Don't Have Sex Because You Will Get Pregnant...And Die

[Reploid Productions]

And because some people can, it's best to mention it in school. You'll reach out to those who can potentially stay abstinent. Teach abstinence along with safe sex, and you're keeping as many students sexually safe as possible.

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinence and its risks; while not everyone is going to stick with it or even want to, "not having sex" is still a method of birth control/avoiding STIs with benefits and drawbacks just like every other method. Especially if it's made clear that "abstinence" means "any sort of sexual (especially fluid) contact" to avoid those myths about anal being safe and so on. It shouldn't be the ONLY option taught, obviously, but it belongs in the list with pills, condoms, and all the rest.

[Mavorpen]

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinence and its risks; while not everyone is going to stick with it or even want to, "not having sex" is still a method of birth control/avoiding STIs with benefits and drawbacks just like every other method. Especially if it's made clear that "abstinence" means "any sort of sexual (especially fluid) contact" to avoid those myths about anal being safe and so on. It shouldn't be the ONLY option taught, obviously, but it belongs in the list with pills, condoms, and all the rest.

No thanks.

[Upper America]

And because some people can, it's best to mention it in school. You'll reach out to those who can potentially stay abstinent. Teach abstinence along with safe sex, and you're keeping as many students sexually safe as possible.

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

How does the majority cancel the minority out? Is the minority of students who can remain abstinent not important enough? Just because most people cannot remain abstinent doesn't mean you should reach out to those who can.

i'm probably going to break alot of context here, probably because i'm arriving late

why is it the responsibility of the state to control what people do?
the ultimate goal in life is to have children, to reproduce.
sexual reproduction strengthens the human race as a whole.

let parents teach their children right from wrong over the topic of reproduction

The state does it so there are less teen pregnancies. Teen pregnancies increase the rate of drop outs.

The ultimate goal in life varies from person to person. For some, it may not be to reproduce. I know a handful of people who don't want kids.

Have you seen the news? Overpopulation is a big problem. Making more kids is not going to make us stronger. Of course, I do not support the regulation of sexual reproduction. Let's not jump to conclusions.

[Idzequitch]

i'm probably going to break alot of context here, probably because i'm arriving late

why is it the responsibility of the state to control what people do?
the ultimate goal in life is to have children, to reproduce.
sexual reproduction strengthens the human race as a whole.

let parents teach their children right from wrong over the topic of reproduction

But what about those without real parental figures in their lives? What about kids whose parents refuse to talk about it? We can't just say "Screw you, two out of three ain't bad" There are too many holes in that plan. Too many people left in the dark. Too many people put at risk.

[Mavorpen]

How does the majority cancel the minority out? Is the minority of students who can remain abstinent not important enough? Just because most people cannot remain abstinent doesn't mean you should reach out to those who can.

When did I say anything about not reaching out to them?

[Upper America]

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinence and its risks; while not everyone is going to stick with it or even want to, "not having sex" is still a method of birth control/avoiding STIs with benefits and drawbacks just like every other method. Especially if it's made clear that "abstinence" means "any sort of sexual (especially fluid) contact" to avoid those myths about anal being safe and so on. It shouldn't be the ONLY option taught, obviously, but it belongs in the list with pills, condoms, and all the rest.

Well put, Rep. Well put.

Again, they won't obtain the social benefit of other people if they are called sluts.

Yes they will. Being called a "slut" has utterly no bearing on the overall effects of millions of people engaging in sex.

You're showing a scary trend in not caring for the minority of people.

And hows about you answer that question about women losing their humanist, alright?

So, you were saying that he cannot say that he will remain abstinent, right?

No. Of course he can say that. And I can make fun of him stating that he's 100% certain as though he can see into the future.

At the very least, you're saying that he cannot predict 100% that he will remain abstinent. It certainly sounds like it.

[Upper America]

How does the majority cancel the minority out? Is the minority of students who can remain abstinent not important enough? Just because most people cannot remain abstinent doesn't mean you should reach out to those who can.

When did I say anything about not reaching out to them?

And because some people can, it's best to mention it in school. You'll reach out to those who can potentially stay abstinent. Teach abstinence along with safe sex, and you're keeping as many students sexually safe as possible.

