Abstinence does not prevent STDs, only condoms do. - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Abstinence does not prevent STDs, only condoms do. (Page 2 of 4)

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:06:12 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.

isn't the minimum drinking age 21?

of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.

And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.

right, and how many more would be driving home drunk if they were never introduced to the concept of a designated driver?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:06:45 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Fuel man,

That just falsely gives the impression that condoms will prevent any problems with premarital sex.

Condoms reduce spreading STDs compared to what?

I heard once that research has proven that 5% of condoms fail. As STDs can be fatal, I wonder how many people would be willing to jump a parachute with a 5% chance of failure? Or partake in anything else that is life threatening....with a 5% failure rate.

actually, the % failure rate is based upon one year of use, not one incident of a sexual encounter ;).

Abstainence has a 0% failure rate.

No one is arguing that; however, abstinence programs are a definite failure at getting kids to remain abstinent.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:08:00 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.

isn't the minimum drinking age 21?

of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.

And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.

right, and how many more would be driving home drunk if they were never introduced to the concept of a designated driver?

precisely 3.14159 billion.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:08:57 PM EDT

[#4]

this must be a generation gap thing or something. i have never met anyone in my age group who thought it was a bad thing that teens are taught the facts about birth control.

when was the last time any of you were in a sex ed class? alot of people here seem to have the impression that students are taught "go ahead and have sex, it's all good as long as you wear a condom"

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:09:11 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.
actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.

You missed it.

The point was that "Don't have sex until you're married" is akin to "Treat every firearm as if it's loaded".

The safest behavior is to never "play around" with guns... or sex.

That's the comparison I was making.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:10:14 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.

isn't the minimum drinking age 21?

of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.

And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.

right, and how many more would be driving home drunk if they were never introduced to the concept of a designated driver?

the more i think about it (and correlate it with my experience as a teenager), the more i find that hard to believe. if a car full of teenagers is going to a party to get drunk, they are NOT going to pick out a designated driver.

maybe your experience was different. but i never saw a group of teenagers get together and choose one guy to not drink.

eta: but if i did, i'm sure it would be the responsible absitent one.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:10:34 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.

isn't the minimum drinking age 21?

of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.

And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.

right, and how many more would be driving home drunk if they were never introduced to the concept of a designated driver?

The same number. When a kid is insanely drunk, he/she don't think too much

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:11:08 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.
actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.

You missed it.

The point was that "Don't have sex until you're married" is akin to "Treat every firearm as if it's loaded".

The safest behavior is to never "play around" with guns... or sex.

That's the comparison I was making.

okay, although the comparison is wrong. Treating every firearm like it is loaded is like treating every sexual encounter as if it will produce a pregnancy or an STD for you; in the case of using firearms, you use them safely, pointing them in the right direction,etc. while in the case of sex, you make sure she is on birth control pills, you are wearing a condom, and you both have been tested for STDs.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:11:47 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
this must be a generation gap thing or something. i have never met anyone in my age group who thought it was a bad thing that teens are taught the facts about birth control.

when was the last time any of you were in a sex ed class? alot of people here seem to have the impression that students are taught "go ahead and have sex, it's all good as long as you wear a condom"

i just turned 24 - what generation are you?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:12:08 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
no, it's more like teaching teens to not drink at all (ommm, they DO in fact do that - turns out underage drinking IS illegal), and then not teaching them to get a designated driver if they do drink because they shouldn't be drinking in the first place.

isn't the minimum drinking age 21?

of course, but teens are going to drink anyway. and i would prefer they know and understand the concept of a designated driver.

And they disregard it and drive home drunk anyway.

right, and how many more would be driving home drunk if they were never introduced to the concept of a designated driver?

the more i think about it (and correlate it with my experience as a teenager), the more i find that hard to believe. if a car full of teenagers is going to a party to get drunk, they are NOT going to pick out a designated driver.

maybe your experience was different. but i never saw a group of teenagers get together and choose one guy to not drink.

eta: but if i did, i'm sure it would be the responsible absitent one.

yes, it was different for me. when going out partying, me and my friends were (and still are) always sure to have a designated driver beforehand, because it was HAMMERED INTO OUR HEADS BY OUR PARENTS AND SCHOOLTEACHERS.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:12:40 PM EDT

[#11]

STDs have killed more people than my gun

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:12:55 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
okay, although the comparison is wrong. Treating every firearm like it is loaded is like treating every sexual encounter as if it will produce a pregnancy or an STD for you; in the case of using firearms, you use them safely, pointing them in the right direction,etc. while in the case of sex, you ~~make sure she is on birth control pills, you are wearing a condom, and you both have been tested for STDs~~ wait for marriage.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:13:26 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
this must be a generation gap thing or something. i have never met anyone in my age group who thought it was a bad thing that teens are taught the facts about birth control.

when was the last time any of you were in a sex ed class? alot of people here seem to have the impression that students are taught "go ahead and have sex, it's all good as long as you wear a condom"

i just turned 24 - what generation are you?

i'm 18. which makes you generation x and me generation y

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:13:39 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.

