Defending the Truth

Why can't people consider this approach to preventing pregnancy. I know some people say it's better without a condom...well boo hoo

If every woman who did not want to have a baby considered using protection the right way, we would not need abortion. Just my 2 cents.

Shit happens? Even if people are careful.

People have no self control.. it's really simple... if you can't handle a kid... DON'T HAVE SEX! Wow... imagine how many problems would go away if people could just control themselves.

Oh but I forgot... people will die if they don't have sex... they need it so bad and it's what keeps relationships together... not communication or friendship or trust or enjoying each other's company... not even intimacy that doesn't include sex... no no... it's the sex...

-Ali

Ali, people will never have that much control over themselves--not Americans anyway. Sex is so tightly woven into American culture that it's impossible to say "oh, just cut it out".

You also have to be aware of the pyschological effects that not having sex has on some (or most) people. That's why so people masturbate, because their hormones have such a powerful grip on them. It's a completely natural process.

If people weren't meant to have sex until they wanted a baby, then we wouldn't have these hormonal explosions at such a young age. This isn't to say that boys and girls should start having sex at age 12 though. I believe there should still be a length of time that kids need to be able to understand sex (humans being an intelligent species and all). Besides, kids from 12 to 15 are timid when it comes to sex anyway--it's still a "dirty" subject to them.

It's easy to see how animal-like humans still are by examining their sexual behaviors (this includes attraction and etc., not just intercourse). It makes us seem so primitive--sex has been around since the beginning of complex organisms (duh).

But of course, with civiliazation and society come rules. Too many people aren't cognizant of the fact that there will always be individuals who are more in touch with nature than others. When I say "in touch with nature" of course I mean they see it necessary to satisfy certain natural needs and don't care what society thinks of it, and not just sex. There are tons of things that society doesn't approve of that many people see absolutely no problem with. I couldn't agree more, actually.

Sex has only been woven into America's culture since te late 1960's, less than 50 years. I find it interesting that the people prior to this time were able to keep their "hormones" under control, and yet people today can't. I am sorry but that is a typical excuse that serves no merit. It shows the ever growing lack of self-control and self-reliance exhibited by people today. If it feels good, do it!!!!!

Social mores are established by the society, and ours have changed. However, today we are required less and less to follow any rules with which we disagree. Russell Kirk wrote that, "The individual is foolish, the species is wise." His comment is true.

Everyone at one time or another seeks to rebel against authority, for the most part this occurs during the teenage and young adult years. I guess that is why Winston Churchill said, "Anyone under thirty who is not a liberal doesn't have a heart, and anyone over thirty who is still a liberal doesn't have a brain."

Once upon a time in this country, unwed pregnancy was viewed in a negative light. Families would move their unwed daughter out of town to have the baby. But then with the popular media supporting this lifestyle change, that stigmatism changed, and today it is more readily accepted. I guess that is why 1/3 of all white children and 2/3 of all black children are born out of wedlock. Has this made society better?

We cry about the poor in this country, and I am not taking anything away from single mothers, I personally know quite a few who are outstanding, however, this is a direct cooralation between poverty and single family homes. Especially in the cases where the father is absent in both presence and financial support for the family. SO before we cry for more welfare, we need to address this problem, and perhaps we wouldn't need more.

I am sorry, but you are making it too easy on those who do not wish to do what is right, and instead follow the just do it culture. We have had, and we can return to a culture where sex can be controlled, and if we wish to survive as a culture, I believe that it is time that we do.

dmk

I'm speaking on my terms, sir, not American society's. Just had to clear that up first.

As crazy as it might sound to any Christian, sex can be a spiritual experience. Free spirits live for intense experiences, those are the defining moments of their lives! As calm as meditation and dreamwork are, they are very intense for the person who learns to take the reins and control their mind in such a way.

Of course, this isn't to say that free-spirited people lack discipline... Dreamwork takes discipline, meditation takes discipline, writing poetry and painting takes discipline. You know, it takes a lot of discipline not to judge or hate or fear too. I'm generalizing here, but to me it seems that many, many Americans are very fearful people, which is the main ingredient for a judgemental, hateful society.

Our beliefs are based on the "information" the media offers us. And they're sneaky in their ways, they have the money to fund the research to figure out how to make Americans believe what they're saying, or at least influence their attitudes.

Unwanted pregnancies, STDs, broken hearts (boo hoo...); yeah that all happens. But America's teenagers will conveniently forget all that when their hormones kick in.

My Dad bought be a box of condoms when my girlfriend started staying at my place over night. He didn't tell me he worries about me having sex or getting this girl pregnant; I know he does, and he knows that I know. This is the case for many teens I'd imagine. But in my mind, what my Dad did was very wise. That kind of offer says "I trust you--don't mess up, don't break my trust".

To tell your kid "don't have sex, just don't", = "You're too young, you're naive, your decisions won't bring any good to yourself or to me... I don't trust you."

It's simple psychology. Sometimes making it easier on them might keep them safer. You just have to let them know you trust them and you have to influence them to take warning. Saying "I trust you not to have sex" won't do a damn thing either. You have to be realistic.

Those single mothers you were talking about, maybe they were sexually repressed women? It all happens under the right conditions, you may ask "how do nuns refrain from having sex all their lives?" No two minds are alike, some people have the strength to do things many others simply can't. Some people can dedicate their lives to God, while others dedicate their lives to themselves.

Again, hormones and sexual repression are excuses for not exercising self-discipline and self-respect. With discipline and respect we are no better than all the animals that so many liberals wish to grant rights.

dmk

You're not addressing my whole post, though. Did you read my statement about discipline?

Look, this is a matter of opinion, but it's pretty sad to me that corporations are granted personhood; man's creation of industry put over nature and the creatures she houses.

Jeremy Bentham argued that "an animal's apparent lack of rationallity ought not to be held against it insofar as morallity is concerned". Just ponder that for a while.

With discipline and respect, we are no better than those animals anyway. What I'm saying is that people know their limits, they know what they're capable of, good & bad. What I want to see is the practice of safe sex, not total abstinence.

Discipline and respect can be measured on so many different levels; you and I both know discipline and respect even though our practices may be vastly different.

Bentham also supported that man's nature are always based on pleasure and pain, and the utility was the best course of action for government, that which makes the most people happy. Seeing how Bush won the popular vote this time around, I could argue using Bentham that outlawing abortion would make the most people happy, could I not?????

Doesn't the actions of the firefighters on 9/11 also disprove his theory on human nature???
So if he is wrong on that account I tend to think that perhaps he is wrong concerning rationality. Something sets the human race apart from the animals, I believe that it is our self-respect and self-discipline.

dmk

You also realize, sir, that the 2004 presidential election has to be one of the most corrupt elections in the history of the United States. The debates, the propaganda vidoes, the dirt everybody was diggin up on either candidate, the disclusion of real votes and the inclusion of fake votes; this all means something.

I'm saying do your research. You'll see that almost every presidential election since the election of 1960 has been so distorted and debauched that no one truly knows who they're voting for in the end. All they know is the shit they've been fed since competition arose.

Look, running for president and losing is political suicide, so people do some really dirty, messed up things to ensure their victory. No matter how modest a candidate may seem, the fact is that s/he's still a politician, and you don't get a career in politics unless you know how to stay ahead, which means utilizing rotten tactics.

Bentham is right about pleasure and pain, but in the context you used his philosophy in; it makes your rebuttal void, in that sense. No offense though, I don't mean to sound like an asshole.

Also, explain the whole firefighter thing to me, I'm not quite sure I understand what you're getting at.