NationStates Jolt Archive

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

and what's your problem with contraception?

the thing about teaching abstinence is that it doesn't work.

no matter how hard you try, teens are going to have sex.

so you have two options:
1) teach them about safe sex, so that when they go at it, they won't get diseases.

2) keep them ignorant, so that when they do it, they have no idea how to protect themselves from pregnancy.



hmmmm....

tough choice :rolleyes:

and what's your problem with contraception?

the thing about teaching abstinence is that it doesn't work.

no matter how hard you try, teens are going to have sex.

so you have two options:
1) teach them about safe sex, so that when they go at it, they won't get diseases.

2) keep them ignorant, so that when they do it, they have no idea how to protect themselves from pregnancy.



hmmmm....

tough choice :rolleyes:
Oh, I have no problem with contraception. I just don't understand how people view it as the only possible option available, and throw abstinence out as an option.

I can't get why teens won't stop having sex, either. For crying out loud, I'm a fifteen year old warm blooded American male---but I'm apparently not humping everything that moves. Is a wee bit of restraint too much too ask?

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

There isn't any problem with abstinance. It is perfectly legit.

What people have a problem with is that some people want it to be THE ONLY thing taught about sex in schools, when it has been shown that it does not work, which results in higher pregnancy rates.

It can also be argued that abstinance is a direct opposition to one of our base instincts; namely sex.

In my mind however, if someone wishes to abtain 'till marriage, more power to them.

There isn't any problem with abstinance. It is perfectly legit.

What people have a problem with is that some people want it to be THE ONLY thing taught about sex in schools, when it has been shown that it does not work, which results in higher pregnancy rates.

It can also be argued that abstinance is a direct opposition to one of our base instincts; namely sex.

In my mind however, if someone wishes to abtain 'till marriage, more power to them.
I don't want it to be the ONLY thing taught. But still, I can't for the life of me figure out how people see it as impossible to implement. Honestly, is it that hard to keep your pants zipped?

I don't want it to be the ONLY thing taught. But still, I can't for the life of me figure out how people see it as impossible to implement. Honestly, is it that hard to keep your pants zipped?

Like I said it's an instinct. And it's even more potent with teenagers, who have their hormones raging.

I know I have no desire for sex, so it may also depend on the individual.

Like I said it's an instinct. And it's even more potent with teenagers, who have their hormones raging.

I know I have no desire for sex, so it may also depend on the individual.
Bah. It's an issue of self control. That's one of the problems with America today; teens are taught that nothing bad is their fault, and that they aren't to be blamed. I'm 15, my hormones rage like no other, yet I never intend to have sex.

I don't want it to be the ONLY thing taught. But still, I can't for the life of me figure out how people see it as impossible to implement. Honestly, is it that hard to keep your pants zipped?

There is no problem with abstinence whatsoever. There is a problem with abstinence ONLY systems of education.

It is part of the normal behaviour of teenagers that they start becoming sexually active. Now some of them may choose to disregard these desires and tendencies, but no-one, other than their parents, has the right to insist that this is the only method of contraception that they can learn about. The institutional censorship of knowledge is problematic in the least.

Bah. It's an issue of self control. That's one of the problems with America today; teens are taught that nothing bad is their fault, and that they aren't to be blamed. I'm 15, my hormones rage like no other, yet I never intend to have sex.

seems a little preemptive. I don't mean to come off like the patronising oldie (not even old), but I'd be surprised if that held up forever.

OT:
just teaching abstinence = bad.
just teaching contraception = bad.
A bit of both with a healthy dose of responsibility = yay!

I don't want it to be the ONLY thing taught. But still, I can't for the life of me figure out how people see it as impossible to implement. Honestly, is it that hard to keep your pants zipped?
You usually have to have balls of steel to deny them the pleasure of sex until you marry. I would suggest you get over it one day, and buy some condoms and make some girl really happy for a few hours.

I'm 15, my hormones rage like no other, yet I never intend to have sex.
I thought you said you had no sexual desire?

seems a little preemptive. I don't mean to come off like the patronising oldie (not even old), but I'd be surprised if that held up forever.

OT:
just teaching abstinence = bad.
just teaching contraception = bad.
A bit of both with a healthy dose of responsibility = yay!
It will. My self control is my pride and joy, and I intend to keep it. It's really the only positive trait I have.

Ah, and of course, there's the fact that I'm horrifically ugly, so it keeps the temptation down.

I thought you said you had no sexual desire?
Well, I have a few random urges. In reference to hormones, I mean in the general sense (hormones don't just have to do with sexual attraction, you know). But still, it's a few bits of annoyance that I can easily control.

Well I am really in the middle with this. I waited until I was married at 19 (not smart I know) now I'm 22 and divorced. After the "D" I boinked everything I could

You usually have to have balls of steel to deny them the pleasure of sex until you marry. I would suggest you get over it one day, and buy some condoms and make some girl really happy for a few hours.
1. I never intend to get married.
2. Funny thing, in 'Nam, I had to get 'em replaced with steel---I kid, I kid.
3. Happy? You've obviously never seen my body...

Honestly abstinence is a good thing when you are under age. However its only a hope, people are going to have sex. Sex is natural. Theres nothing wrong with it(well if your 13 and your partner is 56 than thats a no go area). Several of the ppl who have posted on this thread are quite young, in my mind you should try to hold off for another few years.
Ppl mock supporters of abstinence because they quite frequently appear not to be able to get any sex(at least in IRL), if its truely your decision to abstain then good for you, but if its your mother, teacher, lack of knowledge regarding sex keeping your legs closed then well....grow up!

Ah, and of course, there's the fact that I'm horrifically ugly, so it keeps the temptation down.

The ugliest person I know is the person who has sex the most out of anyone I know.

The ugliest person I know is the person who has sex the most out of anyone I know.
Yeah, but they probably try to get it. One has to be attractive to get people to come to them, and since I'm not going to seek it, nor am I going to attract someone, I'm fine.

Yeah, but they probably try to get it. One has to be attractive to get people to come to them, and since I'm not going to seek it, nor am I going to attract someone, I'm fine.

but your self-perceived ugliness has no bearing on your ability to have sex. you can't use that as an excuse.

Yeah, but they probably try to get it. One has to be attractive to get people to come to them, and since I'm not going to seek it, nor am I going to attract someone, I'm fine.

Hey look, its what ya do with it that counts. How many ppl in the world are 'attractive'? You only have to be attracted to the person your with. Your confidence will grow as you get older. Don't stress about it.

1. It don't work.
2. It don't work.
3. We're horny.
4. I'm horny.

Okay, there's no way you can stop the hornyness of teenagers. So you might as well give them free condoms so they can get all the sex they want, and the girl doesn't get pregnant.

It will. My self control is my pride and joy, and I intend to keep it. It's really the only positive trait I have.

Ah, and of course, there's the fact that I'm horrifically ugly, so it keeps the temptation down.

Self-control doesn't necessarily mean that you must be abstinent. Generally speaking, those people who are rigidly abstinent are just as dominated by their passions as people who mindlessly and recklessly screw everything in sight. Their domination is based on a different reaction to their passions (fear), but they are still dominated by their passions nonetheless.

You might want to read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics on this subject. His argument was that reason and wisdom were tools to find an excess and avoid it, but with an interesting caveat; contrary to how we are often taught in our society, that virtue is the opposite of vice, Aristotle argued that virtue is really the mean between two competing vices.

As an example, courage isn't the opposite of cowardice; running headlong into certain death for no good reason is just foolish, not courageous. Courage, however, is using reason to prudently judge when and how to split the difference between two polar vices: cowardice and foolhardiness. Sometimes courageous people will retreat, in other cases they will charge forward. In all cases, they are guided by prudence and reason. Applying it to this situation, Virtue is not found in Abstinence, but rather Moderation between hedonism and abstinence.

Hey look, its what ya do with it that counts. How many ppl in the world are 'attractive'? You only have to be attracted to the person your with. Your confidence will grow as you get older. Don't stress about it.
Well, most people wouldn't find me "attractive." But again, that's only a helpful tool. The main point for avoiding sex...is because I don't like it. The fact that no one wants to have it with me is only a bonus.

Well, most people wouldn't find me "attractive." But again, that's only a helpful tool. The main point for avoiding sex...is because I don't like it. The fact that no one wants to have it with me is only a bonus.

If you don't do it how do you know you don't like it?

Ah, and of course, there's the fact that I'm horrifically ugly, so it keeps the temptation down.
Alcohol is your friend.

Well, most people wouldn't find me "attractive." But again, that's only a helpful tool. The main point for avoiding sex...is because I don't like it. The fact that no one wants to have it with me is only a bonus.

But..didn't you say you've never had sex? Or was that someone else?
Well if ya just don't like it then thats your decision. Thats a little different from abstince, even tho you are still abstaining, it doesn't appear to be that difficult for you to do so. I would imagine most other abstainees wouldn't be so lucky (no pun intended)

Self-control doesn't necessarily mean that you must be abstinent. Generally speaking, those people who are rigidly abstinent are just as dominated by their passions as people who mindlessly and recklessly screw everything in sight. Their domination is based on a different reaction to their passions (fear), but they are still dominated by their passions nonetheless.

You might want to read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics on this subject. His argument was that reason and wisdom were tools to find an excess and avoid it, but with an interesting caveat; contrary to how we are often taught in our society, that virtue is the opposite of vice, Aristotle argued that virtue is really the mean between two competing vices.

As an example, courage isn't the opposite of cowardice; running headlong into certain death for no good reason is just foolish, not courageous. Courage, however, is using reason to prudently judge when and how to split the difference between two polar vices: cowardice and foolhardiness. Sometimes courageous people will retreat, in other cases they will charge forward. In all cases, they are guided by prudence and reason. Applying it to this situation, Virtue is not found in Abstinence, but rather Moderation between hedonism and abstinence.

