Has anyone heard of the books "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" and "Choosing God's Best - Wisdom for Lifelong Romance"? These two books actually advocate giving up on dating as we know it -- partly because it is a relatively new phenomena.<P>I have not read the first book, but I have read the second. It was interesting, and I don't know as I agree with everything he (Dr. Don Raunikar) says, but I found the idea intriguing. Instead of dating, when a man sees a woman who he finds interesting, he begins to court her. In this scenario, he has not found her interesting because she is beautiful on the outside, but because she is beautiful on the inside. (OK, for all the cynics out there, I am not a dog faced baffoon. lol) He finds her interesting because of common interests and activities, because of the character qualitites she exhibits. <P>When he begins to court her, she knows right from the start that he intends marriage out of this relationship. The 'test' of the relationship is -- Is this a person to whom I wish to be committed for the rest of my life? He advocates complete sexual abstinence. And I mean COMPLETE. No kissing until engagement kind of complete. The idea is to become spiritually one, emotionally one, and physically one IN THAT ORDER. <P>And because marriage is the expected outcome, the question is not about how do I feel... but about how would this person be as a mate.<P>In a way, I think this is a good thing. It is filled with openness and honesty. There are commonalities which lend to meeting needs of recreational companionship and family commitment. There is a spiritual link FIRST of all. And I can get the focus off of me -- how do I look, how do I feel, are MY needs being met -- and on to the traits of the person -- Is this person really a good marriage risk? How good is he/she at keeping other commitments? etc.<P>One of his main premises is to avoid the pain of dating. This is one of the main problems I have with this theory. Is it really God's will that we avoid pain just for the sake of being painfree? And what about the marriage? He mentions in his title about romance. But I did not see it expressed in the book. And I WANT to be loved in a romantic way. I don't like the idea of just fitting right into his equation. Nor do I like the idea that he fits into mine. I like a little spontaneity. How does the heart jumping kind of love fit into all of this? Because I want it ALL. Do I have to settle for one or the other? <P>I know most of you have not read his book, and can only respond to what I have said, but what do you think?

Hmmm. Interesting. I have not read the book, but I have heard of the concept of courtship. In fact, there have been quite a few posts here about it as an alternative to dating. <P>I myself could not do it. Nothing to do with raging hormones, mind you. But I too cannot live without the passion. It seems more likea business arrangement. There is no law that says you cannot find an appropriate mate and still have a little romance and heart fluttering. <P>I also think it is possible to meet someone you find interesting becuase of his/her personality, common interest and activities. But honestly, do you mean that a man courts a woman solely on those factors and not at all on how she looks? I think as human beings we are attracted to the aesthetics, and this theory might be a little too idealistic for me to buy into. <P>If marriage is one's ultimate goal, then maybe. But I think that dating is more self discovery than a means to an end. <P>Also, who is to say that there would be no pain? It is just as possible as in any relationship. We could find those commonalities with a person, develop trust, keep the physical side out of it completely, but there is still emotional risk. No situation is perfect.

I haven't read the books either, but you know that there are still alot of oountries that parents match up their children for marriage and most times it works. You know that after being married twice, once for 5 years and this time for 19. I think that I will look for someone that is different than the other two. Both were just alike. I was looking for my dad in them, but they didn't measure up to my dad. I am gonna look for someone more like me that is a take charge, controller and I am gonna take a rest. I do think that commitment is really the key to any marriage. Look back in the olden days when there weren't but a few people living in towns, and they didn't have much choices of spouses, they survived and made it. I do believe that if we are happy with ourselves, we can live with anybody. I am just speaking from my own heart. I hope there is someone out there who can put up with me, evidently I must be hard to live with???? SEF

Sounds like an interesting book. I am going through divorce, and can't even fathom having any other relationship with a man for a few years. Sounds weird I know, and when I watch a romantic movie I miss having someone! But, I am so burned right now that I feel like I am incapable of a relationship. Talk about baggage. I really need to get my own head on right and healthy enough to be able to entertain a relationship. I am rambling, thanks for the thread.

SEF --<BR>Yes, I had a little Freudian slip in my post -- commitment is something I will look at this time around in a husband. My first husband had a hard time with all commitments. I remember like it was yesterday that I was talking with his parents and saying how much he hated things to remain the same -- how he LOVED variety and hated monotony -- and I thought to myself -- You married a person like that? This was years before his affair, but I think with him it was inevitable. Because he never kept commitments. So it is about commitment, too.<P>gsd --<BR>Yep, it is not supposed to be about the physical. But I am concerned about that too. Remember our emotional needs. Some people need their spouse to look their best at all times. So this must be considered. I am bothered by this too. I want someone who thinks I am pretty -- even especially so! <BR>The business arrangement aspect is definitely a turn-off to me. But maybe if we enter into the commitment with our eyes open? But as I said -- I want BOTH. I want the passion with the commitment.

I read somewhere that dating does not prepare one for marriage, it prepares one for divorce. Endless breakups do not teach people how to be committed. It teaches people how to become desensitized to rejection and rejecting others. Dating does not teach people how to be open and honest. It teaches them to put their best "face" forward for as long as possible, and when the illusion wears off they can go find another.<P>I'm strongly in favor of the courtship principle, which is why I don't "date". First of all, I know I am not ready for a commitment. It is disrespectful to use another person to have my "needs met" without at least the intent to become committed again. It is also not respectful of my gifts. My love and heart is precious and I injure my soul by letting others use them thoughtlessly and without reverence. <P>I also believe that the physical comes after the spiritual and emotional. If one has the spiritual and emotional first, the physical will follow. It is uncommon for the physical to be first, and then have the spiritual and emotional follow...hence the divorce rate we have in this country. People pursue the physical first, then wonder why they aren't "compatible" however many years down the road. <P>Of course, someone's looks and some intangible chemistry comes into play when courting. However, it isn't the top priority. Getting sexual too soon creates a false kind of intimacy--I think this is what the concept of courting tries to avoid. Something else that is also quite different these days..Back in the olden days, people often grew up around the people they eventually married. They got to "know" them and their families long before they were of marriageable age. There aren't too many people who can say that these days. <p>[This message has been edited by TheStudent (edited May 20, 2001).]