What do you think?

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Exactly when men can get pregnant and actually have to deal with some of the crappier parts of sex *like unwanted pregnancy* Then they can get a final say. Until then their opinions should certainly be listened to and weighed but what they want shouldn;t be the final say if it isn;t what the woman wants.

There's that term again, "unwanted pregnancy". All the sex without the responsibilities. Do women just spontaneously get pregnant or something? It'd be interesting to see the statistics on how many "unwanted pregnancies" resulted in lack of contraceptives, just out of curiosity.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Pretty much where I fall on the discussion.

If a man really REALLY wants the child and the woman really REALLY doiesn't, I think they need to have some very serious, indepth discussions.

How about some serious in depth discussions before they choose to have sex with one another? On whether they are ready to commit to any outcome that may happen because of it? And for some reason I just had a thought of a girl I knew, she went through a phase where she wanted a dog. She got a dog, then in a few weeks or a month or 2, she had a new one. After 4 or 5 dogs I figured out that she had been giving them away, and even to the point of dropping one off in a random neighborhood and leaving it. After the fun wears off and the responsibility kicks in I guess its too much for some.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

There's that term again, "unwanted pregnancy". All the sex without the responsibilities. Do women just spontaneously get pregnant or something? It'd be interesting to see the statistics on how many "unwanted pregnancies" resulted in lack of contraceptives, just out of curiosity.

if you mean "how many times does lack of contraception lead to unwanted pregnancies..." thats why I advocate universally available, effective contraception being distributed as a matter of course, like immunisations. Implanon for everyone, unless they request NOT to have it, and abortion would become a null issue instantly

 

[EnemyPartyII]

How about some serious in depth discussions before they choose to have sex with one another? On whether they are ready to commit to any outcome that may happen because of it? And for some reason I just had a thought of a girl I knew, she went through a phase where she wanted a dog. She got a dog, then in a few weeks or a month or 2, she had a new one. After 4 or 5 dogs I figured out that she had been giving them away, and even to the point of dropping one off in a random neighborhood and leaving it. After the fun wears off and the responsibility kicks in I guess its too much for some.

indeed, I think indepth discussions before sex are a very, VERY good idea...

your unwanted puppy story though, I think, shows a reason why fathers who arent carrying the foetus don't get the final say... sure he says he wants it NOW while that involves no work, but will he be around when the 3am nappy needs changing?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

indeed, I think indepth discussions before sex are a very, VERY good idea...

your unwanted puppy story though, I think, shows a reason why fathers who arent carrying the foetus don't get the final say... sure he says he wants it NOW while that involves no work, but will he be around when the 3am nappy needs changing?

it doesnt matter when its already been given away, or in this case, crushed and tossed in the bin.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

it doesnt matter when its already been given away, or in this case, crushed and tossed in the bin.

I'm not talking about condoms being available, I'm talking about every 16 year old girl being offered an implantable contraceptive by a medical professional, replaced as required until such time as she declines.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I'm not talking about condoms being available, I'm talking about every 16 year old girl being offered an implantable contraceptive by a medical professional, replaced as required until such time as she declines.

Is that a better measure rather than just requiring that people be responsible for their actions?

I understand your idea, and it seems plausible in this secular society we live in. But just because we know the nature of the beast does not mean we have to give in to it by coming up solutions that accomodate it.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Is that a better measure rather than just requiring that people be responsible for their actions?

I understand your idea, and it seems plausible in this secular society we live in. But just because we know the nature of the beast does not mean we have to give in to it by coming up solutions that accomodate it.

So... you think NOT providing the most comprehensive protection against unwanted or ill advised pregnancy, and therefore allowing unwanted pregnancies to proliferate, is preferable to accepting that humans are going to act the way they always have?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

So... you think NOT providing the most comprehensive protection against unwanted or ill advised pregnancy, and therefore allowing unwanted pregnancies to proliferate, is preferable to accepting that humans are going to act the way they always have?

Um. I didn't say that. You are using the line of reasoning "They are going to do it anyway" which may have a better temporal societal impact, but I am promoting christian values. I'm concerned more about the people that God puts in these situations and whether they handle them responsibly or not. And also whether people(christians esp.) are responsible enough to understand the variable outcome of sex, and be prepared to deal with any unplanned pregnancy by accepting it for what it is and not denying the innocent child of its right to live.

 

[ClausJohn]

You are using the line of reasoning "They are going to do it anyway" which may have a better temporal societal impact, but I am promoting christian values.