But I don't really fear sex---I loathe it. And I am exhibiting self-control, because I am defying the whims of my body.

Well, most people wouldn't find me "attractive." But again, that's only a helpful tool. The main point for avoiding sex...is because I don't like it. The fact that no one wants to have it with me is only a bonus.

don't like it, but never tried it.

seems a little weird.

But..didn't you say you've never had sex? Or was that someone else?
Well if ya just don't like it then thats your decision. Thats a little different from abstince, even tho you are still abstaining, it doesn't appear to be that difficult for you to do so. I would imagine most other abstainees wouldn't be so lucky (no pun intended)
Never had. The whole concept is horrid, really. I can't get too graphic here, but it's just...Uggh.

Alcohol is your friend.

This is true however if ppl are going to abstain from sex I'm not too sure they're gonna go for a few in the local before heading for a club/date/back seat of car

But I don't really fear sex---I loathe it. And I am exhibiting self-control, because I am defying the whims of my body.

In the same way as an agoraphobe exhibits self-control by locking themselves away in their house?

Never had. The whole concept is horrid, really. I can't get too graphic here, but it's just...Uggh.

Ahhh I used to think the same in my youthful early teenage years. That opinion will change soon. You just haven't met the right person yet

Erm, I apologize for my ignorance, but...what is an agoraphobe?

And I don't fear sex. I hate it.

Erm, I apologize for my ignorance, but...what is an agoraphobe?

And I don't fear sex. I hate it.

ag·o·ra·pho·bi·a: n. An abnormal fear of open or public places.

Ahhh I used to think the same in my youthful early teenage years. That opinion will change soon. You just haven't met the right person yet
I don't think it matters who the person is. Sticking my genitalia into someone else's genitalia will still be absolutely disgusting.

Eh.

I was a virgin until 20. Had no interest in dating. Didn't even admit that I 'liked' girls until I was 18. I reffered to myself as "Der Ubervirgin."

At age 20, though, I fell in love.

No intention of getting married, and she and I are only friends at the moment due to distance issues.

Not upset at my lack in the past. Just gave me a chance to learn more control, and to avoid STDs, so now, when I meet a girl, I can leave her with an overnight limp, without being risky.

There is a thing called self control, and just because a kid has his hormones raging doesn't mean he can control them.

I think that showing control over your sexual urges shows more manliness (or womanliness) than giving in to them freely.

Not to mention that if all those serial rapers would learn how to control their urges...a whole lotta things would be better.

Virginity Pledgers More Likely to Engage in Risky Sexual Behavior Including Oral and Anal Sex (http://www.siecus.org/media/press/press0094.html)

What is the current research and information that supports sexuality education? (http://www.siecus.org/library/faqs/faqs0001.html)

I don't think it matters who the person is. Sticking my genitalia into someone else's genitalia will still be absolutely disgusting.

Dude, you're dwelling on sex way too much.

This sounds like you're trying to convince yourself you don't want it.

Eh.

I was a virgin until 20. Had no interest in dating. Didn't even admit that I 'liked' girls until I was 18. I reffered to myself as "Der Ubervirgin."

At age 20, though, I fell in love.

No intention of getting married, and she and I are only friends at the moment due to distance issues.

Not upset at my lack in the past. Just gave me a chance to learn more control, and to avoid STDs, so now, when I meet a girl, I can leave her with an overnight limp, without being risky.
So what? I recently fell in love as well. Wonderful girl, but it's not going to make me surrender my beliefs. No sex, no romance. Period.

ok this guy is only 15 so I think he needs less of a hard time.

I really think the only proper way to battle the huge increase in teenage pregnacies is through education. Several European countries don't actually give sex ed in secondary schools. Education won't stop young ppl getting pregnant but it will create awareness and reduce STDs n stuff

Self-control doesn't necessarily mean that you must be abstinent. Generally speaking, those people who are rigidly abstinent are just as dominated by their passions as people who mindlessly and recklessly screw everything in sight. Their domination is based on a different reaction to their passions (fear), but they are still dominated by their passions nonetheless.

You might want to read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics on this subject. His argument was that reason and wisdom were tools to find an excess and avoid it, but with an interesting caveat; contrary to how we are often taught in our society, that virtue is the opposite of vice, Aristotle argued that virtue is really the mean between two competing vices.

As an example, courage isn't the opposite of cowardice; running headlong into certain death for no good reason is just foolish, not courageous. Courage, however, is using reason to prudently judge when and how to split the difference between two polar vices: cowardice and foolhardiness. Sometimes courageous people will retreat, in other cases they will charge forward. In all cases, they are guided by prudence and reason. Applying it to this situation, Virtue is not found in Abstinence, but rather Moderation between hedonism and abstinence.

I agree; Moderation is usually a good philosophy.

Off-topic: Have you noticed that this thread has become an online therapy session for Armandian Cheese?

Dude, you're dwelling on sex way too much.

This sounds like you're trying to convince yourself you don't want it.
Nah. It truly is nasty. When I'm bored, I like to pop in here and disrupt the constant "Gay/Straight" debate by reminding people there are other options.

I agree; Moderation is usually a good philosophy.

Off-topic: Have you noticed that this thread has become a semblance of a therapy session for Armandian Cheese?
Heh. People can't accept that others have a different spin on things, so they assume I'm mentally ill, and need therapy.

Nah. It truly is nasty. When I'm bored, I like to pop in here and disrupt the constant "Gay/Straight" debate by reminding people there are other options.

With all due respect, you are 15. Your sexuality has barely kicked in.

You have a long road ahead and a lot to learn. Enjoy it.

With all due respect, you are 15. Your sexuality has barely kicked in.

You have a long road ahead and a lot to learn. Enjoy it.
Yes, I'll be happily living a life of asexuality as I laugh at you fools! MWA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Ahem. :D

But I don't really fear sex---I loathe it. And I am exhibiting self-control, because I am defying the whims of my body.

No, you are not. Self-control means that the rational faculty of your mind guides your actions in all things. As you said yourself, it isn't rationality that is guiding your actions: it's an emotional sense of loathing. As such, you aren't exhibiting self-control because you aren't rational.

Think about it this way: what is the purpose to which you direct your actions. If you are at all rational and like other people, the answer is happiness; you wish to be happy in life. But how do you make yourself happy? The answer is that you become a virtuous person. Okay, you may say, but I am being virtuous, but you aren't. Virtuous acts are done by those who are rational, and we've already concluded you aren't rational.

What Is It?
Abstinence is not having sex. When a person decides to practice abstinence, that means he or she has decided not to have sex.

How Does It Work?
Abstinence is the simplest form of birth control. If two people don't have sex, then sperm can't fertilize an egg and there's no possibility of a pregnancy. Other forms of birth control depend on barriers that prevent the sperm from reaching the egg (such as condoms or diaphragms) or they interfere with the menstrual cycle (as birth control pills do). With abstinence, no barriers or pills are necessary.

Do you have to be a virgin to practice abstinence? No. Sometimes, someone who has been having sex decides not to continue having sex. Even if a person has been having sex, he or she can still choose abstinence to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

How Well Does It Work?
Abstinence is the only form of birth control that is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy. Although many other methods can have high rates of success if used properly, they can fail occasionally. The rate of success of other birth control methods varies depending on the type of birth control. Practicing abstinence, however, ensures that a girl will not become pregnant because there is no opportunity for sperm to fertilize an egg.

Protection Against STDs
Abstinence protects people against STDs. Some STDs spread through oral-genital sex or even intimate skin-to-skin contact without actual penetration (genital warts and herpes can be spread this way). So only avoiding all types of intimate genital contact can prevent STDs. Avoiding all types of intimate genital contact is complete abstinence.

Only complete and consistent abstinence prevents pregnancy and protects against STDs. Because a person does not have any type of intimate sexual contact - including oral sex - when he or she practices complete abstinence, there is no risk of passing on a sexually transmitted infection.

Consistent abstinence means that the person practices abstinence all the time. Having sex even once means that the person risks getting an infection.

Abstinence does not prevent AIDS and hepatitis B infections that come from nonsexual activities like using contaminated needles for doing drugs, tattooing, or taking steroids.

How Do You Do It?
Not having sex may seem easy because it's not doing anything. But peer pressure and things you see on TV and in the movies can make the decision to practice abstinence more difficult. If it seems like everybody else is having sex, some teens may feel they have to do it, too, just to be accepted. Don't let kidding or pressure from friends, a girlfriend, a boyfriend, or even the media push you into something that's not right for you.

A couple can still have a relationship without having sex. The people who care about you should respect that deciding not to have sex is an important personal choice. You might not realize it, but most teens are not having sex.

Choosing to practice abstinence is an important decision, and you may have questions about making this choice or about other methods of birth control. Your doctor or nurse - or an adult you trust, such as a parent, teacher, or counselor - can help provide some answers.

http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/contraception/abstinence.html

Heh. People can't accept that others have a different spin on things, so they assume I'm mentally ill, and need therapy.

No they don't! People are just trying to make discourage the never judge a book by its cover. While this is slightly on a smaller scale I always thought salmon was horrible, even tho I had never tasted it and it smelt horrible, however on tasting it I actually loved it and the lived happily ever after!

Heh. People can't accept that others have a different spin on things, so they assume I'm mentally ill, and need therapy.

Sex has a basic biuological function. If being healthy means having all your biological systems functioning within the basic ranges then, by definition there is something wrong with hating the idea of sex.

Having said that, however, it is your body and you have the right to use it however you see fit so long as this does not restrict the equivalent rights of others. So if you want to abstain, go ahead and abstain.

This does not give you the right to argue that others should abstain if they do not wish to.

What Is It?
http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/contraception/abstinence.html

Bloody hell... a doctor wrote that?

