Here is Tacitus on Germania
>Their marriage code, however, is strict, and indeed no part of their manners is more praiseworthy. Almost alone among barbarians they are content with one wife, except a very few among them, and these not from sensuality, but because their noble birth procures for them many offers of alliance.
and
>Thus with their virtue protected they live uncorrupted by the allurements of public shows or the stimulant of feastings. Clandestine correspondence is equally unknown to men and women. Very rare for so numerous a population is adultery, the punishment for which is prompt, and in the husband's power. Having cut off the hair of the adulteress and stripped her naked, he expels her from the house in the presence of her kinsfolk, and then flogs her through the whole village. The loss of chastity meets with no indulgence; neither beauty, youth, nor wealth will procure the culprit a husband.
Here is Musonius Rufus, the most eminent Roman philosopher of his era:
>Not the least significant part of the life of luxury and self indulgence lies also in sexual excess; for example those who lead such a life crave a variety of loves not only lawful but unlawful ones as well, not women alone but also men; sometimes they pursue one love and sometimes another, and not being satisfied with those which are available, pursue those which are rare and inaccessible, and invent shameful intimacies, all of which constitute a grave indictment of manhood.
Here is the Greek philosopher Epicurus:
>no one was ever the better for sexual indulgence, and it is well if he be not the worse
And this is not an European only thing. Here is Buddhism:
>Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this craving which leads to re-becoming, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for becoming, craving for disbecoming.
>>3207707
All people of all time have been against their wifes fucking around.
Doesn't mean they were extreme anti sex people who didn't enjoy fucking around before marriage.
There is a difference..
I'm OP.
Did this happen due to:
(1) Ignorance (people really do believe that only the Abrahamic religions had this position).
(2) As a rhetorical tactic.
>>3207722
All of those argued against sex outside the marriage (or in the case of Epicurus, even sex at all)
>>3207722
Or that they thought homosexuals or anyone taking part in homosexual activities should be stoned
Because in the United States the religious right has been very vocal for decades and is just recently starting to lose influence. Now stop asking dumb questions.
>>3207707
>Most unwed mothers are black
Really makes you think
>>3207773
This is very harmful for the African American community.
A disruption of the family unit can only mean one thing
INVASION
>>3207831
Truer words havent been spoekn
>>3207907
Seriously, the best way of improving the lives of African Americans would be to rebuild their families.
It's not a Christian thing, it "traditional values". In the modern West, the main group associated with "traditional values" is Christians.
>>3207707
>https://www.oecd.org/els/family/SF_2_4_Share_births_outside_marriage.pdf
For country to country basis.
Asians fall under <5% if anyone is wondering.