NationStates Jolt Archive

This is taken direct from my blog at www.funnylonelylife.blogspot.com- just my thoughts on the issue, and I'm sure you'll be willing to respond with righteous anger.

Abstinence
In the US, about a third of schools have a policy of abstinence. Uh, that doesn't mean that the schools don't have sex before marriage, because as far as I know a public building can't have sex (private buildings get some action though). No, as you probably know, and if you don't you should be shocked, its where they teach kids that the best way for them to be safe from STDs is to swear off sex before marriage. In these classes, they will not teach children about contraceptives, other than to repeat flawed statistics suggesting that other forms of contraceptive are useless.

Now, the principle reason given for this is the protection of children. The theory advanced is this will reduce teenage pregancies. I doubt this, of course. Several studies so far appear to show no difference before and after an abstinence policy. In a more controlled study, following some people (a large survey, I might add), they did have less partners, and on average had sex 18 months less than your average immoral kid, but it was discovered, 10 years or so down the line, that despite having much less partners, they had higher STD rates! The reason? Well they never got taught how to use contraception, see......

There is a compromise option, which encourages abstinence but teaches about contraception, but many people in the US appear to feel that it would send mixed messages. This is an opinion based on belief rather than attention to what studies show, of course, but what opinion isn't? Well, hopefully the one I'm about to give in a minute, but.... ok no it isn't going to be. But still, one has to be pragmatic about these things.

To be fair, it doesn't seem that sex education programs are very effective, certainly not in the UK. There are few studies that show sex education having a major effect either way, so we cannot really draw conclusions. I would say that we do teach it very badly in the UK at least. The method I was introduced to was essentially watching a couple of crap videos then seeing a condom being put on a cucumber, or some equally phallic object. A short discussion was made of the alternative forms, but the only reason I know so much about them is research and experience, all of which I did without the schools aid. I think that people are too embarrased to talk about it, and if the teachers were more frank: after all most HAVE had sex, and actually communicated to the students, rather than letting some video do that for them, then it might have an effect. One of the oddest parts of sex education is that there seems to be no mention of whats good about sex. I suppose its assumed to be known, but the implication of many of these awful videos is that theres nothing good about sex. Its one of the reasons I think drug education is terrible. People do drugs for a reason, and to write "peer pressure" and underline it means nothing. This is a far more reasoned explanation for the reasons to not smoke, and the reasons WHY people smoke, and I think i'd be more effective than campaigns obviously done by people who have never smoked.

Basically, I don't think fear is a very effective tactic. I think getting all those women who hated their first time and wished they'd waited to come and talk, then you might have some effect, if only to embarrass guys into actually trying to please their lady, would be far better. Is the principle notion of adolescence a feeling of invincibility? Macho cool, denying fear and laughing in its face?


The big thing I dislike about abstinence as opposed to our currently shite system, is the imposition of a belief. For me, the greatest thing about our schooling system right now, is that moral views are not imposed. I mean, other than discouraging racism, and obvious stuff like that, the big issues are usually left open. But abstinence is the promotion of an attitude about sex. Its not just about protecting our children (I dunno why I say "our"- I am 19 after all) from the dangers of teenage pregnancy and STD's, its about getting them to believe that somehow, waiting until marriage for sex is somehow "better." I don't think this is true. I personally would prefer to have sex within a committed relationship, if only because that is a more comfortable environment for me to make an utter fool out of myself sexually. But I do think some people can enjoy casual sex. I know people who do, and as long as both partners know whats happening, and are careful, whats the harm in that? Telling children that that is wrong is not something schools should be doing. They should point out that it can be dangerous, and harmful, but in the end a school is not a place to tell you waht to do (or it shouldn't be). Its a place to advise you.