*head shake*

What's the problem with abstinence?

It's lame?

Sex has a basic biuological function. If being healthy means having all your biological systems functioning within the basic ranges then, by definition there is something wrong with hating the idea of sex.



Yes but hes only a kid(no offence Armandian Cheese). Not wanting to have sex is perfectly ok. If he was 20 and hated the idea of sex or even 18 then I'd say ok bit of a problem. But personally life experiences come into it too. I went to all girls schools from primary to secondary, as I live in the middle of nowhere and my school was in the city I rarely got to socialise with guys on a normal basis(I mean from puberty on cos I didn't fancy my little guy friends when I was a kid), until I was almost 16. Most of my friends had boyf and I had no interest in any of that stuff til then

Bloody hell... a doctor wrote that?

*head shake*

I quite agree, it makes sex seem like some rampent infection that will get you if you so much as come in close contact with someone.

I don't think it matters who the person is. Sticking my genitalia into someone else's genitalia will still be absolutely disgusting.

Hasn't your mother ever told you: "How do you know if you haven't tried it?"

I quite agree, it makes sex seem like some rampent infection that will get you if you so much as come in close contact with someone.

Perhaps, in the case, 'MD' means something else.

If it weren't a mile past bed time, I'd try to come up with something, but the best I can currently do is 'Mega Dick'

Perhaps, in the case, 'MD' means something else.

If it weren't a mile past bed time, I'd try to come up with something, but the best I can currently do is 'Mega Dick'

I think it means mis-directed! Maybe he bought his degree on line..

When you think through the implications of sex before marriage, abstinence seems to be a very valid, and rational solution to many of today's problems. Those who marry as virgins have a much lesser chance of divorce than those who have sex before they are married. Those who abstain until marriage also rate their happiness much higher, as well as the quality of sex. When you look at the issue of abstinence from a factual, psychological point of view, it is a very rational, logical act to undergo.

No, you are not. Self-control means that the rational faculty of your mind guides your actions in all things. As you said yourself, it isn't rationality that is guiding your actions: it's an emotional sense of loathing. As such, you aren't exhibiting self-control because you aren't rational.

Think about it this way: what is the purpose to which you direct your actions. If you are at all rational and like other people, the answer is happiness; you wish to be happy in life. But how do you make yourself happy? The answer is that you become a virtuous person. Okay, you may say, but I am being virtuous, but you aren't. Virtuous acts are done by those who are rational, and we've already concluded you aren't rational.

self-con·trol (slfkn-trl)
n.

Control of one's emotions, desires, or actions by one's own will

He IS exhibiting self-control. Please don't attempt to make an arguement without first knowing the facts. Self-control has NOTHING to do with why, it is merely what occurs. The determination of whether someone is exhibiting self control is a behavioral question, much more so than it is cognitive. In saying abstinence is in response to a fear, one's desires are kept in check, it may not be for the correct reasons in YOUR point of view, but as it stands, your arguement above is solely your point of view, and not necessarily factual.


Please, when you are debating, don't try to be very deep and wise, just look at the facts of a situation. That is a problem people on this forum deal with constantly.

No they don't! People are just trying to make discourage the never judge a book by its cover. While this is slightly on a smaller scale I always thought salmon was horrible, even tho I had never tasted it and it smelt horrible, however on tasting it I actually loved it and the lived happily ever after!
I'm pretty sure sticking my genitals into a woman's/man's genitals/anal area doesn't appeal to me. It's not judging a book by it's cover, it's looking at the obvious facts.

Ah, and it being disgusting is not the only flaw of sex.

A main one is that it is extremely primitive. It overrides rational instinct, and makes people do things they normally wouldn't out of lust.

There are people in this world who are asexual, i.e., simply not interested in sex.

This is perfectly fine. Don't razz 'em for it.

Abstinence is selfish, sex is meant to be shared. :fluffle:

I don't think it matters who the person is. Sticking my genitalia into someone else's genitalia will still be absolutely disgusting.

weird

oh well, more for everybody else.

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

Nothing wrong with it; it's just not for everyone.
Just as being sexually active is not for everyone.

Nothing wrong with it; it's just not for everyone.
Just as being sexually active is not for everyone.
Yeah, but why do so many people (especially teens) disregard it? To the point where we have to teach them about contraception? I mean, is it really that hard to refrain from sex?

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.
if you don't want sex, don't have it. i've got no problem with that. just don't tell me that we should ONLY teach children about abstinence, and not teach them about contraception and safe sex practices. and don't tell me that having sex is bad or dirty or wrong, because then i WILL laugh at you. as long as you respect my choices i will respect yours. pretty simple.

Yeah, but why do so many people (especially teens) disregard it? To the point where we have to teach them about contraception? I mean, is it really that hard to refrain from sex?
we "have" to teach kids about contraception for the same reason we "have" to teach them about how to deal with strangers who approach them. we could always tell kids to abstain from going outside, because then they would never need to know how to protect themselves from predators, but most loving and rational parents would rather educate their kids about how to be safe instead of expecting them to sequester themselves.

furthermore, kids won't always be kids. kids become adults, and adults need to know about safe sex. after all, why does a 10 year old need to know multiplication? there's nothing a 10 year old needs to use multiplication for, in terms of survival or supporting himself, but we teach it to him because we know that he will need it in his future life. we teach kids all sorts of things that they probably won't apply for many years to come. when it comes to teaching them safety, i don't see why anybody would balk.

I'm pretty sure sticking my genitals into a woman's/man's genitals/anal area doesn't appeal to me. It's not judging a book by it's cover, it's looking at the obvious facts.

Ah, and it being disgusting is not the only flaw of sex.

A main one is that it is extremely primitive. It overrides rational instinct, and makes people do things they normally wouldn't out of lust.
funny, sex has never made me do anything i normally wouldn't do, and i really like sex. i enjoy sex, i have for years, and i plan to continue enjoying it for many years, but it has never been able to override my values or my judgment. if you think it's impossible to be a rational, caring, responsible person who also has sex then i think you've got a lot to learn about life. if you don't like the idea of sex then that's your business, but you don't need to go around smearing people who think differently...indeed, that just makes you look like you are protesting a wee bit too much, and undermines your credibility a whole lot.

What about non-penetrative sex? :rolleyes:

Something tells me this debate may become more amusing if the concept of a yeast infection was introduced, so there it is... :D *snicker*

Something tells me this debate may become more amusing if the concept of a yeast infection was introduced, so there it is... :D *snicker*
hey, nobody is claiming sex ain't gross at times. it's squishy and messy and there are fluids. the aftermath of sex is often unappetizing, particularly when it involves babies (shudder).

but then, eating is pretty gross at times, too. ever see what a severely congested colon looks like? i can tell you that a yeast infection doesn't seem so nasty after you get a gander at a backup up intestine...

"I don't think it matters who the person is. Sticking my genitalia into someone else's genitalia will still be absolutely disgusting."

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy. um, I'm all for abstinence but the fact that you find sex discusting is a little strange, unless you haven't gone through puberty yet.

"I don't think it matters who the person is. Sticking my genitalia into someone else's genitalia will still be absolutely disgusting."

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy. um, I'm all for abstinence but the fact that you find sex discusting is a little strange, unless you haven't gone through puberty yet.
i dunno, i felt that way for a long time. i didn't understand why anybody wanted to have sex, and i certainly had no interest in it myself, and these feelings lasted until after i began puberty. some people live their whole lives without wanting sex, though most people grow out of such feelings at some point...i know i did :).

What about a prolapsed rectum? I'd say thats pretty gross. Chortle.

What about a prolapsed rectum? I'd say thats pretty gross. Chortle.
*shudder*

we should stop this game, and fast, before it gets even uglier...:P

All this talk about teenagers having sex no matter what is a "bunch of load" as my brother says. I am 18 and I have never had sex. I plan to keep it that way too. Which is not to say that I have never had the opportunity, either. I chalk it up entirely to my upbringing. I was taught that I should consider the consequences before I did anything. That is what I think should be the overriding factor in sex education. Neither "sex all willy-nilly" nor "abstinence or die" are good lesson plans, but sex ed must concentrate on cold hard facts - not be contaminated by politics. Our children (including me) are far too important for us not to do that. With that said, I think sex really is for marriage because it's specialler (yes I know) that way. And because you can have babies and exercise ultimate control over their psyches. :p

When I went through puberty I abstained... though the fact that I was main target of the namecalling in gradeschool did have some to do with it. I also abstained, perhaps partially out of habit, after grade and highschool.

When I did lose my virginity my age began with 2. That relationship lasted some great months. Afterwards, while I did think that sex was pleasant and good, I decided to abstain. I did get offers during the 7 years while I abstained, and it was more than once I felt a (small) desire to say yes, but I didn't.

It's just over a year ago that I met my gf (face to face) for the first time, and Yay!
I was still 20-something january 1st, but I won't be december 31st.

There is nothing wrong with abstinence. But there is something wrong with the negative connotation sex has in America.

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

The question is, do I want to refrain from sex. My answer is no. ;) If you want to refrain that is your business.

Yeah, but why do so many people (especially teens) disregard it? To the point where we have to teach them about contraception? I mean, is it really that hard to refrain from sex?


It's viewed as a rite of passage into adulthood by some. There is a biological imperative, which is stronger in some than others. Some teens are afraid that something is wrong with them if they are 'the only one' not 'doing it'. Some enjoy it.

I'd rather my kids be taught how to better protect oneself using condoms, etc. alongside abstinence education so that teens are at least informed of how to reduce the chances of pregnancy and/or disease if they choose not to abstain.

and what's your problem with contraception?

the thing about teaching abstinence is that it doesn't work.

no matter how hard you try, teens are going to have sex.

so you have two options:
1) teach them about safe sex, so that when they go at it, they won't get diseases.