Yeah. Because there are millions of gun accidents every year right? Oh wait there aren't.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:15:32 PM EDT

[#15]

I think it's more important that it works than how it gets the job done.

You can't stop them from having sex. Telling them not to is like telling a 5-year-old not to eat candy. They'll just want it more because it's the forbidden fruit. Sure, condoms aren't 100% effective, but preaching abstinence isn't having the desired effect anywhere near 100% of the time either. Nobody can control their habits, just educate them. Some will do it no matter what they're told.

It's not condoms are 95% vs abstinence 100%, that's assuming they'll listen 100% of the time. It's 50% having a 0% chance of failure and 50% having a 5% chance of failure if you preach safer sex, or it's 50% having a 0% chance of failure and 50% having a 50% chance of failure. I'm just pulling these numbers out of my ass, but it's getting my point across.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:16:43 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
okay, although the comparison is wrong. Treating every firearm like it is loaded is like treating every sexual encounter as if it will produce a pregnancy or an STD for you; in the case of using firearms, ~~you use them safely, pointing them in the right direction,etc.~~ join law enforcement and other jobs where you "need" to use firearms while in the case of sex, you ~~make sure she is on birth control pills, you are wearing a condom, and you both have been tested for STDs~~ wait for marriage.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:17:33 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.
actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.

You missed it.

The point was that "Don't have sex until you're married" is akin to "Treat every firearm as if it's loaded".

The safest behavior is to never "play around" with guns... or sex.

That's the comparison I was making.

okay, although the comparison is wrong. Treating every firearm like it is loaded is like treating every sexual encounter as if it will produce a pregnancy or an STD for you; in the case of using firearms, you use them safely, pointing them in the right direction,etc. while in the case of sex, you make sure she is on birth control pills, you are wearing a condom, and you both have been tested for STDs.

Except virtually every sexual encounter outside of monogamy DOES carry risk of STD or pregnancy.

A better comparison would be playing russian roulette with ammo you're 95% sure is a dud.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:17:59 PM EDT

[#18]

wow, these analogies are getting waaaayyy out of control

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:18:22 PM EDT

[#19]

Kids have a choice to whether they have sex or no.

The ACLU seems to want them to think they do not

'You will eventually screw around and those nasty right wing religeous bigots want to prevent you from having the info you need when you eventually do. Because you will. You should. You can also get a quick abortion if you get pregnant. Have some sex, condoms work- some of the time."

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:18:28 PM EDT

[#20]

The best gun comparison I can think of is this.

Lets say every teenager of a sexually mature age has a handgun. Do you think its better to tell them to not shoot it until they are married or to tell them the safe way to shoot it if they choose to.

Also lets assume gun technology sucks and even if they shoot them safely the gun can still hurt them. Like it blows up every now and then.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:19:45 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
The best gun comparison I can think of is this.

Lets say every teenager of a sexually mature age has a handgun. Do you think its better to tell them to not shoot it until they are married or to tell them the safe way to shoot it if they choose to.

Also lets assume gun technology sucks and even if they shoot them safely the gun can still hurt them. Like it blows up every now and then.

"NO GLOCKS UNTIL MARRIAGE'

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:20:11 PM EDT

[#22]

in addition, what do you have to say about this:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/teensexualhealth/fact-abstinence-education.xml

As it actually cites respected sources, unlike the Heritage foundations pro-abstinence program page, which cites sources that are not very well respected:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm461.cfm

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:21:34 PM EDT

[#23]

You didn't just bring those scumbags at Planned Parenthood into this did you?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:21:56 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.
actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.

You missed it.

The point was that "Don't have sex until you're married" is akin to "Treat every firearm as if it's loaded".

The safest behavior is to never "play around" with guns... or sex.