Finally, of course, abstinence programs do not actually say only sex within a commited relationship. They actually call for no sex before marriage. Why? Whats so special about marriage? I don't get it. Do some pieces of paper prove that you are more comitted than the couple dating two years? You can marry within days of meeting each other after all. I don't get how marriage is a special point. After all, most marriages do not last forever- divorce statistics are always rising, and the break ups are not always clean. The only real way I can see it being supportable to tell kids that the only time they should have sex is during marriage is if you believe it religously. And that should not be in schools. I dunno, I thought seperation of state and church were enshrined in the American constitution, but hey, what do I know, I'm just some crazy brit with an institutional religon. Shouldn't WE be the fanatics?

Finally, I'd like to say I'm not condoning a way of life here. I mean, I think waiting for a commited relationship is a healthier way of going about things, and its entirely possible that one day I will end up married, although probably with a partner I have had sex with first. You are free to live your life the way you choose it, and I respect that. Just don't start telling kids to do it in school. Give them the facts, the reasons for the way of life, then let them choose. They might be smarter than you think.

No comment on the article as of yet, but on an unrelated note, is your nation named after the band Guided By Voices?

heh, indeed it is, they do rock.

Well, firstly, I'd like to make the comment that while waiting until you are married is not WRONG, in some cases, it is unrealistic. Many women and men and waiting until the are older to get married, so they can establish their career first. So, while there are adults out there in their 20's who are virgins, how realistic is it to suggest that every person wait until their mid to late 20's or even 30's to have sex for the first time?

The problem as I see it, is somewhat evolutionary. Boys and girls start to mature in their early teens, and hormones are driving them to want to have sex. Many know that they should wait, but it really is a battle of mind over hormones. If we think teens are too immature to handle the responsibility of sex, how can we expect them to ignore the urges that are with them night and day?

Hundreds of years ago, most people didn't live past their 30's and women started having children in their early to mid-teens. Now, we expect them to finish school and get a job, or a college degree before marrying and starting a family, yet kids are starting puberty even EARLIER. I know evolutionary changes take thousands of years, but this is putting even more pressure on kids to have sex.

Also, the teenage years are a time to establish your independence, so during that time, it is almost guaranteed that whatever your parents or other authority figures tell you is going to sound archaic and out of touch. Providing teens with the facts about sex and letting them decide for themselves sounds like a good idea, but how will this information be received? And again, how much are they going to use their heads to decide and how much of it is going to be hormonally driven.

When you add in the presence of peer pressure and the images portrayed by the media, it almost seems like it would be too much to expect kids to wait. I really think the best way to approach this is to assume that most kids are going to want to have sex, so make contraceptives readily available. I think it is up to parents to set the moral tone, and let their kids know the reasons behind their expectations, but also let them know they are loved unconditionally, and are not going to be judged for being human.

Unfortunately, many kids would get no sex education at all, if it weren't presented in school, but you can't expect schools to be able to present a view that is acceptable to all families. Parents need to be held accountable moreso than the schools.

Boy, this went over like a lead balloon. Does no one have an opinion on abstinence?

Either the Religious types are not here(it is Sunday you know ;) ) or they know it's a hopless cause for this bunch.

Abstinence should only be an option in the sex ed class. Not everybody needs to jump in the sack at the first moment possible. If you want to wait then hey why not?

Expecting everybody to go that route is rather insipid idea.

Another stance they love to chant. If you abstained then you don't get STDs. :rolleyes:

Ahh well. It interesting you don't hear about that bunch that signed pledges not to have sex. I remember seeing a small report that most failed on their pledge.

Sex should be when you are ready and that time is different for people.....

Abstinence is fine.

Masturbation is fine.

Mutual Masturbation is fine.

Protected Sex is fine.

S'all good baybeh.

All you have to do with sex is not go for the riskiest, most irresponsible fricking possible method, and you're doing fine.

And, of course, if one of the two have their tubes tied off, and you're both STD free... you can go au natural like bunnies.

Abstinence


Is best left to the ugly.

Not everybody needs to jump in the sack at the first moment possible.

Sez You! :p

:fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

This is taken direct from my blog at www.funnylonelylife.blogspot.com- just my thoughts on the issue, and I'm sure you'll be willing to respond with righteous anger.