2) keep them ignorant, so that when they do it, they have no idea how to protect themselves from pregnancy.



hmmmm....

tough choice :rolleyes:



Pregnancy is a joy and wonder, not something to be "protected" from.

Diseases are what God will send upon those whom anger Him. If you fornicate and get sick, it's your just rewards. For God command you in 1st Corinthians 6:18 "Flee from fornication" and then in Galatians 6:7 "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" so if you sin, you get your just rewards.

How about teaching youths that sex is for marriage and it's infinitely better inside marriage (sex without emotional attachment is basically worthless, so I've heard)

Also, teach them how to properly do it, I suppose that might come in handy, so fewer women wind up sore on the morning after the wedding night. Anyway, keeping your spouse sexually satisfied is biblically sanctioned and commanded.

Off topic: Did you ever get the feeling that there was an orchestrated wave of new nations specifically to support each other and 'save' the rest of us? ;)

I think contraception is a great idea, but I've no problem with abstinence. If you wanna wait till marriage,or whenever, go for it. If you want to have sex, be responsible and use contraceptives.

Bah. It's an issue of self control. That's one of the problems with America today; teens are taught that nothing bad is their fault, and that they aren't to be blamed. I'm 15, my hormones rage like no other, yet I never intend to have sex.

It's not what teens are "taught", its that not everybody handles their emotions in the same ways, just because you can control yourself doesn't mean others always can. It's like how some people get mad more easily than others, and can't handle that aggression as easily, except this is dealing with some people get more horny than others and can't handle it as well. Plus, if you are a 15 year old teenager, I can guarantee that you would do one of two things if a beautiful girl your age asked you to have sex with her, you would either A) Chicken out or B) Agree to it, abstaining would be the last thing on your mind.

It's not what teens are "taught", its that not everybody handles their emotions in the same ways, just because you can control yourself doesn't mean others always can. It's like how some people get mad more easily than others, and can't handle that aggression as easily, except this is dealing with some people get more horny than others and can't handle it as well. Plus, if you are a 15 year old teenager, I can guarantee that you would do one of two things if a beautiful girl your age asked you to have sex with her, you would either A) Chicken out or B) Agree to it, abstaining would be the last thing on your mind.


I can guarantee you this, you don't know how every teenage male will act, since you don't know every teenage male. Some of us abstain for our own reasons, I don't know what his are, maybe religious? But as for me, why do I abstain? I intend to inherit the kingdom.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

It's not what teens are "taught", its that not everybody handles their emotions in the same ways, just because you can control yourself doesn't mean others always can. It's like how some people get mad more easily than others, and can't handle that aggression as easily, except this is dealing with some people get more horny than others and can't handle it as well. Plus, if you are a 15 year old teenager, I can guarantee that you would do one of two things if a beautiful girl your age asked you to have sex with her, you would either A) Chicken out or B) Agree to it, abstaining would be the last thing on your mind.
Anyone can control themselves. We have free will, after all. And can't I choose C) Refuse out of principle?

Off topic: Did you ever get the feeling that there was an orchestrated wave of new nations specifically to support each other and 'save' the rest of us? ;)
Erm, are you referring to me as one of these "new nation" out to "save" everyone?

Nah, just the April '05ers. :)

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

There's nothing wrong with abstinence. The problem, however, is in thinking that you will encourage abstinence by insisting that that alone is the only acceptable solution against STDs and unwanted pregnancies, and that sex in general should be demonized. If you make sex taboo, kids, being kids, are going to want it even more. It's like that old adage:

Q: Why did the hippie cross the road?
A: Because someone told him not to.

Since you're not talking about teaching it, however, if I can ask: do you object to safe sex?

There's nothing wrong with abstinence. The problem, however, is in thinking that you will encourage abstinence by insisting that that alone is the only acceptable solution against STDs and unwanted pregnancies, and that sex in general should be demonized. If you make sex taboo, kids, being kids, are going to want it even more. It's like that old adage:

Since you're not talking about teaching it, however, if I can ask: do you object to safe sex?


As the old adage goes, "Why did the hippie get hit by the truck? Because he crossed the road when he was told not to by those who knew best."

As the old adage goes, "Why did the hippie get hit by the truck? Because he crossed the road when he was told not to by those who knew best."

Never heard that one before.

I can guarantee you this, you don't know how every teenage male will act, since you don't know every teenage male. Some of us abstain for our own reasons, I don't know what his are, maybe religious? But as for me, why do I abstain? I intend to inherit the kingdom.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Well, aside from the fact that God screwed Mary and had a bastard child by her...

...you're a real estate mogul for Jesus?

...And don't you have to die to pass on on inheritance?

No one has any problem with abstinence, only with abstinence-only education, WHICH HAS BEEN PROVEN NOT TO WORK!

Abstinence... Yeah, right. That's going to work. I respect people who do it (except for the people who look down on you for not doing it) but how in the world can you control raging hormones? I don't plan to wait till I'm married to have sex, but at the same time I don't plan on rooting someone for the hell of it. But then again, I'm all for free love. Hell it's your body, do whatever the hell you want to do with it.

no problem with abstinence- but it is not for everyone. We should teach kids about all the options...and let them do what they choose to do safely. Those who feel abstinence is best for them, the more power to them. Personally, I didn't have sex until I felt I was damned good and ready, and it wasn't really hard for me not to have sex until I found the right person. It is just a matter of personal perogative. But only teaching abstinence or only teaching contraception is an example of bad all or none thinking. Teaching all options is just good common sense.

no problem with abstinence- but it is not for everyone. We should teach kids about all the options...and let them do what they choose to do safely. Those who feel abstinence is best for them, the more power to them. Personally, I didn't have sex until I felt I was damned good and ready, and it wasn't really hard for me not to have sex until I found the right person. It is just a matter of personal perogative. But only teaching abstinence or only teaching contraception is an example of bad all or none thinking. Teaching all options is just good common sense.

In fact what does this mean: "Teaching abstinence". All you could teach there is: Abstinence is the safest (completely safe) method of contraception.
Thats it.

I can guarantee you this, you don't know how every teenage male will act, since you don't know every teenage male. Some of us abstain for our own reasons, I don't know what his are, maybe religious? But as for me, why do I abstain? I intend to inherit the kingdom.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Just do remember: according to your Bible, abstinence is no protection from STDs (since God sends many different STDs down upon various populations throughout the Bible, independent of sexual behavior), and abstinence is also no protection against pregnancy.

Also, keep in mind that your God knocked up a 14 year old girl in order to produce a bastard child that He then expected another man to care for, a child which He also allowed to be tortured to death in front of Him.

Just some things to keep in mind before you start trying to use the Bible as a manual for sexual morality. :)

In fact what does this mean: "Teaching abstinence". All you could teach there is: Abstinence is the safest (completely safe) method of contraception.

(bold mine)

Not according to the Bible :).

I'm 15, my hormones rage like no other, yet I never intend to have sex.
Not everyone is blessed (cursed?) to be free from the forces of attraction.

It will. My self control is my pride and joy, and I intend to keep it. It's really the only positive trait I have.

Ah, and of course, there's the fact that I'm horrifically ugly, so it keeps the temptation down.
Post pics please!

Sounds like you have self-esteem problems. (Likely nothing more than the average 15-year-old though.)

Well I am really in the middle with this. I waited until I was married at 19 (not smart I know) now I'm 22 and divorced. After the "D" I boinked everything I could
See this is why it is inadvisable to wait until marriage to have sex. People get married out of sexual desire, rather than good reasons.

Well, most people wouldn't find me "attractive."
Most people are not really attractive from appearance alone. Other aspects of them make them attractive.

But I don't really fear sex---I loathe it. And I am exhibiting self-control
You loathe it? Sounds like you have a problem, not self-control.

And I don't fear sex. I hate it.
You definitely have some sort of psychological problem! Either that, or this is just some weird little phase.

Not to mention that if all those serial rapers would learn how to control their urges...a whole lotta things would be better.
Rape is more about power and mysogyny than about sexual desire.

A main one is that it is extremely primitive. It overrides rational instinct, and makes people do things they normally wouldn't out of lust.
Eating! It's so primitive. Desire for food overrides rational instinct, and makes people do things they normally wouldn't out of craving for food.

There are people in this world who are asexual, i.e., simply not interested in sex.

This is perfectly fine. Don't razz 'em for it.
I know, but AC is not one of them. He seems to be a guy who thinks he is somehow superior because he rejects sex and love.

How about teaching youths that sex is for marriage and it's infinitely better inside marriage (sex without emotional attachment is basically worthless, so I've heard)/QUOTE]
So sex within a long-term but unmarried relationship is the same as "sex without emotional attachment"? Read:

[QUOTE=Mae West]Sex with love is the greatest thing in life. But sex without love— that's not so bad either.

Off topic: Did you ever get the feeling that there was an orchestrated wave of new nations specifically to support each other and 'save' the rest of us? ;)
AC doesn't seem to be one of those zealous religious types trying to save us. Merely look down at us.

As the old adage goes, "Why did the hippie get hit by the truck? Because he crossed the road when he was told not to by those who knew best."
The original adage stands. Point is, the hippie crossed the road because he was told not to.

Natural slection is a wonderful thing.

Just do remember: according to your Bible, abstinence is no protection from STDs (since God sends many different STDs down upon various populations throughout the Bible, independent of sexual behavior), and abstinence is also no protection against pregnancy.If you are referring to the Bible I am thinking of, it lists a huge range of behaviors, consequences, and ironies. The use of prostitutes was common practice in various parts well into the foundation of David's kingdom (I would cite Saul, but he was more of a despot). On the other extreme were those who devoted themselves to God in on way or another, including the Nazerites who (for a time) restricting their pleasures (not just sex), and then later the sect outside Jerusalem who required complete abstinance as membership.

