between casual sex and one's psychological distress (meaning as one increases, the other increases).

Importantly, gender did not modify those results. In addition to these psychological effects, according to a study at a Canadian university, the majority of both men and women reported feeling regret after an "uncommitted sexual encounter" (i.e. casual sex with someone only once or with someone known for less than 24 hours). However, the reasons for their regret differed: men mostly regretted that their partner was not "sufficiently attractive", and women's regret centered around shame and self-blame.

Adalay Katch eloquently discusses her first experience with casual sex, and at the end of it all, decides that she is a "girl who did something she wanted to do." And that's that. But her argument isn't that casual sex is the norm or that it should be the norm. Her argument is that the way that women are sexually controlled by society, in a way in which men are not, is the problem. Certainly, society needs to treat premarital sex equally for both genders. It is indeed a modern form of sexism to shame women for premarital sex but to congratulate men in a way that intensely objectifies women.

Ryan Robinson's article gives the impression that abstinence until marriage is oppressive to women, when the real issue is how premarital sex is handled for each gender. Abstinence is not oppressive; it is a mature decision made by both parties, and haven't you ever heard the saying that "good things come to those who wait"?! Waiting to have sex until marriage is only oppressive when that "decision" has been forced upon you, and not made by careful consideration between you and your partner. Otherwise, it's simply a mutual decision that you believe will ultimately benefit your relationship.

However, Katch also stresses the seriousness of sex-- that it is intimate and should not be participated in apathetically. Most people would probably agree that casual sex is not ideal, physically or emotionally.

But what if you have been with your significant other for a long period of time? Whether it be six months, one year, seven years?

Truth be told, I don't have a good (nonreligious) argument against premarital sex after you've been in a long-term relationship. Thought Catalog asked for women's views on how long they "make their boyfriends wait to have sex". And guess what? A lot of them don't see the point in waiting, or they won't wait more than a couple months, and that's in order to test the seriousness of the relationship.

But anyone who did wait for some period of time said that their first experience with their significant other was much more romantic, knowing that their significant other patiently waited and spent more time getting to know them than trying to get with them.

Because, from a secular point of view, there is no logical argument against premarital sex once you are in a "committed", long-term relationship, I'm not going to talk about it from a secular point of view.

To be sure, no one should remain abstinent just because they are pressured to do so by their parents and their religious leaders or by a sacred text. If you are abstinent for no other reason than that you must be, then you are not refraining from sex before marriage for the right reasons.

Sexual purity isn't a physical state of being so much as it is a spiritual and mental state of being. If you are mentally and spiritually pure, the natural consequence would be that you are also physically pure. You could be physically "pure" without being spiritually pure, but the reverse is impossible. In order to have a mentality that seeks purity and sanctification in your relationship, you need to understand why the Bible tells us in numerous references that fornication is sinful.

Anyone, religious or not, should want a pure relationship when the antithesis of purity is toxicity. But for those of you who are frustrated with the "church" or God or the Bible for demanding that sex only be in the context of marriage, you have a serious misunderstanding of the purpose of marriage in God's eyes.

You don't need to believe that God even exists to believe that He says what He does about marriage. You just need to be willing to say, "To this Christian, God exists. So if God were who my friend says that He is, does this attribute of His or this command from Him make sense in that context?"

And when it comes to marriage, His perspective does "make sense."

We know from the Bible that God Himself is the epitome of relationship because He is the Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, all in one. It is because of this that the relationships invented by God are designed the way they are.

God is the creative genius behind marriage-- the idea that two people could become one and remain as one for the rest of their lives, create together, worship together, and be united in all things. Only God has ever displayed a relationship so intimate, and he allows men and women to portray two becoming one, in a physical sense through the physical consummation of the relationship, and in a spiritual sense, by vowing to God and through Christ's power to be committed to pursue Christ first and each other second.

Sex creates an irreversible bond with your partner. Zhana Vrangalova suggests that "you shouldn’t hook-up if you care about seeing them again." If you are worried about developing feelings for your partner or that your partner will eventually break up with you, you may want to take a step back and take time to think about the gravity of having sex with that person.

If God designed marriage (which He did), and if He invented sex (which He did), then He obviously had a specific design for it. Of course, this argument is completely invalid if you don't believe in the Bible, but let's make one thing clear: you can't believe only parts of the Bible. Robinson's article calls out the Bible for being outdated. But if you believe that God's commands regarding sex are outdated, then where is the line between relevant then and relevant now? Why do we get to decide what is and isn't acceptable today?

Moreover, we aren’t talking about a cultural preference, we’re talking about sin. Sin isn’t sin one day and then acceptable in the eyes of God 1,000 years later. Similarly, there are not actions that used to be acceptable which are now considered sinful. What kind of a god constantly changes his mind on what is and isn’t acceptable? Not the God of the Bible, I can tell you that much.

Is waiting to have sex until you're married flawed? Just like everything else, our humanness basically makes it impossible for us to not ruin something. Sex is another one of those things. We lust after it, we devalue it, we abuse it. But don't undermine God's design for marriage. Choosing abstinence before marriage because you love your significant other and you love God is beautiful-- not flawed.

Refraining from sex is actually freeing, not restricting because it allows you to be free from a physical bond with someone whom you may end up in an ugly breakup with later on. Abstinence during dating and the engagement season encourages you to get to know the other person better and better, instead of putting the focus on the physical side of your relationship. And, Mr. Ryan Robinson, people remain abstinent until marriage all the time; waiting to have sex until marriage is not unrealistic.

Just like a good father (or mother) would, our Heavenly Father calls us to be more than what is seen as acceptable in the world's eyes. It's not supposed to be something that is committed to out of pressure but out of love.

Abstinence until marriage is difficult, but it is possible, realistic, and so beneficial. If you understand God's purpose behind sex and you love your significant other and you love God, not having sex until marriage is a decision that you should want to make. My boyfriend of over a year and a half and I know each other to a depth that would be skipped over were we not abstaining until marriage. Sex is not meant to be put on a pedestal, but it is meant to be valued. Good things really do come to those who wait, and waiting until marriage to have sex is neither unrealistic or flawed.