Abstinence
In the US, about a third of schools have a policy of abstinence. Uh, that doesn't mean that the schools don't have sex before marriage, because as far as I know a public building can't have sex (private buildings get some action though). No, as you probably know, and if you don't you should be shocked, its where they teach kids that the best way for them to be safe from STDs is to swear off sex before marriage. In these classes, they will not teach children about contraceptives, other than to repeat flawed statistics suggesting that other forms of contraceptive are useless.

Now, the principle reason given for this is the protection of children. The theory advanced is this will reduce teenage pregancies. I doubt this, of course. Several studies so far appear to show no difference before and after an abstinence policy. In a more controlled study, following some people (a large survey, I might add), they did have less partners, and on average had sex 18 months less than your average immoral kid, but it was discovered, 10 years or so down the line, that despite having much less partners, they had higher STD rates! The reason? Well they never got taught how to use contraception, see......

There is a compromise option, which encourages abstinence but teaches about contraception, but many people in the US appear to feel that it would send mixed messages. This is an opinion based on belief rather than attention to what studies show, of course, but what opinion isn't? Well, hopefully the one I'm about to give in a minute, but.... ok no it isn't going to be. But still, one has to be pragmatic about these things.

To be fair, it doesn't seem that sex education programs are very effective, certainly not in the UK. There are few studies that show sex education having a major effect either way, so we cannot really draw conclusions. I would say that we do teach it very badly in the UK at least. The method I was introduced to was essentially watching a couple of crap videos then seeing a condom being put on a cucumber, or some equally phallic object. A short discussion was made of the alternative forms, but the only reason I know so much about them is research and experience, all of which I did without the schools aid. I think that people are too embarrased to talk about it, and if the teachers were more frank: after all most HAVE had sex, and actually communicated to the students, rather than letting some video do that for them, then it might have an effect. One of the oddest parts of sex education is that there seems to be no mention of whats good about sex. I suppose its assumed to be known, but the implication of many of these awful videos is that theres nothing good about sex. Its one of the reasons I think drug education is terrible. People do drugs for a reason, and to write "peer pressure" and underline it means nothing. This is a far more reasoned explanation for the reasons to not smoke, and the reasons WHY people smoke, and I think i'd be more effective than campaigns obviously done by people who have never smoked.

Basically, I don't think fear is a very effective tactic. I think getting all those women who hated their first time and wished they'd waited to come and talk, then you might have some effect, if only to embarrass guys into actually trying to please their lady, would be far better. Is the principle notion of adolescence a feeling of invincibility? Macho cool, denying fear and laughing in its face?


The big thing I dislike about abstinence as opposed to our currently shite system, is the imposition of a belief. For me, the greatest thing about our schooling system right now, is that moral views are not imposed. I mean, other than discouraging racism, and obvious stuff like that, the big issues are usually left open. But abstinence is the promotion of an attitude about sex. Its not just about protecting our children (I dunno why I say "our"- I am 19 after all) from the dangers of teenage pregnancy and STD's, its about getting them to believe that somehow, waiting until marriage for sex is somehow "better." I don't think this is true. I personally would prefer to have sex within a committed relationship, if only because that is a more comfortable environment for me to make an utter fool out of myself sexually. But I do think some people can enjoy casual sex. I know people who do, and as long as both partners know whats happening, and are careful, whats the harm in that? Telling children that that is wrong is not something schools should be doing. They should point out that it can be dangerous, and harmful, but in the end a school is not a place to tell you waht to do (or it shouldn't be). Its a place to advise you.

Finally, of course, abstinence programs do not actually say only sex within a commited relationship. They actually call for no sex before marriage. Why? Whats so special about marriage? I don't get it. Do some pieces of paper prove that you are more comitted than the couple dating two years? You can marry within days of meeting each other after all. I don't get how marriage is a special point. After all, most marriages do not last forever- divorce statistics are always rising, and the break ups are not always clean. The only real way I can see it being supportable to tell kids that the only time they should have sex is during marriage is if you believe it religously. And that should not be in schools. I dunno, I thought seperation of state and church were enshrined in the American constitution, but hey, what do I know, I'm just some crazy brit with an institutional religon. Shouldn't WE be the fanatics?