Also, keep in mind that your God knocked up a 14 year old girl in order to produce a bastard child that He then expected another man to care for, a child which He also allowed to be tortured to death in front of Him.That was the plan. :rolleyes:

Just some things to keep in mind before you start trying to use the Bible as a manual for sexual morality.Very few parts of the Bible were written directly to everyone. On the other hand, some basic study shows a clear trend in behaviors.


And don't you have to die to pass on on inheritance?You have to be alive to get one, and, if you remeber a basic belief of all Christians, "Christ died..."

Well, I read this whole thread. And I have to say that I agree and feel the same way that AC does in some ways. Also, I tend to think sex is "gross", but I'm even younger than him, so that probably doesn't mean much to anyone here. Personally, I think I'll wait until I get married. If I don't see any chance that I'll ever get married, I might feel differently, but I'll just have to see. Anyway, I agree that you shouldn't just teach abstinence, because no matter what, there will always be teenagers that completely blow off the whole abstinence thing. For people like that, you have to teach about protection, etc. So....that's my opinion.......

Not everyone is blessed (cursed?) to be free from the forces of attraction.


Post pics please!

Sounds like you have self-esteem problems. (Likely nothing more than the average 15-year-old though.)


See this is why it is inadvisable to wait until marriage to have sex. People get married out of sexual desire, rather than good reasons.


Most people are not really attractive from appearance alone. Other aspects of them make them attractive.


You loathe it? Sounds like you have a problem, not self-control.


You definitely have some sort of psychological problem! Either that, or this is just some weird little phase.


Rape is more about power and mysogyny than about sexual desire.


Eating! It's so primitive. Desire for food overrides rational instinct, and makes people do things they normally wouldn't out of craving for food.


I know, but AC is not one of them. He seems to be a guy who thinks he is somehow superior because he rejects sex and love.

[QUOTE=Martel France]How about teaching youths that sex is for marriage and it's infinitely better inside marriage (sex without emotional attachment is basically worthless, so I've heard)/QUOTE]
So sex within a long-term but unmarried relationship is the same as "sex without emotional attachment"? Read:


l

AC doesn't seem to be one of those zealous religious types trying to save us. Merely look down at us.


The original adage stands. Point is, the hippie crossed the road because he was told not to.
I don't have self esteem problems, I'm a realist. I don't have a "problem"! I simply loathe sex. Not only is it frankly disgusting, it also overrides reason and logic. It's a primitive foolish instinct that does nothing but harm.

And I'm not looking down on anyone! All I'm asking is why people find it so hard to abstain! Everywhere I go, I hear abstinence is "impossible" and that teens will never listen to it. But why? Is it really that hard?

Oh, and frankly, I'd rather not post my photo online. Don't want to burn out any retina. Just trust me, I'm not a pretty sight.

I don't have self esteem problems, I'm a realist. I don't have a "problem"! I simply loathe sex. Not only is it frankly disgusting, it also overrides reason and logic. It's a primitive foolish instinct that does nothing but harm.


You know, it isn't just a "primitive instinct".....there is a reason for it.

You know, it isn't just a "primitive instinct".....there is a reason for it.
Not really a reason that people think about though, there'd probably be a lot more youngsters choosing abstinance if they thought more about the possible consequences.
Those abstaining willingly basically fall into 2 groups, either:
a) They have strong morals or are religious.
b) They have issues.

Most will claim a), but b) is far more common. AC seems to fit into b) really, either that or he hasn't got to the finding opposite sex attractive yet.

I have no idea why people find abstinance so hard though, i've been doing it for 19 years.......granted it may have something to do with the fact that i have never had and probably never will have a girl friend, but technically it still counts.

Not only is it frankly disgusting, it also overrides reason and logic. It's a primitive foolish instinct that does nothing but harm.You do realise that the appeal in reason and logic stems from a similar (though often conflicting) instinct? Besides, without it you wouldn't be here... I hope you at least appreciate that.


If you are trolling, well, I have some poo for you.

:gundge:

so did they tell you the problem with abstinence yet?

in a nutshell

there are things that you can choose for yourself but you cant choose for others. abstinence is one of them.

if you want to abstain, thats fine. its pretty difficult in the long run but it can be done. if you want other people to abstain you are ..welll... pissing up a rope.

if you want other people to abstain you are ..welll... pissing up a rope.
What an expression!

Not really a reason that people think about though, there'd probably be a lot more youngsters choosing abstinance if they thought more about the possible consequences.
Those abstaining willingly basically fall into 2 groups, either:
a) They have strong morals or are religious.
b) They have issues.

Most will claim a), but b) is far more common. AC seems to fit into b) really, either that or he hasn't got to the finding opposite sex attractive yet.

I have no idea why people find abstinance so hard though, i've been doing it for 19 years.......granted it may have something to do with the fact that i have never had and probably never will have a girl friend, but technically it still counts.
I'm a bit of A and B.

Not really a reason that people think about though, there'd probably be a lot more youngsters choosing abstinance if they thought more about the possible consequences.
Those abstaining willingly basically fall into 2 groups, either:
a) They have strong morals or are religious.
b) They have issues.

Most will claim a), but b) is far more common. AC seems to fit into b) really, either that or he hasn't got to the finding opposite sex attractive yet.

I have no idea why people find abstinance so hard though, i've been doing it for 19 years.......granted it may have something to do with the fact that i have never had and probably never will have a girl friend, but technically it still counts.

For me, it's more that it's not something I think about yet. I'm only 13, so it isn't exactly my main focus.....

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

I'm certain that if I suddenly stopped having sex with my girlfriend, I'd soon be single...

Seriously, not everyone believes it necessary to refrain from sex until marriage. This is nothing new; people have been having sex without marriage since prehistory. Absolutely nothing wrong with the concept of sex out of wedlock whatsoever. Sure, teaching abstinence is an option, but why does it have to be the only option? That's the biggest, hell, the only problem I have with teaching abstinence; most people that push it want it to be the only thing taught.

The problem is that telling people not to have sex doesnt stop them from having sex.

End of story.

Telling people to use conddoms, and explaining how and giving reasons however is proven to increase condom use, and therefore decrease unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

That is the problem.

The problem is that telling people not to have sex doesnt stop them from having sex.

End of story.

Telling people to use conddoms, and explaining how and giving reasons however is proven to increase condom use, and therefore decrease unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

That is the problem.

That's not enough. Condoms can fail, and STDs are not known for easy detection or for immediate symptoms. The only good solution is teaching both sex ed and abstinence...and get the media to shut up about what currently makes up its opinion on promiscuity.

That's not enough. Condoms can fail, and STDs are not known for easy detection or for immediate systems. The only good solution is teaching both sex ed and abstinence...and get the media to shut up about what currently makes up its opinion on promiscuity.


Again though, abstinance education does not cause kids to refrain from sex, that is a *given.*

The question becomes: "should kids be instructed in safe sex, or left to have sex without an understanding of protection?"

Again though, abstinance education does not cause kids to refrain from sex, that is a *given.*

The question becomes: "should kids be instructed in safe sex, or left to have sex without an understanding of protection?"

I said, they should be instructed in both abstinance and safe sex.

and what's your problem with contraception?

the thing about teaching abstinence is that it doesn't work.

no matter how hard you try, teens are going to have sex.

so you have two options:
1) teach them about safe sex, so that when they go at it, they won't get diseases.

2) keep them ignorant, so that when they do it, they have no idea how to protect themselves from pregnancy.



hmmmm....

tough choice :rolleyes:
No matter how hard you try, kids are going to be bulemic. Should you instruct them in the use of laxatives so when they do it they won't shit themselves to death?

No matter how hard you try, kids are going to be bulemic. Should you instruct them in the use of laxatives so when they do it they won't shit themselves to death?

That analogy made no sense whatsoever. What do laxatives have to do with bulemia? Nothing.

That analogy made no sense whatsoever. What do laxatives have to do with bulemia? Nothing.
Look up bulemia. Then come back to this thread.

Look up bulemia. Then come back to this thread.


Your wish is my command. Most bulemics I've known personally never used laxatives, they vomited.

Now, back to your analogy, it still doesn't make sense. People still defecate without the use of laxatives. Use of laxatives when they are unnecessary could be harmful.

People have sex without contraception. Those that do are more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases than those who practice safe sex.

So, I ask you: How does your analogy even compare?

Your wish is my command. Most bulemics I've known personally never used laxatives, they vomited.

Now, back to your analogy, it still doesn't make sense. People still defecate without the use of laxatives. Use of laxatives when they are unnecessary could be harmful.

People have sex without contraception. Those that do are more likely to contract sexually transmitted diseases than those who practice safe sex.

So, I ask you: How does your analogy even compare?
Oh, and since you know bulemics, you're now the expert, as opposed to the person who knows what's he's talking about?

People have sex without the use of contraceptives. Use of contraceptives just allow them to have sex more effectively. Laxatives let bulemics lose weight more effectively.

You're right, they do! You're also more likely to have sex if contraception is available. What's your point?

It compares because the argument is: "Well, since it's going to happen, let's facilitate it as much as possible." Rather than trying to fix something, you're exacerbating it.

I said, they should be instructed in both abstinance and safe sex.


I wasnt aware that a single sex ed program existed that didnt instruct kids in abstinance.

"You cant get pregnant or an STD if you dont have sex" is a pretty simple message and one i'm quite certain most kids already understand.

Oh, and since you know bulemics, you're now the expert, as opposed to the person who knows what's he's talking about?

People have sex without the use of contraceptives. Use of contraceptives just allow them to have sex more effectively. Laxatives let bulemics lose weight more effectively.

You're right, they do! You're also more likely to have sex if contraception is available. What's your point?

It compares because the argument is: "Well, since it's going to happen, let's facilitate it as much as possible." Rather than trying to fix something, you're exacerbating it.