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

Are you typing this stuff? You seem to not have a basic understanding of what you are saying.

[Mavorpen]

You're showing a scary trend in not caring for the minority of people.

And you're showing a scary trend in not being able to actually address my arguments instead of the caricatures you insist upon making.

At the very least, you're saying that he cannot predict 100% that he will remain abstinent. It certainly sounds like it.

Why yes, that's what I just said. Thank you for repeating my statements yet again.

[Mavorpen]

When did I say anything about not reaching out to them?

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

Are you typing this stuff? You seem to not have a basic understanding of what you are saying.

No, that would be you, since nowhere in that post do I say we should not reach out to them.

[Upper America]

You're showing a scary trend in not caring for the minority of people.

And you're showing a scary trend in not being able to actually address my arguments instead of the caricatures you insist upon making.

I suggest leaving this debate until you learn how to debate. I am addressing your arguments. You keep dodging the bullet by claiming I'm misrepresenting them.

Are you typing this stuff? You seem to not have a basic understanding of what you are saying.

No, that would be you, since nowhere in that post do I say we should not reach out to them.

You said that the majority cancel out the minority. And you said because of that, abstinence should not be taught. Sounds like not reaching out to them to me.

Seriously, you are making no sense. Your arguments used to be strong, but now they're very weak. I have a feeling you know you lost, and you cannot admit it.

[Mavorpen]

I suggest leaving this debate until you learn how to debate. I am addressing your arguments. You keep dodging the bullet by claiming I'm misrepresenting them.

Which ANY person would do if they discovered that you're misrepresenting their arguments as much as you are.

You said that the majority cancel out the minority. And you said because of that, abstinence should not be taught. Sounds like not reaching out to them to me.

Then it's your own problem for not being able to draw correct logical conclusions from what someone else has said. If I had said that I don't want to teach those students at ALL, you'd have a point. Not teaching abstinence does not equate to not reaching out to them, because we have another option, and that option is actual comprehensive sexual education.

[Allentyr]

Funnily enough, the movie just ran on the TV.

And UpAm, abstinence works 100% guaranteed, but only the person actually sticks to it, which most will fail.

[Torisakia]

Funnily enough, the movie just ran on the TV.

And UpAm, abstinence works 100% guaranteed, but only the person actually sticks to it, which most will fail.

To be honest, abstinence would've encouraged me to do it more.

[Allentyr]

Funnily enough, the movie just ran on the TV.

And UpAm, abstinence works 100% guaranteed, but only the person actually sticks to it, which most will fail.

To be honest, abstinence would've encouraged me to do it more.

Meh. Why bother anyway? Just bang. It's how nature works

[The Rich Port]

No you aren't. Because the vast majority of those people aren't going to stick with it, those people cancel out the net amount of people who stick with it and DO benefit from it.

There's nothing wrong with teaching abstinence and its risks; while not everyone is going to stick with it or even want to, "not having sex" is still a method of birth control/avoiding STIs with benefits and drawbacks just like every other method. Especially if it's made clear that "abstinence" means "any sort of sexual (especially fluid) contact" to avoid those myths about anal being safe and so on. It shouldn't be the ONLY option taught, obviously, but it belongs in the list with pills, condoms, and all the rest.

Uh, yeah, 'bout that... Thing is, sex is a very important of... Being human. It's a powerful social, emotional, and psychological exchange between two people. It's rather popular, probably way more popular than not doing it. Yeah, abstinence is a birth control option, but, considering how sex is part of the weave that composes inter-human relationships... I doubt pushing it as something other than what it is would be useful.

I've met people that would have unprotected sex even when they knew their partner had an STD because they wanted to... If the safe sex messages didn't get to them, I doubt abstinence ones would fare any better, if not somehow worse.

[Allmann]

The sex ed I had in my school was pretty good, we got to go to a center where they can check if you have STD's or is pregnant, also there to give advice etc.
We were given a few condoms too.
I think there should be sex ed in school and these centers to remain open, as far as I know I could go there once a month and get a free carton full of condoms until the age of 21 or so.