Finally, I'd like to say I'm not condoning a way of life here. I mean, I think waiting for a commited relationship is a healthier way of going about things, and its entirely possible that one day I will end up married, although probably with a partner I have had sex with first. You are free to live your life the way you choose it, and I respect that. Just don't start telling kids to do it in school. Give them the facts, the reasons for the way of life, then let them choose. They might be smarter than you think.

Crazy Brit teenager here too! Anyway, being 15 I can agree with you that the sex ed. system is shite. So far (we might be having a sex ed. lesson next week), we've been shown a few videos on diseases and pregancy, and… that's it, really. They don't even hint at the notion that you might want to put off sex. That's right, they just assume that you cannot control yourself… sorry, I am ranting.

Oh, by the way, this is the religious person everyone was expecting here. :)

I've managed to keep my virginity through a hell of a lot of temptation.

the entire pospect of absinece is that human beings are infalible or should strive to be, and so in essence go against instincts insilled by X million years of evolution, therefore it is bound to fail.

however not being controled by the right we dont have it over here in the u.k, i hear of the lies of contraception failure and it makes me cry, 20% i think was once example when infact its more 1 in 800 if that.

Sez You! :p

:fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:
aren't you supposed to be married, or is that someone else? either way, you're a horny wanker, and that's a fact. :D

I've managed to keep my virginity through a hell of a lot of temptation. Why is it that seemingly everyone else is having opportunities to display their self-control, iron will and honour except me? :rolleyes:

I've managed to keep my virginity through a hell of a lot of temptation.
Good for you ... I made the opposite choice in my early 20's (still in them) never regretted a thing

Good for you ... I made the opposite choice in my early 20's (still in them) never regretted a thing

Why does that not surprise me? :)

:fluffle:

This is sort of on topic...

Various English people talking about how their sex-ed system doesn't work makes me think about the system of their neighbor to the south. I figure that since you guys are closer to the Netherlands you must get even more crap about how superior their sex-ed system is. What do you guys think on the matter?

i've never understood why people prize virginity. personally, i didn't value my ignorance of sex any more than i valued my ignorance of the Spanish language, and i eliminated both before i graduated High School. i've never regretted either in the slightest.

i've never understood why people prize virginity. personally, i didn't value my ignorance of sex any more than i valued my ignorance of the Spanish language, and i eliminated both before i graduated High School. i've never regretted either in the slightest.


I don't believe that ignorance and inexperience are the same thing. Even when I was a virgin, I knew a whole lot about sex, I just had never experienced it.

I go to a Catholic school (Stupid f-cking province with publicly funded right wing propaganda...) and the crap they try to shove down your throat is absolutely ridiculous!

I took Phys Ed for two years, and never once did they mention using contraceptives. On top of all that, they actually give us worksheets to fill in on the benefits of abstinence.

And the skewed facts they present to us are amazing:
- Condoms prevent pregnancy only 4 in 5 times.
- Condoms protect you from HIV only 3 in 5 times.
- Condoms protect you from no other STDs.

:rolleyes:

I don't believe that ignorance and inexperience are the same thing. Even when I was a virgin, I knew a whole lot about sex, I just had never experienced it.
there are some things you can only learn by doing :).

I go to a Catholic school (Stupid f-cking province with publicly funded right wing propaganda...) and the crap they try to shove down your throat is absolutely ridiculous!

I took Phys Ed for two years, and never once did they mention using contraceptives. On top of all that, they actually give us worksheets to fill in on the benefits of abstinence.

And the skewed facts they present to us are amazing:
- Condoms prevent pregnancy only 4 in 5 times.
- Condoms protect you from HIV only 3 in 5 times.
- Condoms protect you from no other STDs.