That's the comparison I was making.

okay, although the comparison is wrong. Treating every firearm like it is loaded is like treating every sexual encounter as if it will produce a pregnancy or an STD for you; in the case of using firearms, you use them safely, pointing them in the right direction,etc. while in the case of sex, you make sure she is on birth control pills, you are wearing a condom, and you both have been tested for STDs.

Except virtually every sexual encounter outside of monogamy DOES carry risk of STD or pregnancy.

A better comparison would be playing russian roulette with ammo you're 95% sure is a dud.

it would be like playing russian roulette for a few years, and only blowing your brains out 5% of the years that you do it.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:22:38 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
You didn't just bring those scumbags at Planned Parenthood into this did you?

I cited them because they actually have scientific research to back their opinion. Their opinion may be wrong, but the stats are true.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:23:59 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
You didn't just bring those scumbags at Planned Parenthood into this did you?

+1. also, i am anti-abortion, but pro-birth control education because birth control education PREVENTS abortions, while abstenince only education does not. the statistics cited earlier in this threat support this conclusion.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:24:10 PM EDT

[#27]

Sorry but abstinence is the only way to go.

If you lack that much self control and just have to bang away, do it.

But you may end up with some consequences you may not like

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:25:40 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Sorry but abstinence is the only way to go.

If you lack that much self control and just have to bang away, do it.

But you may end up with some consequences you may not like

I am sure the innocent babies being butchered due to pregnancies that happened due to lack of knowledge would love to speak to you when you die.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:25:52 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
expecting abstinence from teenagers in this modern society is pretty stupid. Abstinence only programs along with other religious clap-trap are the reason why the South has a much higher STD transfer rate along with higher teen pregnancy rate than the North, and most other countries where they teach safe-sex doctrine.
Expecting firearm-safety from gun-owners in this modern society is pretty stupid. Eddie The Eagle programs along with other NRA clap-trap are the reason why children of gun-owners have much higher accidental shooting rate than nongunowning families where they teach guns-are-bad doctrine.
actually, in this case, the gun-safety programs are equivalent to the "safe sex" programs, as both programs support the safe use of their respective objects,and the "OMG GUNS ARE EVIL, DON"T TOUCH THEM!!!" programs are equivalent to the abstinence programs, as they support "abstaining" from using firearms.

You missed it.

The point was that "Don't have sex until you're married" is akin to "Treat every firearm as if it's loaded".

The safest behavior is to never "play around" with guns... or sex.

That's the comparison I was making.

Gun Safety. Safer Sex. Its the same. If you choose to have sex, do it as safe as possible. If you want to shoot a gun do it as safe as possible.

Then teach them the safe way. Telling a kid with unlimited access to guns to not use them, then not telling him how they are used safely is just a bad idea.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:26:14 PM EDT

[#30]

Pro abstience and anti abstinence groups will only put out the statistics they think supports their side.

No thanks.

Real world evidence suits me fine.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:26:34 PM EDT

[#31]

abstinence only education follows a democrat line of thinking: "don't give a damn if it doesn't work and the results are terrible, it is in line with our ideology and at least we tried something so it MUST be a good thing"

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:26:45 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The best gun comparison I can think of is this.

Lets say every teenager of a sexually mature age has a handgun. Do you think its better to tell them to not shoot it until they are married or to tell them the safe way to shoot it if they choose to.

Also lets assume gun technology sucks and even if they shoot them safely the gun can still hurt them. Like it blows up every now and then.

"NO GLOCKS UNTIL MARRIAGE'

hahaha.....KABOOM....

Wait a min....I carry a Glock

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:26:58 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry but abstinence is the only way to go.

If you lack that much self control and just have to bang away, do it.

But you may end up with some consequences you may not like

I am sure the innocent babies being butchered due to pregnancies that happened due to lack of knowledge would love to speak to you when you die.

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE?

LIKE NO SEX= NO BABIES

Everyone knows the stork does not bring babies

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:27:58 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
in addition, what do you have to say about this:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/teensexualhealth/fact-abstinence-education.xml

As it actually cites respected sources, unlike the Heritage foundations pro-abstinence program page, which cites sources that are not very well respected:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm461.cfm

oh yes, what wonderful sources:

_____. (2000, July). "Effective Approaches to Reducing Adolescent Unprotected Sex, Pregnancy, and Childbearing." Report to the Surgeon General.

_____. (2003b, accessed 2004, December 21). Sex Education: Needs, Programs and Policies. [Online].
http://www.guttmacher.org/presentations/ed_slides.html.

i'm gonna have to get me a copy of stuff written by underscore underscore underscore underscore.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:29:17 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry but abstinence is the only way to go.