[Upper America]

I suggest leaving this debate until you learn how to debate. I am addressing your arguments. You keep dodging the bullet by claiming I'm misrepresenting them.

Which ANY person would do if they discovered that you're misrepresenting their arguments as much as you are.

I'm reading your arguments as they are. Stop using pathetic excuses to avoid the fact that you lost.

You said that the majority cancel out the minority. And you said because of that, abstinence should not be taught. Sounds like not reaching out to them to me.

Then it's your own problem for not being able to draw correct logical conclusions from what someone else has said. If I had said that I don't want to teach those students at ALL, you'd have a point. Not teaching abstinence does not equate to not reaching out to them, because we have another option, and that option is actual comprehensive sexual education.

Now this argument makes sense.

As is proven, safe sex isn't always safe. Condoms break and STIs get around the protection. Abstinence is probably the safest option. Now, if you teach the kids that abstinence and safe sex are options, there may be students who will be able to remain abstinent. They will be as safe as possible. The kids who didn't remain abstinent, however, are still at a risk of unwanted pregnancies and STIs. Therefor, you reached out to those who can remain abstinent, and helped them be as safe as possible, while reaching out to those who cannot remain abstinent, and helping them stay as safe as possible. Do you understand?

[Allentyr]

The sex ed I had in my school was pretty good, we got to go to a center where they can check if you have STD's or is pregnant, also there to give advice etc.
We were given a few condoms too.
I think there should be sex ed in school and these centers to remain open, as far as I know I could go there once a month and get a free carton full of condoms until the age of 21 or so.

Free cartons, each month? Where do you live?
*packs bags*

[Upper America]

To be honest, abstinence would've encouraged me to do it more.

Meh. Why bother anyway? Just bang. It's how nature works

But remember, bang safely!

The sex ed I had in my school was pretty good, we got to go to a center where they can check if you have STD's or is pregnant, also there to give advice etc.
We were given a few condoms too.
I think there should be sex ed in school and these centers to remain open, as far as I know I could go there once a month and get a free carton full of condoms until the age of 21 or so.

Schools do that? I'm surprised there hasn't been a protest for this in my district.

Unfortunately, the condom thing wouldn't fly. Parents flip their lid over little things. And kids coming home with condoms would make the parents think that the kids are either a) having sex, or b) think that the schools are encouraging sex. And as much as this pains me to say, but giving condoms to kids to ensure they are safe would kinda come off as an encouragement to have sex.

[Mavorpen]

I'm reading your arguments as they are.

No, you really aren't. You keep insisting that the social benefits I'm talking about pertains to how they're viewed by their friends. It doesn't.

As is proven, safe sex isn't always safe. Condoms break and STIs get around the protection. Abstinence is probably the safest option.

Right, and never driving a car in your life to prevent being injured in a car wreck is probably the safest option.

Now, if you teach the kids that abstinence and safe sex are options, there may be students who will be able to remain abstinent.They will be as safe as possible. The kids who didn't remain abstinent, however, are still at a risk of unwanted pregnancies and STIs. Therefor, you reached out to those who can remain abstinent, and helped them be as safe as possible, while reaching out to those who cannot remain abstinent, and helping them stay as safe as possible. Do you understand?

I've always understood. This doesn't change my argument at all.

[Allmann]

The sex ed I had in my school was pretty good, we got to go to a center where they can check if you have STD's or is pregnant, also there to give advice etc.
We were given a few condoms too.
I think there should be sex ed in school and these centers to remain open, as far as I know I could go there once a month and get a free carton full of condoms until the age of 21 or so.

Free cartons, each month? Where do you live?
*packs bags*

Gothenburg, Sweden.
I think you were allowed one per month, maybe one every two months.
Dont know, still quite alot for free or for a reduced price. Some parts of Sweden has 20 years of age as the maximum, others up to 25.

Meh. Why bother anyway? Just bang. It's how nature works

But remember, bang safely!

The sex ed I had in my school was pretty good, we got to go to a center where they can check if you have STD's or is pregnant, also there to give advice etc.
We were given a few condoms too.
I think there should be sex ed in school and these centers to remain open, as far as I know I could go there once a month and get a free carton full of condoms until the age of 21 or so.