:rolleyes:
at least they didn't tell you that condoms cause AIDS...that's what the Church has its missionaries telling Africans right now.

I reckon it should be up to each person to make their own decision, but at the same time, all the options should be talked about properly (ie better than here in the UK...though we loved to say "SEX" to our biology teacher just to watch her blush, what 10 years ago!) but that includes abstinence treated equally.
Certainly where I was, you were only considered "cool" if you'd had sex, and I reckon that this doesn't help anyone. People should be happy whatever they are doing...although personally I'm waiting and I'm happy there, even if it's not always easy.

Abstinence is fine. I practice it, to a degree, myself. I'm search of true love! *sigh!*

So is doing it like they do it on the Discovery Channel. [can you guess the song?]

The problem arises when the government and educational institutions deliberately mislead the public and the chilren about abstinence and birth control. Misinformation of this kind can only lead to the spread of more STDs and more unwanted pregnancies, yet it is still done on moral grounds.

The reactionary forces in the U.S. that are involved in regulating what is and is not taught in Sex Ed. base their reasoning on non-consequentialism; they believe that it is moral to teach kids about abstinence and promote it over birth control, and so they use this to justify misinformation. That such misinformation can lead to detrimental effects is not what is important; it is the moral worth of the education, not the effects of it, that they are concerned with.

I remember in grade 7, we were distributed cups of water. A couple of the cups in the class had a weak basic solution and we had the job of going around the class and exchanging the contents of our cup with three other people, as it is said that the average person has sex with 3 different people in their lifetime. Now, the cups with a basic solution would turn purple with an idicator (phenolpthalein [sp?!]) and was supposed to represent an std.

The message was basically don't go exchanging your fluids so much...

Of course, I couldn't get three other classmates to have "cup sex" (as it was dubbed by the end of the period) with me so I ended up clean...

Oh yes, but at my school they taught us all the correct stats for contraceptives and they did emphasize that abstianance was the only thing that guaranteed 100% protection, but that monogomous sex with one person isn't too bad either.

They didn't teach us any of the fun aspects at all though. For instance, I didn't know that I had a clitoris until I heard some boys talkign about clitorises some time later. I didnt' actually figure out what it did until much after that... I didn't even know anything about the g-spot until my first year of university.

What I find amusing is that, due to my dad making sex a big deal when I was a kid (Constantly pointing out breasts, etc), I had absolutely no interest in it until 18, and, up until 20, didn't intend to do anything with that interest. I was nearly 21 when I -did- do something about it.

Still not that big a deal to me. Fun as heck, and given a safe, sane chance, would do it all day long, but cuddling and chatting are great too.

Education and exposure to things works -much- better than making something a big scary secret.

I go to a Catholic school (Stupid f-cking province with publicly funded right wing propaganda...) and the crap they try to shove down your throat is absolutely ridiculous!

I took Phys Ed for two years, and never once did they mention using contraceptives. On top of all that, they actually give us worksheets to fill in on the benefits of abstinence.

And the skewed facts they present to us are amazing:
- Condoms prevent pregnancy only 4 in 5 times.
- Condoms protect you from HIV only 3 in 5 times.
- Condoms protect you from no other STDs.

:rolleyes:

True, even the Halton board does it. Catholics suck. They even told us that the HIV virus can travel through condoms.... with what dumbasses?

Also, if you don't mind me asking, what school do you go to and what grade are you in?

True, even the Halton board does it. Catholics suck. They even told us that the HIV virus can travel through condoms.... with what dumbasses?
A '72 AMC Gremlin. At least that's what I heard in school. :D

I just have a hard time believing a while third of US schools only teach abstinance. I moved a lot as a kid. I was an Air Force brat. I went to more than half a dozen schools across the country. Six of them had sex-ed, and each of those six taught contraceptives as well as abstinance.

True, even the Halton board does it. Catholics suck. They even told us that the HIV virus can travel through condoms.... with what dumbasses?

Also, if you don't mind me asking, what school do you go to and what grade are you in?
Mount Carmel. Grade 10. If I'm kidnapped and gang raped on my way home from school, I only have myself to blame.