If you lack that much self control and just have to bang away, do it.

But you may end up with some consequences you may not like

I am sure the innocent babies being butchered due to pregnancies that happened due to lack of knowledge would love to speak to you when you die.

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE?

LIKE NO SEX= NO BABIES

Everyone knows the stork does not bring babies

Alot of that leads to "Virgins" who are actually more at risk for STD's

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:30:08 PM EDT

[#36]

How so?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:30:10 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Gun Safety. Safer Sex. Its the same. If you choose to have sex, do it as safe as possible. If you want to shoot a gun do it as safe as possible.

Then teach them the safe way. Telling a kid with unlimited access to guns to not use them, then not telling him how they are used safely is just a bad idea.

HUGE +1. everyone who owns a penis or vagina should know how to use it safely, just as everyone who owns a gun should know how to use it safely. if you own a gun, saying "i don't plan to use it until i feel it's time" is no reason for not knowing the safety rules.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:30:39 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry but abstinence is the only way to go.

If you lack that much self control and just have to bang away, do it.

But you may end up with some consequences you may not like

I am sure the innocent babies being butchered due to pregnancies that happened due to lack of knowledge would love to speak to you when you die.

what on earth are you talking about?

they were butchered due to the abortion, not due to the pregnancy.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:31:25 PM EDT

[#39]

yes, but if the person had used a condom, it's a lot less likely that that pregnancy would have happened.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:32:03 PM EDT

[#40]

There is a specific time to use your sexual organs ONLY AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN MARRIED.

God created those organs for a reason and it's not for one night stands your freshman year of college

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:32:15 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Gun Safety. Safer Sex. Its the same. If you choose to have sex, do it as safe as possible. If you want to shoot a gun do it as safe as possible.

Then teach them the safe way. Telling a kid with unlimited access to guns to not use them, then not telling him how they are used safely is just a bad idea.

absolutely.

now we agree.

and what's the safest possible way to have sex?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:32:48 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
How so?

How does it lead to Virgins or how "Virgins" are at a higher risk for STDs?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:33:06 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
yes, but if the person had used a condom, it's a lot less likely that that pregnancy would have happened.

But pregnancies can still happen with a condom.

Too many people are told use a condom and forget about it. It's cool

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:33:09 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
There is a specific time to use your sexual organs ONLY AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN MARRIED.

God created those organs for a reason and it's not for one night stands your freshman year of college

You can keep God out of this please, we are trying to have a rational conversation that doesn't rely on appeals to authority.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:33:36 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
There is a specific time to use your sexual organs ONLY AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN MARRIED.

God created those organs for a reason and it's not for one night stands your freshman year of college

i do not believe in the same god as you. his "reasons" do not apply to me, or to many other people who may have different views.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:33:38 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Quoted:
How so?

How does it lead to Virgins or how "Virgins" are at a higher risk for STDs?

"virgins" at a higher risk

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:33:42 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Gun Safety. Safer Sex. Its the same. If you choose to have sex, do it as safe as possible. If you want to shoot a gun do it as safe as possible.

Then teach them the safe way. Telling a kid with unlimited access to guns to not use them, then not telling him how they are used safely is just a bad idea.

absolutely.

now we agree.

and what's the safest possible way to have sex?

Safest as in prevention of preg or preven of STD?

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:33:47 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
yes, but if the person had used a condom, it's a lot less likely that that pregnancy would have happened.

but IF the person had been abstinant, it's even more likely that that pregnancy wouldn't have happened.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:34:27 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Gun Safety. Safer Sex. Its the same. If you choose to have sex, do it as safe as possible. If you want to shoot a gun do it as safe as possible.

Then teach them the safe way. Telling a kid with unlimited access to guns to not use them, then not telling him how they are used safely is just a bad idea.

absolutely.

now we agree.

and what's the safest possible way to have sex?

Safest as in prevention of preg or preven of STD?

prevention of unwanted pregnancy and STD's.

Posted: 12/19/2005 8:34:27 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Quoted:
yes, but if the person had used a condom, it's a lot less likely that that pregnancy would have happened.

But pregnancies can still happen with a condom.

Too many people are told use a condom and forget about it. It's cool

yes, but a lot less happen. and less unwanted pregnancies mean less abortions. are you saying that less abortions wouldn't be a good thing?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Abstinence does not prevent STDs, only condoms do. (Page 2 of 4)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us