Love, thoughts-physical displays of affection

Alright, there are lots of levels of meaning for physical displays of affection: body language, proximity, cultural expressions of affection, etc. These comments are only part of the picture...

Physical displays of affection are part of the integration the wholeness of the "love" (commitment, shared experience, emotions, social expectations, etc.) The human person is an integrated whole (think of psychosomatic illnesses - the mind affecting the body). One part of the person affect the rest of the person. So, all parts should be moving the same way; participating in their aspect of the same activity. When it comes to love, all the parts of the person should be coordinated and progress together. Think of the disparity of an intimate relationship without touch or of casual sex. Both extremes exist, but both are dysfunctional because it separates the integration of the person. We cannot name all the components involved, but let us at least consider verbal affirmations of love, emotion, attraction, commitment, physical expressions of love, shared history, and dreams of a future together. We see examples all around of one component of love running ahead of other components: "Puppy love" is when dreams of a future together run ahead of shared history (a school girl day-dreaming about a fellow with whom she has never spoken). Old marriages which have lost their life and passion have progressed in other areas, but not in attraction and dreams of a future (I wonder if one or both partners dream of the loss of that "obnoxious" partner), Sex without marriage (marriage being the formal, religiously sanctioned, socially public, and legally binding commitment) tries to simulate intimacy like a crutch simulates walking. In summary, it is the balence of all these components (and more, probably) that enables healthy relationships. Physical expressions, to enable and not to cripple a relationship, should be harnessed up with all the other components. That is why some fathers tell their children "Don't say 'I love you' unless you are ready to ask 'Will you marry me?'" It is to maintain consistency. And why the Bible has always taught that sex is only for marriage. It is allowing the whole person to move ahead in a consistent and coordinated manner.

Physical displays of affection augment the "shared experience" unique to the couple. Hand-holding, kissing, sex (and everything in between) offer a means of unique shared experience between people who are building other areas of the relationship. As the level of exclusiveness increases in the couple, so does the intimacy of the action. That is another reason why sex is reserved for those who have promised a whole life together. They regularly experience something together into which no one else is accepted. They form an exclusive bond that is regularly renewed by this action. Sex without the commitment doesn't make sense in this regard: it is trying to create an exclusive shared experience in an open sort of way - into which others are admitted. (In what logic does that goal make sense?)