On a related note, we also have Anti-choice posters up in the washrooms (That's the males washroom, for some reason)

(Cracks knuckles...hurts self)

Okay. I think we SHOULD teach our kids about puberty and what goes on in their bodies, and I DO think we should teach adolescents about sex.

Reasons?

1. Hormones: It is only natural for young adults to have these sort of feelings, we are obliged to help them understand sex and what it is about.

2. Sex in society: I will agree with some people that sex is very prominant in society. I feel it is better to learn from an unbiased source (such as a teacher, or better yet, their parents) rather than peer pressure or media.

3. Risks and Benefits: Yes, there are risks in having sex. STDs and pregancy are just a few, not to mention potential emotional problems if the parties were not ready mentally. This would be the ONLY reason why I would stress abstinance AT ALL.
But we need to also stress that sex can be pleasurable, and that it can be looked upon as an ultimate consumation of ones affection, not as something to be reviled as sinful or dirty.

As for programs that teach "abstinance until marriage"...drop that shit now. It is proven ineffective (Mississippi has the highest teen pregnancy rate and has a state-wide abstainance only program), and is, for today's generation, EXTREMELY unrealistic. Most likely a person is going to have sex several times before marriage. Once a person settles down however, they'll probably be monogamous.

As a matter of fact, as a member of the next generation, I send out a cry to my brethren; let's try and drop these divorce rates...and make the baby boomers look bad, eh?

I reckon it should be up to each person to make their own decision, but at the same time, all the options should be talked about properly (ie better than here in the UK...though we loved to say "SEX" to our biology teacher just to watch her blush, what 10 years ago!) but that includes abstinence treated equally.
Certainly where I was, you were only considered "cool" if you'd had sex, and I reckon that this doesn't help anyone. People should be happy whatever they are doing...although personally I'm waiting and I'm happy there, even if it's not always easy.
lol were as my high school biology teacher used to joke about watching porn and that he had to because he was a biology teacher :p

Happens to be the same teacher that threw a girls mobile (cell) phone in an aquarium because it rang during class

I attended an all-girls school and our biology teachers were male. When we got to the subject of human reproduction, I don't know who was more uncomfortable - the students, or the teachers.

Actually though, I was friends with my biology teacher, so I used to stay after class to ask him embarrassing questions. I guess I was a hellion in those days...

Why does that not surprise me? :)

:fluffle:
Because I am a slut ... and still manage to love myself for it :-D :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

I've managed to keep my virginity through a hell of a lot of temptation.

That's AWESOME!

My name is Harry. My native language is not English. I live in Denmark. My English spelling is bad and my vucabulary is ever worse. I also speak Danish, Swedish, Norwegian and German! :D

I do not think Abstinence "Education" work at all. It has more to do with moral judgement than real education. It is just the "easy solution" to a very serious problem. I fear it only promotes harsh naked moral judgement especially towards women. I dont think it will help or educate young people. How does People/Abstinence education folks defend the poor perfomance of the American education system in this area? Do they have numbers/statistics or any kind of material to support their theories/Idears?

I have calculated that you are 170 times more likely to become pregnant as a teen in the USA than in Denmark, when you are a young teenager (Especially young women... :rolleyes: ). I used official statistics. Newspapers, internet and books with statistic material. I know they might not be completely accurate, but the figures/numbers can be tricky to compare. But I belive they are quite close to what most people would call reality! :D

Harry "the bastard"

I have calculated that you are 170 times more likely to become pregnant as a teen in the USA than in Denmark, when you are a young teenager (Especially young women... :rolleyes: ).

Harry, your spelling and vocabulary are pretty darn good. I just had to laugh at the statement above. I do get your point, but it's funny that you had to point out that it is "especially young women" teenagers getting pregnant. If it were young men teenagers, now that would be news! :p

Harry (Ussel Mammon)

Harry, your spelling and vocabulary are pretty darn good. I just had to laugh at the statement above. I do get your point, but it's funny that you had to point out that it is "especially young women" teenagers getting pregnant. If it were young men teenagers, now that would be news!