So....how about we give children contraceptive methods, while you preach christian values all you want? Just see contraception as a "fail-safe" device. If you can get children to stay chaste - sad, but fine - but if they don't and have no contraceptive methods and do what everyone not suppressing his natural urges does, the abortion is not on our hands, but yours.

I'm concerned more about the people that God puts in these situations and whether they handle them responsibly or not.

Using contraceptives sounds responsible to me. Risking pregnancy doesn't.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Using contraceptives sounds responsible to me. Risking pregnancy doesn't.

Not having sex until you are ready for the possible outcome sounds even more responsible.

 

[ClausJohn]

I said it before, but whatever...
Not leaving your house protects you from car accidents.
Not owning a computer protects you from a computer virus.
Cutting off your feet protects you from hurting your toes.
etc.

*No* amount of indoctrination will get most kids from refraining from having sex. You're like the firefighter standing before a burning house, and instead of rescuing people trapped inside you're merely saying "this should not be on fire".

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I said it before, but whatever...
Not leaving your house protects you from car accidents.
Not owning a computer protects you from a computer virus.
Cutting off your feet protects you from hurting your toes.
etc.

What does that have to do with people taking care of the life they've created?

If someone can't accept that they might get pregnant when they are having sex, then they shouldn't. They should not after the fact decide they are not ready for the responsibility and then kill the life they created.

 

[ClausJohn]

What does that have to do with people taking care of the life they've created?

Nothing whatsoever. It has something to do with the fallacy of trying to preach chastity instead of providing contraceptive methods.

If someone can't accept that they might get pregnant when they are having sex, then they shouldn't. They should not after the fact decide they are not ready for the responsibility and then kill the life they created.

I don't think you grasped the fact that sex =!= impregnation if you act responsibly. Hence my examples. Please explain then in what way the differ from your proposal to avoid sex to avoid pregnancy, other than "it works".

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Nothing whatsoever. It has something to do with the fallacy of trying to preach chastity instead of providing contraceptive methods.

how is it fallacious? And I assume you are using a secular humanist standard, so if you aren't then correct me.

I don't think you grasped the fact that sex =!= impregnation if you act responsibly. Hence my examples. Please explain then in what way the differ from your proposal to avoid sex to avoid pregnancy, other than "it works".

because I can accept the fact that when I go get in my car in a few hours, and drive home, that I could in fact get in an accident and get hurt or die or whatever. All abortion does is gives an out at the cost of a life.

 

[ClausJohn]

because I can accept the fact that when I go get in my car in a few hours, and drive home, that I could in fact get in an accident and get hurt or die or whatever.

So what would you tell someone that tells you you shouldn't drive because you might get injured or killed? Any ideas? Would you be for or against people going to schools and teach children "driving safety", that consists of teaching not to drive at all instead of teaching them to use a safety belt?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

So what would you tell someone that tells you you shouldn't drive because you might get injured or killed? Any ideas? Would you be for or against people going to schools and teach children "driving safety", that consists of teaching not to drive at all instead of teaching them to use a safety belt?

The comparison between driving and choosing to have sex are only comparable in that both involve the person choosing to do them accepting the possible outcomes. Having an abortion is like me getting into an accident and leaving the scene. I knew i could possibly get in an accident before I drove, but instead of accepting the responsibility I was given because of this accident, I run from it. Abortion is the same.

 

[ClausJohn]

My example is not about abortion, it's about abstaining from sex and contraception, so don't divert. Both are largely beneficial but come with minor risks. You claim eliminating the risk is wort sacrificing the other.

So the question is whether you'd support teaching children not to drive instead of using safety belts.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

My example is not about abortion, it's about abstaining from sex and contraception, so don't divert. Both are largely beneficial but come with minor risks. You claim eliminating the risk is wort sacrificing the other.

So the question is whether you'd support teaching children not to drive instead of using safety belts.

the example is about the key issue here, which is abortion. Its a comparison of accepting responsibility and not being given an out.

Considering the destruction of a life I've created is not a 'minor risk' at all.

 

[ClausJohn]

the example is about the key issue here, which is abortion. Its a comparison of accepting responsibility and not being given an out.
Considering the destruction of a life I've created is not a 'minor risk' at all.

Thank you for telling me what my example is about...As we are discussing what the best course of action is to avoid pregnancy, the *minor risk* is quite obviously not the abortion, but the risk of getting pregnant. As you yourself stated that abortion is the extension of the example of leaving the accident scene. That's not what i've asked for. So please don't wiggle out of it.

Would you promote teaching children in school not to drive so not to die in car accidents, as opposed to driving with a safety belt?