Question158

. Are atheist sexual mores based pretty much on Judeo/Christian norms or is there a tendency toward (for instance) polygamy or open relationships among atheists?

• I don't know about other atheists but mine are primarily based on the fact that I can't outrun a bullet and my wife knows how to shoot. (atheist@home.com - #1554)

• Maybe I hang out with a square bunch, but the sexual mores of atheists that I know pretty much mirror those of the population at large.

  Regardless of what the fundies try to tell us, sex is here to stay. Then again, if recent polls can be believed, most people don't pay much attention to them in this matter either. For example just today I saw:

  http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/od/sex_dc_2.html

  Without the hangups about religion, I believe that atheists would be more open to premarital sex, and be less concerned about matters of sexual orientation for themselves and others.

  The few atheist married couples that I do know seem to practice a fairly standard monogamous relationship. If one looks around the world, this is pretty much the usual practice. Although some groups do permit polygamy, it seems that most Muslims and Mormons whom have I have met are also in a one to one.

  I don't have any statistics, but I think that atheists would also have an average divorce rate. IOW, except for our lack of belief, we're just folks too. (John Hachmann#1782)

• Based on the atheists I know personally? Yes, I'd say that there's a tendency toward non-traditional lifestyles; if only because, lacking the "sin" label, there is more freedom of thought to experiment and find out what else works. (Jeff Dee #366)

• I think that the strict enforcement of marital rites is in part responsible for a lot of failed marriages and overpopulation. I think the establishment's promotion of marriage and scorn of outside of marriage relationships causes far more unwanted pregnancies than it prevents. In short, marriage shouldn't be the be all and end all of what's available out there.

  Certain living arrangements facilitate various goals in life better than others and thus the way we live should reflect what we'd like to accomplish. A monogomous lifetime relationship should be considered as just another living arrangement that suits itself to a certain purpose. Nothing moral, sacred, or final about it. There is no reason to live by a wrong or unecessary set of rules. (Hendrix Fan #1692)

• I'd be lying if I tried to pretend to be unaffected by growing up in a Christian society and that my sexual morals aren't affected by it. Difference is that I know the guilt attached to it is a hoax, though I still get it - but there's not much to be done about that, really... However this means that I don't try to push my ideas on other people or tell them how to conduct themselves sexually - as long as all involved are conscending adults - they can do whatever they please - including things i might personally find repulsive - I'd never jugde a persons character on that... (Nikitta - #1759)

• Well...I have no statistical information one way or the other so I can't answer the question for anyone but me.

  While I think that strong stable relationships are a healthy thing, especially when children are involved, I do not accept that relationships must be 'monogamous' to be stable or healthy.

  Whatever arrangement works and is satisfying for the individuals involved is all that really matters.

  I happen to find the idea of 'marriage' absurd and woefully outdated, but then that's just me.

  A relationship should last only as long as the love does, when the love is over those involved should just move on.

  So, I suppose I fall into the *definately not* judeo/christian norm catagory, but I don't necessarily advocate any particular kind of relationship, just that it should be whatever works for the individuals involved at the time. (Dr. Necrophage)

• Of course not. Everyone knows atheist sexual mores are based on Blud's Black Book of Perversion and Deviance.

  Actually, I'm not at all sure what is meant by "atheist sexual mores." Are there special sets of mores followed by atheists? Is there some identifiable pattern of sexual behavior that sets atheists apart from the rest of society?

  Since atheism is the lack of belief in god(s) or the belief there are no god(s), it offers us nothing in the way of moral guidance. Atheists adopt their morality from the cultural milieu in which they live. It also should be noted that the phrase "Judeo/Christian norms" isn't that clear either. Those norms will be different - and will be applied differently - in different cultures. And let's not forget that there are places in the world where the moral tradition comes from sources other than Judaism and Christianity.

  Atheists may tend to be more adventurous and less dogmatic in applying whatever moral code they follow than the general population. But then, I suspect the same thing could be said of some theists. (George Ricker #146)

• Judeo/christian norms were simply borrowed from the norms of several groups before. Their religion involves very little original material.

  That being said, there are definate human advantages to monogamy that have made it the norm in many societies. One relationship is much less complicated for starters, especially once children become involved. In an evolutionary sense, that's the goal. I've heard the argument that women would be better off having sex with a lot of men if survival of the species were the goal. But it is more likely that choosing a man likely to protect, provide for and give strong offspring would be the best way to survive.

  Now those traits have changed of course. There are new reasons that monogamy might be a better choice.

  I've always found it easier to have one relationship. More than one is too much trouble. Ultimately, people are hard enough to deal with that more than one is just a pain. (ClayeSkye #4)

• Oh my, I knew something like this would eventually come up. Should I just mention that I'm a rock musician, and leave it at that, or go into some depth? ;-)

  Well, here goes; although currently in a monogamous relationship, I've basically lived most of my adult life in a stereotypical rock musician way, with multiple simultaneous open relationships and assorted one-nighters. (I've particularly enjoyed having menages-a-trois in several different combinations). I just eventually decided to settle down in a committed relationship with one person (and if she ever decides she wants another threesome one of these days, I wouldn't say no...)

  I have absolutely no guilt or regrets about my former lifestyle; while sex with someone you love is the greatest thing in the world, sex without love is still damn good! (raven1 #1096)

• It'd be foolish to say society doesn't influence you or that superstitions and ideas you were made to believe for years can just be discarded with the drop of a hat. Most everyone's sexual mores will be much like that of major religions in their area. The guilt, the rules, the doctrines that most people are inundated with as kids are bound to have some affect. I would bet more than 95% of all people felt guilty once the glow of their first orgasm wore off, regardless of whether is was with a spouse, date, or whacking off.

  Having said that, it does not necessarily follow that religion is the source of these mores. Quite often what's socially acceptable predates religions who claim to have promoted these ideas. In recorded history monogamy has been a standard which predates xianity, islam and other religions by centuries - Babylon, Egypt, Asia, and many other countries.

  Polygamy has only appeared in places where a small minority have had is proportionate wealth or positions of power. From the partly true/partly mythical arab harem to the mormon multiple wife rule, to mistresses amongst royalty and wealthy families in Europe and Asia, fooling around on the side has been a peculiarity of pecuniary people. One could suggest the rich feel they are "entitled" to something the poor cannot have, hardly a moral stand.

  As to whether atheists are more likely or less likely to want a "piece" on the side, I don't have an answer. But I would not be surprised if it turned out that religious and right wing people are more likely to be hypocrites on this issue - be it Jimmy Swaggart, Newt Gingrich (a 2nd wife), or any of their ilk. (Bob Dog)