Boy, aren't you the snide one? I was simply explaining why I didn't get the connection between laxatives and bulemia. Why so defensive?

You seem to be operating under the presupposition that sex is a bad thing, hence you compare it to bulemia, and that by facilitating safer sexual practices for those who are already having sex, that you're somehow making things worse.

Teaching abstinence doesn't stop people from having sex any more than teaching a someone how to have sex responsibly is going to start them having sex. That's a choice up to the individual to make.

As I've said before, I have no problem with teaching teens that sex has consequences, and that the only sure way to avoid those consequences is to avoid sex. However, the addition of saying "For those of you that will be having sex anyway, here's how to best protect yourself..." is not encouragement, it's acceptance of given fact.

It compares because the argument is: "Well, since it's going to happen, let's facilitate it as much as possible." Rather than trying to fix something, you're exacerbating it.


Contracepts dont facilitate sex, (in fact they tend slightly to impede it, for a number of reasons) hiring prostitutes for kids or other things like that "facilitate sex."

Contraceptives simply prevent pregnency and (condoms) the spread of STDs.

Also, considering that condoms are 99% effective, moreso when used in conjunction with another contraceptive, you essentially decrease unwanted pregnency and STD spread by 99% among people who pay attention to the lessons versus a program based soley on abstinance lectures.

Contracepts dont facilitate sex, (in fact they tend slightly to impede it, for a number of reasons) hiring prostitutes for kids or other things like that "facilitate sex."

Contraceptives simply prevent pregnency and (condoms) the spread of STDs.

Also, considering that condoms are 99% effective, moreso when used in conjunction with another contraceptive, you essentially decrease unwanted pregnency and STD spread by 99% among people who pay attention to the lessons versus a program based soley on abstinance lectures.
No. Kids in America are more likely to have sex if they have easy access to contraceptives than if they do not. And abstinence is 100% effective at stopping pregnancy and STD's, making it infinitely better than contraceptives.

I'm rather interested in the entire concept of waiting until marriage for sex to occur -- what is marriage other than a construction of society, the same society that fervently attempts to limit the occurence of sex? Why does the signing of a paper or giving of a ring suddenly allow for the unlocking of the magic kingdom between a woman's legs and free the pent up desires inside of two people? While I would not promote the idea of frequent and unprotected casual sex, I do believe that, when the time is right and both people are ready, sex can be a marvelous experience. When done at the wrong time, sex can have some horrid effects (including hatred of self and mate).

If decreasing the amount of unplanned for / premature sex is a goal, I feel the best start would be through altering media's portrayals of sex. When scantily clad characters are shown on a family network on TV, an image is sent to even the youngest and most unaware viewer that nudity is desirable, acceptable, and something to strive to see in others. Would today's teens be so desirous of sex if they did not have it constantly flaunted in their faces?

Would today's teens be so desirous of sex if they did not have it constantly flaunted in their faces?
Yes. The beauty of hormones.

How did children of yester-years survive without releasing their hormones? At no time in civilized history has humankind been so free with their bodies or so active on their lustful feelings...

How did children of yester-years survive without releasing their hormones? At no time in civilized history has humankind been so free with their bodies or so active on their lustful feelings...
People have sex all the time in history. Look at Sparta, it was standard practice to have homosexual sex and rape the conquered. Look at Africa, with polygamous tribes. People have been having sex since the beginning of the time.

No. Kids in America are more likely to have sex if they have easy access to contraceptives than if they do not. And abstinence is 100% effective at stopping pregnancy and STD's, making it infinitely better than contraceptives.


Indeed abstinance is, but abstinance-based education does not cause young people to actually be abstinent.

A good way to live a long time is to not get sick, but sadly we cannot simply tell people "don't get sick."

Granted there is a choice involved in the former, but for all honest purposes, telling kids not to have sex is no more effective at stopping them from having sex (much less at getting STDs or pregnent) than telling them not to get sick is at keeping them healthy.

People have to make a choice, do they want to prevent youth sex or do they want to prevent STDs and teen pregnency.

If the choice is the former, to the exclusion of the latter, then abstinance is the right path.

If it is the latter, then safe-sex education is the honest choice.

How did children of yester-years survive without releasing their hormones? At no time in civilized history has humankind been so free with their bodies or so active on their lustful feelings...


They marrier earlier, among other things.

Also, i imagine they simply didnt talk about it so much as they do now, so the idea that they didnt have sex is an illusion.

Indeed abstinance is, but abstinance-based education does not cause young people to actually be abstinent.

A good way to live a long time is to not get sick, but sadly we cannot simply tell people "don't get sick."

Granted there is a choice involved in the former, but for all honest purposes, telling kids not to have sex is no more effective at stopping them from having sex (much less at getting STDs or pregnent) than telling them not to get sick is at keeping them healthy.

People have to make a choice, do they want to prevent youth sex or do they want to prevent STDs and teen pregnency.

If the choice is the former, to the exclusion of the latter, then abstinance is the right path.

If it is the latter, then safe-sex education is the honest choice.
Why not prevent both? Kids aren't entitled to have sex, you don't get to do that until you're 18. And when you're 18, have all the sex you want. I just don't see the virtue in telling them the most efficient way to do it and removing all obstacles to it.

How did children of yester-years survive without releasing their hormones? At no time in civilized history has humankind been so free with their bodies or so active on their lustful feelings...Are you kidding me? Just because they white-wash history doesn't mean our forefathers weren't gettin in the ladies petticoats every chance they could. There has been no sudden surge in the collective libido for our race, we've been a buch of randy fuckers since the dawn of history. The children of yester-years did release their hormones, the only thing that's changed is we are able to talk about and acknowledge it more now than then.

The big problem with abstinence is you can't have sex. And sex feels good. It's a natural evolutionary development of our species that we enjoy sex. It compensates for the lost ability to detect ovulation in the female. Nature instead makes us want to have sex as often as we can to insure procreation. Your fighting our natural instincts with abstinence, that's why it continues to be ineffective.

How did children of yester-years survive without releasing their hormones? At no time in civilized history has humankind been so free with their bodies or so active on their lustful feelings...
Yeah right you obvously dont know history :p

Are you kidding me? Just because they white-wash history doesn't mean our forefathers weren't gettin in the ladies petticoats every chance they could. There has been no sudden surge in the collective libido for our race, we've been a buch of randy fuckers since the dawn of history. The children of yester-years did release their hormones, the only thing that's changed is we are able to talk about and acknowledge it more now than then.

The big problem with abstinence is you can't have sex. And sex feels good. It's a natural evolutionary development of our species that we enjoy sex. It compensates for the lost ability to detect ovulation in the female. Nature instead makes us want to have sex as often as we can to insure procreation. Your fighting our natural instincts with abstinence, that's why it continues to be ineffective.
So what? Doesn't justify it. The reptilian part of my brain wants me to rape a woman I find attractive. Doesn't mean I'm going to go out and do it. Cause it's wrong. We as humans don't do that sort of thing. "Because it's natural" is never an excuse for anything.

I guess abstinence is fine, but personaly I kind of like the idea of having sex. But maybe I'm jsut weird. ;)

Why not prevent both? Kids aren't entitled to have sex, you don't get to do that until you're 18. And when you're 18, have all the sex you want. I just don't see the virtue in telling them the most efficient way to do it and removing all obstacles to it.


I suppose i will need to determine where you stand.

Which goal takes precedence and should be the central focus of school sex ed:

Preventing STDs and unwanted teen pregnancies

OR

Preventing young people from having sex

?

Consider that whichever one you choose will impede the other, as is the case in reality.

I suppose i will need to determine where you stand.
Which goal takes precedence and should be the central focus of school sex ed:
Preventing STDs and unwanted teen pregnancies
OR
Preventing young people from having sex
?
Consider that whichever one you choose will impede the other, as is the case in reality.
If you accomplish the later you accomplish the former. We can stop our kids from murdering people, we can damn well get them to stop screwing people.

So what? Doesn't justify it. The reptilian part of my brain wants me to rape a woman I find attractive. Doesn't mean I'm going to go out and do it. Cause it's wrong. We as humans don't do that sort of thing. "Because it's natural" is never an excuse for anything."excuse"? Who's asking for you to excuse anything? I'm just laying out the truth. And leave your rape fantasies out of this, we're talkin' consensual sex. Yes, both male and female humans are wired to enjoy and want sex. I'm not ashamed of my sexual desires and no one should be. I have no problem with how evolution created our species, that's your schtick.

If you accomplish the later you accomplish the former. We can stop our kids from murdering people, we can damn well get them to stop screwing people.
And what leads you to the belief that we can get them to stop screwing eachother?

If you accomplish the later you accomplish the former. We can stop our kids from murdering people, we can damn well get them to stop screwing people.

I suppose i will need to determine where you stand.

Which goal takes precedence and should be the central focus of school sex ed:

Preventing STDs and unwanted teen pregnancies

OR

Preventing young people from having sex

?

Consider that whichever one you choose will impede the other, as is the case in reality.

"excuse"? Who's asking for you to excuse anything? I'm just laying out the truth. And leave your rape fantasies out of this, we're talkin' consensual sex. Yes, both male and females humans are wired to enjoy and want sex. I'm not ashamed of my sexual desires and no one should be. I have no problem with how evolution created our species, that's your schtick.
You're justifying it based on the fact that wired that way. Well, we're also wired to kill and cheat and steal and rape. I don't hear you justifying those based on the fact that htose urges are natural. Are you ashamed of anything you've ever thought? If not, you have more problems than hormones.

And what leads you to the belief that we can get them to stop screwing eachother?
You can stop someone from doing anything. Skinner boxes and all that.

