36 replies to this topic

[Juni Ori]

@Tom: You failed to notice my most important point: Venereal Diseases! As said, it doesn't matter if your shots are blank, diseases roam free without condom. And your approach would most certainly lead to sex without condom in short-term sexually active relationships also. That's one of my main arguments against the idea.

[Tom Henrik]

That is true, but I also support medical checkups. Right now girls have to do most of the precaution work surrounding sex, and they are also left with most of the consequenses of having sex.

I believe men should share the workload, and that means go to regular check ups to ensure that their willies are in tip top shape and that there are no diseases present. Just like the girl. If both are clean, and the boy is sterile... there is no stopping them

[BeefontheBone]

That's fine for those in a long-term relationship, but not a lot of good for people having casual sex - whatever your views on the value of casual sex it's always going to happen.

[PrejudiceSucks]

I might sound like some kind of pig, but there are some parts of men which are... sacred... I can't imagine it helping peoples' self-confidence if they get their tubes cut. Oh no.

Both practices should be free. Abortion via the morning after pill is about £20 in the UK, this should really be made free, but there we are.

[DakaSha]

Puffin, on Sep 26 2005, 11:56 AM, said:

DakaSha, on Sep 26 2005, 11:20 AM, said:

women are pretty much ready to have kids once they get thier period

I started periods on my 11th birthday. No way I was ready then, pal
11-12 year old kid is in NO way ready to raise up a kid. Kids can't raise kids. You need to be mature enough to teach your child.
EDIT: Physically, I wasn't ready either when I started my periods. I didn't have hips then, for example. My body at that time just couldn't've handled a baby.

obviously you didnt read the whole post... i cant stand it when people get all "hey pal " like without even reading the damn post.

"women are pretty much ready to have kids once they get thier period. that isnt always the case because sometimes women are just to small at that age for a problem free birth."

and when it comes to "kids raising kids" who says a 13 year old cant raise a kid? its an instinct for crying out loud. NO i dont think that 13 year olds should have a kid because our modern day society makes it almost impossible to raise that kid half-way decent which is nobodys fault... it just happend to turn out the way it has. you cant raise a kid when you have to go to school and are brainwashed into thinking that Britney Spears is a role-model...

girls had kids all the time at that age before we got all hooked up in technology... and obviously it went ok... otherwise we wouldnt be the dominating species on the planet.

**EDIT**

dont forget your all just animals people... i think thats a leading reason why everything is so screwed up today.

**EDIT AGAIN**

(Hmm this is quite off topic actually i just noticed )

[PrejudiceSucks]

Urmmm actually the only reason that kids had children and raised them at this point was that at the time if you lived past 30 you were doing well. It would be about right to have kids at around 25 now on the same scale and this is what's starting to happen.

[DakaSha]

well like i said people shouldnt have kids at that age nowadays. i think 25-30 is about right also. im just saying that its not really wrong to have them earlier either...

one thing i did forget to mention:

kids nowadays get thier period earlier than they used to because of the hormones and crap in our food.... my cousin got her period at 10... thats messed up. of course 10 or eleven is a "little" young to have kids

[PrejudiceSucks]

Actually it's to do with your weight. People nowadays eat more and hence weigh more. That's why it'll be.

[A. J. Raffles]

PrejudiceSucks, on Sep 26 2005, 03:26 PM, said:

Actually it's to do with your weight. People nowadays eat more and hence weigh more. That's why it'll be.

But she can hardly be *that* fat.

[DakaSha]

PrejudiceSucks, on Sep 26 2005, 03:26 PM, said:

Actually it's to do with your weight. People nowadays eat more and hence weigh more. That's why it'll be.

that is NOT the only reason pred... btw shes completly average weight

[PrejudiceSucks]

You don't actually have to weigh that much, I believe it's something like 9 stone (?)

Still, different additives may have bad effects on people too.

[Tom Henrik]

Can we get back to abortions / vasectomies?

[A. J. Raffles]

9 stone would be an awful lot for a ten-year-old, though. That's more than I weigh now.

Edit: Sorry.

[DannyMc252]

9 stone.. about my weight then.. Im 11 (ish) now.

[taikara]

Actually, from my understanding, Daka is correct, it's the hormones and chemicals found in food that are causing puberty to start earlier in recent generations...

But, that is also directly related to weight, because the same hormones also factor into the average size increase in recent generations.

But to get back to the subject...

I think that abortions should definitely be legal, and I also wish that there would be a paradigm shift in our cultures that would actually encourage abortion, especially in the case of unwed mothers, or accidental conceptions in families that already have two or more children (I know there's going to be some protests to that, but I'll address it later on).

I also think that vasectomies should be encouraged, but unless abortion were made illegal, I wouldn't vote that they should be required. The reason for this is that if the government is given the power to dictate what one half of the population does with their bodies, they should also dictate what the other half does. Sort of a counterbalanced approach to the same problem.

And, really, I think vasectomies are a much better approach to curbing unwanted births than abortion, because they circumvent the moral issues attached to abortion.

I would vote that abortions and vasectomies be paid for by the government. I also think the morning-after pill should be paid for by the government, and made more readily available.

The reason for this (and my wish for a paradigm shift that encourages abortion for certain cases) is because I think a large part of the problem for many governments is overpopulation... not that the countries themselves can't sustain the people in them (though that will eventually be true), but that the goverments of those countries can't sustain the people under them. Social security (in the US, it will be nullified by the time I'm old enough to receive it, due to ridiculous population booms), general welfare, healthcare systems, all of it is for the most part just clogged with too many people needed to use too little available assistance.

I think that worldwide population increases also contribute to poor education, crime, and causes a cycle that causes the problem to increase exponentially.

Basically, uneducated people and people from less wholesome family lives tend to breed fastest, and therefore, those dysfunctional lifestyle choices and world views are passed on to the next generation in greater number than positive world views that curb dysfunction.

Basically, given the same amount of time, you can teach 10 children a lot more than you can teach 15 children. Or, if you have a certain amount of money, you can do more for 100 kids than you can for 200 kids.

In Japan, abortion is encouraged for the same reasons.

I'm not saying it's necessarily right or wrong... it's just that at the end of the day, it makes more sense than forcing people to have children that will likely not receive the education and nurturing that is necessary to become well-adjusted and contributing members of society who are unlikely to have to face an unwanted pregnancy because of that education and nurturing.

And condoms are just a must if you are not in a 100% committed monogamous and longterm relationship, regardless of other birth control methods used. But hell, nowadays, I'd still use a condom even if the terms of the relationship were longterm monogamy... most people are just too likely to cheat nowadays regardless of what they may say