Sometimes you have to state the obvious... he he! :p

Also when a wome makes a mistake....She is a slut! When it is a man... a honest mistake! (Or am I judgemental!?)

Harry (Ussel Mammon)



Sometimes you have to state the obvious... he he! :p

Also when a wome makes a mistake....She is a slut! When it is a man... a honest mistake!
I want to be a slut :mad: but Im a man

I want to be a slut :mad: but Im a man

I'm just a bead slut. ;)

Several studies so far appear to show no difference before and after an abstinence policy. In a more controlled study, following some people (a large survey, I might add), they did have less partners, and on average had sex 18 months less than your average immoral kid, but it was discovered, 10 years or so down the line, that despite having much less partners, they had higher STD rates! The reason? Well they never got taught how to use contraception, see......

the second study was of people who had taken an abstiance pledge.
at least they didn't tell you that condoms cause AIDS...that's what the Church has its missionaries telling Africans right now.
yup to women who have very little choice of how they have sex anyway.
As to my sex ed at school it was rather good, we did it in biology for a term and we also had a very amusing woman from brook come and talk to us, so i seem to know more than most, a friend of mine at a different school though didn't even know that the egg was produced around the 14th day of her menstrual cycle.

I want to be a slut :mad: but Im a man

There, there... I think you're a slut, UpwardThrust. :)

:fluffle:

There, there... I think you're a slut, UpwardThrust. :)

:fluffle:
Thank you gravy baby

At least someone believes in me :fluffle: :fluffle:

On a related note, we also have Anti-choice posters up in the washrooms (That's the males washroom, for some reason)
well that's obvious: men own women, so a man is the one who would be making such a decision. clearly it is not a woman's business to decide what happens with her pregnancy.
[/sarcasm]

well that's obvious: men own women, so a man is the one who would be making such a decision. clearly it is not a woman's business to decide what happens with her pregnancy.
[/sarcasm]

Glad you added the 'sarcasm' tag... as, I believe there are many here that would have agreed with your point, if presented as a serious argument. :(

Glad you added the 'sarcasm' tag... as, I believe there are many here that would have agreed with your point, if presented as a serious argument. :(
i know...i wasn't going to add it, but then i remembered that the self-evident idiocy of that statement is not evident at all to a great many people. i cried for a few minutes, threw some things, then composed myself and added the tag to the post.

i know...i wasn't going to add it, but then i remembered that the self-evident idiocy of that statement is not evident at all to a great many people. i cried for a few minutes, threw some things, then composed myself and added the tag to the post.

Welcome to 'civilised' society. [/sarcasm]

:)

Sex is just a thing that you do with someone else. Like going to the movies. Only more fun.

So doing it more or less often doesn't matter, it's morally ambiguous. (You hear people use words like promiscuous in a bad way, but really it's no worse than being a film fan - you heard it here first!) So yeah, they should teach contraception and junk.

I want to be a slut :mad: but Im a man
I made a desperate effort to not to resort to being one of those in order to make some money.

In you have protected sex nothing is wrong.
Studies have shown sex and masturbation is good for a man's prostate.
Sex is fine and it has to many religious and social stigmas.

I made a desperate effort to not to resort to being one of those in order to make some money.
Money is a good thing :p

Money is a good thing :p
No it's not. What we need is a gift economy. ;)

Here's a good rule of thumb:

"Abstinence works, abstinence education doesn't."

Welcome to 'civilised' society. [/sarcasm]

:)
it's gotten to the point where any time somebody says "moral values" i brace for impact.

Here's a good rule of thumb:

"Abstinence works, abstinence education doesn't." Wow. You've got the whole thing in a nutshell. Hmm… either some form of cheap, reversible sterilisation option (is it possible?) for teenagers who can then catch all the diseases that they want without getting pregant - or abstinence INDOCTRINATION!