Schools do that? I'm surprised there hasn't been a protest for this in my district.

Unfortunately, the condom thing wouldn't fly. Parents flip their lid over little things. And kids coming home with condoms would make the parents think that the kids are either a) having sex, or b) think that the schools are encouraging sex. And as much as this pains me to say, but giving condoms to kids to ensure they are safe would kinda come off as an encouragement to have sex.

Well over here schools are required to educate on safe sex and to give condoms in order to encourage safe sex.

[Upper America]

I'm reading your arguments as they are.

No, you really aren't. You keep insisting that the social benefits I'm talking about pertains to how they're viewed by their friends. It doesn't.

Then what do the social benefits pertain to? Being "socially healthy" usually involves having friends who support you. Being called a slut isn't very supportive.

As is proven, safe sex isn't always safe. Condoms break and STIs get around the protection. Abstinence is probably the safest option.

Right, and never driving a car in your life to prevent being injured in a car wreck is probably the safest option.

It is the safest option. Unfortunately, it's usually necessary unless you live in an area with a lot of public transport, or have someone to drive you all over the place. Sex isn't required to live a productive life.

Now, if you teach the kids that abstinence and safe sex are options, there may be students who will be able to remain abstinent.They will be as safe as possible. The kids who didn't remain abstinent, however, are still at a risk of unwanted pregnancies and STIs. Therefor, you reached out to those who can remain abstinent, and helped them be as safe as possible, while reaching out to those who cannot remain abstinent, and helping them stay as safe as possible. Do you understand?

I've always understood. This doesn't change my argument at all.

Good, then you understand. I don't expect it to change your argument, I expect you to understand what I'm saying.

[Upper America]

But remember, bang safely!


Schools do that? I'm surprised there hasn't been a protest for this in my district.

Unfortunately, the condom thing wouldn't fly. Parents flip their lid over little things. And kids coming home with condoms would make the parents think that the kids are either a) having sex, or b) think that the schools are encouraging sex. And as much as this pains me to say, but giving condoms to kids to ensure they are safe would kinda come off as an encouragement to have sex.

Well over here schools are required to educate on safe sex and to give condoms in order to encourage safe sex.

Oh, Sweden. Well, knee-jerk politics, political correctedness, and sue-happy parents would not let that fly. It would certainly lower the risk to teens who cannot remain abstinent, though. Do they do it through high school and college?

[Mavorpen]

Then what do the social benefits pertain to? Being "socially healthy" usually involves having friends who support you. Being called a slut isn't very supportive.

Humans are a social species, and as such, there are certain qualities that we share with many other social species like chimpanzees. One of which includes the importance of sex in maintaining social order.

In humans, sex serves as a bonding mechanism that often increases intimacy between two individuals in a relationship. Because of this, it increases the stability of a relationship and thus helps maintain the stability of the family unit as a whole. That's also why women arguably are the ones who benefit the MOST from this, because they repeatedly report that the thing that brings the most satisfaction when experiencing sex is the intimate connection shared with someone, rather than something like achieving an orgasm.

So again, your complaint doesn't affect my argument at all, especially since the majority of women aren't called "sluts" by their friends for engaging in sex with multiple partners. Making a general statement based on a minority is silly, so from the get go, your rebuttal doesn't in any way address my claim.

It is the safest option. Unfortunately, it's usually necessary unless you live in an area with a lot of public transport, or have someone to drive you all over the place. Sex isn't required to live a productive life.

Er, no, this isn't true. Sex is very much necessary for many people to live a life as fulfilling and healthy as possible.

Good, then you understand. I don't expect it to change your argument, I expect you to understand what I'm saying.

And like I said, I always have. I just don't take what you're saying all that seriously.

[Allmann]

Well over here schools are required to educate on safe sex and to give condoms in order to encourage safe sex.

Oh, Sweden. Well, knee-jerk politics, political correctedness, and sue-happy parents would not let that fly. It would certainly lower the risk to teens who cannot remain abstinent, though. Do they do it through high school and college?

Was a few years since I went to school.
We got our sexual education in Primary School/Secondary School in year 6 or 7 of 9. We were about 13-15 years of age or so?