Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Will there be any Walk-in Abortions as a DIRECT result of the Olympic Games in London
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="quatona" data-source="post: 61143821" data-attributes="member: 111204"><p>You are not seriously asserting that getting a condom for free prompts anyone to engage in sexual activity when they wouldn´t have, anyways, are you? The idea of giving them condoms is to <strong>decrease </strong>the amount of unintended pregnancies and STDs caused by unprotected sex by making protection readily available.</p><p>So your entire logic is completely baseless. If anything, the use of condoms <strong>reduces</strong> the probability of pregancies (and potential abortions).</p><p>The comparison is not "people who have no sex vs. people who have sex with a condom" (as your logic implies) but "people who have sex with a condom vs. people who have sex without a condom". No matter the failure rate of condoms, the first group statistically will produce less pregnancies.</p><p>So if we follow your math (which has serious flaws of its own, but that´s already been explained to you), we would have 5000 pregnancies (4500 abortions) without the condoms being used compared to 400 pregnancies (360 abortions) with the condoms being used.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="quatona, post: 61143821, member: 111204"] You are not seriously asserting that getting a condom for free prompts anyone to engage in sexual activity when they wouldn´t have, anyways, are you? The idea of giving them condoms is to [B]decrease [/B]the amount of unintended pregnancies and STDs caused by unprotected sex by making protection readily available. So your entire logic is completely baseless. If anything, the use of condoms [B]reduces[/B] the probability of pregancies (and potential abortions). The comparison is not "people who have no sex vs. people who have sex with a condom" (as your logic implies) but "people who have sex with a condom vs. people who have sex without a condom". No matter the failure rate of condoms, the first group statistically will produce less pregnancies. So if we follow your math (which has serious flaws of its own, but that´s already been explained to you), we would have 5000 pregnancies (4500 abortions) without the condoms being used compared to 400 pregnancies (360 abortions) with the condoms being used. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Will there be any Walk-in Abortions as a DIRECT result of the Olympic Games in London
Top
Bottom