You're justifying it based on the fact that wired that way. Well, we're also wired to kill and cheat and steal and rape. I don't hear you justifying those based on the fact that htose urges are natural. Are you ashamed of anything you've ever thought? If not, you have more problems than hormones.
Or maybe just more comfortable with who he is ... who says everyone has the natural urges to cheat steal kill and rape? some do ... not all of us (though speeks of your personality that you think thoes are such basic insincts)

You can stop someone from doing anything. Skinner boxes and all that.
Over the long term on large scale infesable and has no backing
Humans dont work that way in the real world ... we dont follow your ideals

Or maybe just more comfortable with who he is ... who says everyone has the natural urges to cheat steal kill and rape? some do ... not all of us (though speeks of your personality that you think thoes are such basic insincts)
Everyone does. If you don't, you're defective. You have something drastically and physically wrong with your brain. Everyone has thoughts about committing a crime. Unless you simply transcended beyond normal human instincts.

You're justifying it based on the fact that wired that way. Well, we're also wired to kill and cheat and steal and rape. I don't hear you justifying those based on the fact that htose urges are natural. Are you ashamed of anything you've ever thought? If not, you have more problems than hormones.Who say's man is naturally wired to kill, cheat, steal and rape? Why do you want to confuse violence with sex? Sex usually is just the opposite of violent. Maybe the real problem is within you, the way you percieve sex.

Who say's man is naturally wired to kill, cheat, steal and rape?
Every psychiatrist ever? Every neuropsychologist ever?

Why do you want to confuse violence with sex?
They're both base instincts. You simply assume one to be good.

Sex usually is just the opposite of violent. Maybe the real problem is within you, the way you percieve sex.
Maybe as a biologist, that's the only way to perceive sex, a human urge.

Everyone does. If you don't, you're defective. You have something drastically and physically wrong with your brain. Everyone has thoughts about committing a crime. Unless you simply transcended beyond normal human instincts.
Nice ad-hominim ... I have NEVER in my life had the urge to rape

And crimes are a socioconstruct thoes that have thoughts about breaking laws usualy are dissatisfied with the consturct rather then a wish to commit the crime (not all but a lot)

Every psychiatrist ever? Every neuropsychologist ever?


They're both base instincts. You simply assume one to be good.


Maybe as a biologist, that's the only way to perceive sex, a human urge.
proof ? or are you just spouting off because "Every" is a rather large word

not every expert in any field agree's 100 percent with eachother

Can you prove that every Psychiatrist? and Every neurophyschologest has always (thoughout history) said this? (you said ever) I bet you 5 bucks you cant

Nice ad-hominim ... I have NEVER in my life had the urge to rape
Then you're a liar as well. That's simply the way people are. Everyone has entertained a thought at some point, either consciously or in a dream, to commit pretty much every base act possible. 50% of college males reported to be at least "somewhat likely" to commit rape if they had the assurance of not being caught.

proof ? or are you just spouting off because "Every" is a rather large word

not every expert in any field agree's 100 percent with eachother

Can you prove that every Psychiatrist? and Every neurophyschologest has always (thoughout history) said this? (you said ever) I bet you 5 bucks you cant
Every respected, published, and cited then. Since it's far easier to prove a negative, I'm sure you'll find one counterexample then.

Then you're a liar as well. That's simply the way people are. Everyone has entertained a thought at some point, either consciously or in a dream, to commit pretty much every base act possible. 50% of college males reported to be at least "somewhat likely" to commit rape if they had the assurance of not being caught.
Nope not lying ... you must be mistaken (hell could be a statistical freek) but have never thought about it

Every respected, published, and cited then. Since it's far easier to prove a negative, I'm sure you'll find one counterexample then.
Nope you claimed the positive it is up to you to support it

Nope not lying ... you must be mistaken (hell could be a statistical freek) but have never thought about it
Shrug, as I said, something could be drastically miswired in your brain. Not that that's a criticism of you, or an attempt at contempt, but if you've truly never thought about rape, or dreamed about it, then you're more than a statistically anomaly, you're the exception to the rule.

Everyone does. If you don't, you're defective. You have something drastically and physically wrong with your brain. Everyone has thoughts about committing a crime. Unless you simply transcended beyond normal human instincts.OK I think I see where you failing to make a delineation. You want to say that man should be able to control all natural urges or thoughts he might have. I don't seriously consider acting on most violent ideas that cross my mind. But sexual desires I do seriously consider and do act upon. Why? Because my sexual desires don't involve harming my fellow humans, in fact most involve bringing my partner to the heights of pleasure. Sex is one of the basic building blocks of the most intimate of human relationships, it opens our soul and self up in a way nothing else can. That's a far cry from killing and stealing, those things involve destruction and pain, sex is about creation and pleasure.

Nope you claimed the positive it is up to you to support it
You can't prove a positive. You can prove a negative. Prove you've never thought about rape.

Shrug, as I said, something could be drastically miswired in your brain. Not that that's a criticism of you, or an attempt at contempt, but if you've truly never thought about rape, or dreamed about it, then you're more than a statistically anomaly, you're the exception to the rule.
Oh I have thought about it just not commiting it there is a difference (you were trying to prove an urge to commit) absolutly none

OK I think I see where you failing to make a delineation. You want to say that man should be able to control all natural urges or thoughts he might have. I don't seriously consider acting on most violent ideas that cross my mind. But sexual desires I do seriously consider and do act upon. Why? Because my sexual desires don't involve harming my fellow humans, in fact most involve bringing my partner to the heights of pleasure. Sex is one of the basic building blocks of the most intimate of human relationships, it opens our soul and self up in a way nothing else can. That's a far cry from killing and stealing, those things involve destruction and pain, sex is about creation and pleasure.
Are STD's about creation and pleasure? Broken homes? Pregnancy? Sex isn't all gumdrops and roses, and all the contraceptives, educational programs, and testing in the world won't change that. I don't see the problem with ADULTS having sex. I don't see the problems with homosexuals having sex. I don't see the problem with married people having sex. I do see a problem with minors, people who can't even sign a document, having sex.

You can't prove a positive. You can prove a negative. Prove you've never thought about rape.
Nope you have not made a single ounce of support just a claim so far you dont have a leg to stand on I really dont have to disprove anything its your unsupported claim so far

Oh I have thought about it just not commiting it there is a difference (you were trying to prove an urge to commit) absolutly none
So every girl you've ever been attracted to has wanted to have sex with you? Or has there ever, in your entire life, been a girl that you'd want to have sex without bothering to find out if the feelings were reciprocated?

Nope you have not made a single ounce of support just a claim so far you dont have a leg to stand on I really dont have to disprove anything its your unsupported claim so far
How do you want me to support it?

Let's go a little easier, find an article saying that it is unnatural to entertain thoughts about criminal actions. Find one. I'll find 3 counterarticles for every one you find.

So every girl you've ever been attracted to has wanted to have sex with you? Or has there ever, in your entire life, been a girl that you'd want to have sex without bothering to find out if the feelings were reciprocated?
No not really the emotional part is the big turn on for me personaly the seeing her be pleasured
She wouldent exactly respond in a way I like if it was forced

No not really the emotional part is the big turn on for me personaly the seeing her be pleasured
She wouldent exactly respond in a way I like if it was forced
No not really? Or no not at all ever? Hell, since we've started talking you've probably thought about it. But again, even if you're not bullshitting, you're the one in a billion exception, not the rule.

How do you want me to support it?

Let's go a little easier, find an article saying that it is unnatural to entertain thoughts about criminal actions. Find one. I'll find 3 counterarticles for every one you find.
Nope you made the claim including another one saying "all" (even with the quantified "respected") but never once showed any proof

Sorry but I dont go resource hunting for someone that did not even bother to look it up and give us at least a linky to support it

proof ? or are you just spouting off because "Every" is a rather large word

not every expert in any field agree's 100 percent with eachother

Can you prove that every Psychiatrist? and Every neurophyschologest has always (thoughout history) said this? (you said ever) I bet you 5 bucks you cant

Maybe not every, but it is a human instinct. It isn't just a natural urge alone; a person must think they can get away with it. Look at the Greek and Roman wars... Its all in there. Violence, pilliaging, and raping. Even if it is something that we have learned to quell, each of us does have some tendencey no matter how small. We have come a long way over the last few thousand years.

Now as far as abstinence... It is a choice. If you want to have sex; do it, if not; don't.
I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.
Lets compare that to eating. It is required for a person to eat in order to live. Sex is expanded on that idea even more. It is required for people to have sex in order for humanity to live. Although a single person having sex isn't vital, it is still hardwired into human nature. Survival of the Species.

Nope you made the claim including another one saying "all" (even with the quantified "respected") but never once showed any proof

Sorry but I dont go resource hunting for someone that did not even bother to look it up and give us at least a linky to support it
Here's a linky then: http://www.crystalinks.com/reptilianbrain.html

The basic ruling emotions of love, hate, fear, lust, and contentment emanate from this first stage of the brain. Over millions of years of evolution, layers of more sophisticated reasoning have been added upon this foundation.

When we are out of control with rage, it is our reptilian brain overriding our rational brain components. If someone says that they reacted with their heart instead of their head. What they really mean is that they conceded to their primative emotions (the reptilian brain based) as opposed to the calculations of the rational part of the brain.

Are STD's about creation and pleasure? Broken homes? Pregnancy? Sex isn't all gumdrops and roses, and all the contraceptives, educational programs, and testing in the world won't change that. I don't see the problem with ADULTS having sex. I don't see the problems with homosexuals having sex. I don't see the problem with married people having sex. I do see a problem with minors, people who can't even sign a document, having sex.Those things are sometimes a factor in sex, but certainly not always. Society sets a date that divides adults from children, nature however doesn't recognize our calendar. I started having sex regularly at 17, I was ready and capable, but I wasn't legally an adult. People mature at different rates, I don't advocate pedophilia, but assigning an arbatrary age doesn't necessarily solve the problem of maturity.

One problem with your correlation between sex and other violent urges.
The human species can survive without the violence you claim is natural, it can't without sex.

Shall we return to the topic?

Again, evidence bears out unequivocally that abstinance-only education (the stated aim of which is to provide zero percieved condoning of sex by young people) does not prevent young people from having sex and does not lower rates of teen pregnency and STDs.

On the other hand, sex-ed which incorporates factual information about condoms and other contraceptives does not decrease the ammount of sex among young people, but it does decrease the ammount of STDs and unwanted pregnencies.

Because there are only two options: abstiance-only and contraception-inclusive, a choice must be made between which one is preferred.

As the first is completely ineffective in reducing teen pregnency and STDs, its primary driving motivation is that "kids must not be made to think that sex is acceptable, and should not have sex."

As the second has as its main motivation the prevention of STDs and teen pregnency, and not the prevention of sex itself (bear in mind that if this was not the primary goal, abst-only would be preferable), one motivation or the other takes exclusive precedence.

The question is therefore, in the real world, which approach is preferable, and by extension, which interest is superior: preventing sex or preventing pregnency/STD.

Those things are sometimes a factor in sex, but certainly not always. Society sets a date that divides adults from children, nature however doesn't recognize our calendar. I started having sex regularly at 17, I was ready and capable, but I wasn't legally an adult. People mature at different rates, I don't advocate pedophilia, but assigning an arbatrary age doesn't necesarily solve the problem of maturity.

One problem with your correlation between sex and other violent urges.
The human species can survive without the violence you claim is natural, it can't without sex.
How would we survive without killing animals? How would any nation exist if it never killed other humans? Killing is as essential as sex, just not as often, with in turn is as necessary as eating, just not as often.

How would we survive without killing animals? How would any nation exist if it never killed other humans? Killing is as essential as sex, just not as often, with in turn is as necessary as eating, just not as often.Your stretching now. Weak. I won't even dignify this with the obvious arguements.

Sex is a natural urge, one had by all species -- even by males who know their partners will devour them as soon as they mate.

Violent acts against others (including rape) are unnatural. Not everyone has those urges -- I know of few females who appreciate the thought of forcing themselves on others, particularly since it has been so ingrained within most that every man is a potential preditor to beware of. Violent urges come from a worldly and competitive view on life where the focus is 'I' and not 'you.' Sex, when not consensual, can be placed in that same self-gratifying category.

Your stretching now. Weak. I won't even dignify this with the obvious arguements.
Because you don't have any?

Sex is a natural urge, one had by all species -- even by males who know their partners will devour them as soon as they mate.

Violent acts against others (including rape) are unnatural. Not everyone has those urges -- I know of few females who appreciate the thought of forcing themselves on others, particularly since it has been so ingrained within most that every man is a potential preditor to beware of. Violent urges come from a worldly and competitive view on life where the focus is 'I' and not 'you.' Sex, when not consensual, can be placed in that same self-gratifying category.
Violence is a natural urge of all species. Put a cat and dog in a box. Put a red ant in a colony of black ants. Put a tiger in a cage with a baby. Violence is extremely natural. Natural != good.

Because you don't have any?Oh grow up, I can't be baited that easy.

Oh grow up, I can't be baited that easy.
Sounds like a fancy way of saying you don't have a rebuttal. Which essentially makes your posts spam.

Violence is a natural urge of all species. Put a cat and dog in a box. Put a red ant in a colony of black ants. Put a tiger in a cage with a baby. Violence is extremely natural. Natural != good.

Are man and woman different species, ones that must always be at war with one another? A tiger/baby comparison to male/female demonstrates strong sexist feelings and no respect for the equality held for all people. A man/man relationship is still the same species, as is a woman/woman. Most species resist attacking their own kind, instead reaching for another branch of the foodchain to attack. Yes, it is natural for a mountain lion to attack a deer -- the need for food requires as much. Not it is not natural for a man to attack another man (other than possibly in a contest for a woman, as such battles ensue in most higher life forms); for it is through cooperation and coexistence that species survive. Nature does equal good, as long as it is correctly viewed without being purposefully misconstrued.

How would we survive without killing animals? How would any nation exist if it never killed other humans? Killing is as essential as sex, just not as often, with in turn is as necessary as eating, just not as often.Man is an omnivore not a carnivore, many societies and individuals don't hunt and kill, not to mention there is a big difference in fighting a war and say fishing. We were discussing survival of the species not of nations. Long before ntions existed man existed in a tribal society, war and killing was not a prerequisite part of tribal society, true sometimes it happened, especially when conflict over resources occured, but that doesn't mean it is a requirement. The vast a mjority of humans on this planet will go through their lives without killing anyone, a very small minority will never have sex.


Happy now. You owe me an apology.

Are man and woman different species, ones that must always be at war with one another? A tiger/baby comparison to male/female demonstrates strong sexist feelings and no respect for the equality held for all people. A man/man relationship is still the same species, as is a woman/woman. Most species resist attacking their own kind, instead reaching for another branch of the foodchain to attack. Yes, it is natural for a mountain lion to attack a deer -- the need for food requires as much. Not it is not natural for a man to attack another man (other than possibly in a contest for a woman, as such battles ensue in most higher life forms); for it is through cooperation and coexistence that species survive. Nature does equal good, as long as it is correctly viewed without being purposefully misconstrued.
Put an Irishman in the IRA with Prince Charles in a box together. Put Al-Sadr and Falwell in a box together. Put Ann Coulter and Hillary Clinton in a box together. And biologically, men and women are at war with each other, the X chromosome is slowly attempting to destroy the Y chromosome, several species don't even HAVE Y chromosomes anymore.

Man is an omnivore not a carnivore, many societies and individuals don't hunt and kill, not to mention there is a big difference in fighting a war and say fishing. We were discussing survival of the species not of nations. Long before ntions existed man existed in a tribal society, war and killing was not a prerequisite part of tribal society, true sometimes it happened, espescially when conflict over rsources occured, but that doesn't mean it is a requirement. The vast a mjority of humans on this planet will go through their lives without killing anyone, a very small minority will never have sex.


Happy now. You owe me an apology.
Between the incisors, short small intestine, and inability to synthesize certain amino acids, man was clearly designed to eat meat AND plants, not one or the other. That's what omnivorous means, you eat both. Not that you can, but choose one over there other. A vast majority may never kill anyone, but a healthy portion will. How many millions have died in wars, from sanctions, from diseases spread intentionally? Violence is, at some points, necessary. If nothing else to overcome violence. How different would the world be if Hitler and Tojo led the only violent nations?

And this is my last post on the subject tonight. Exams are tomororw, and I needs me sleep. Have fun arguing amongst yourselves.

Put an Irishman in the IRA with Prince Charles in a box together. Put Al-Sadr and Falwell in a box together. Put Ann Coulter and Hillary Clinton in a box together. And biologically, men and women are at war with each other, the X chromosome is slowly attempting to destroy the Y chromosome, several species don't even HAVE Y chromosomes anymore.

People again inspired by society to hate others based on differences often beyond control. Would one person hate another if not conditioned by others to so do? What real reason do Iraqis have to hate me, other than the fact that I was born into a certain country?

And I must have missed the lecture about the disappearing Y chromosome in my genetics course last fall. I hardly think, however, that a genetic alteration is a signification of a war between the genders, for the term war signifies a sense of intentionality, of a conscious desire to accomplish something.

Between the incisors, short small intestine, and inability to synthesize certain amino acids, man was clearly designed to eat meat AND plants, not one or the other. That's what omnivorous means, you eat both. Not that you can, but choose one over there other. A vast majority may never kill anyone, but a healthy portion will. How many millions have died in wars, from sanctions, from diseases spread intentionally? Violence is, at some points, necessary. If nothing else to overcome violence. How different would the world be if Hitler and Tojo led the only violent nations?Vegeterians exist and procreate, many people go through life never eating any animals that are warmblooded, eating a lower lifeform is not the same as killing a member of your own species. The conflicts that have arrisen from the crowding of the planet are just that, not an inevitable part of human life. Sex is needed for human life to continue, the factors you keep bringing up to muddy the arguement are not. You have not successfully countered this point and continue to digress.

And this is my last post on the subject tonight. Exams are tomororw, and I needs me sleep. Have fun arguing amongst yourselves.Yeah, you hit the wall and know it, goodnight.

Honestly, I really don't get this. Everywhere I go it seems, people ridicule and attack the idea. Is it really so hard to refrain from sex? Is contraception the only option? I swear, so many people act is if having sex is a vital necessity that they need to live, and any suggestion they refrain from it is absurd.

What's the problem with abstinence? Nothing, except when people are trying to force other people to do so, and the like.

The real question here would rather be: what's wrong with sex?

Is sex just for you "sticking one's genitalia in another's genitalia"?! Yuck... If that's how you see sex, well, I guess I can understand your point of view. But sex can be about so much more than that! One of the reasons behind "no sex before marriage" was so that people would form relationships before having sex, which is rather healthy. Of course, no people seems to think about this now, but sex with love is far from being a bad thing. Or should I rather say, sex with respect (that would be already a big step forward, I thinl)? I'm not sure, but look at asian history. They've refined sex to a much higher level, it's not "giving in to primal instincts", it almost seems like an art form!

You see, maybe the real problem (and maybe your own problem with sex as well) is not so much about abstinence vs contraception but just about having "healthy sex" (sorry, I don't feel like trying defining this right now with anything better than "something that brings more than plain physical pleasure", but if people can't see what I mean, I'll eventually try a bit later). You can see sex as something bestial, primal, devoid of respect or feelings, that's "screwing someone". But you also can see it as a way to *share* love, to give yourself, to trust, that's "making love *with* someone".

Well, I got quite a bit messed up with my ideas, but I hope that still makes a bit of sense for some people...