• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Planned Parenthood Attack

Wrangor said:
They can with two incomes. And they won't have child support for 3 other kids either.

Regarding what we can do as a society to change our behavior: the first thing would be to admit the truth. Sex is best when confined within a lifelong monogamous relationship. How do we promote that reality? First step would be a national leader 'coming out' to this admission and promoting it in a similar manner to Michelle's promotion of healthy eating styles. Our government promotes ideals all the time. We could promote it in our sex education. We could make it a part of national party platforms. There are a million ways to promote an ideal.

What we lack is the conviction to do it. We say things like " of course that is great, but it isn't realistic" but we don't believe it. The first step towards solving a problem is admitting the problem exists. We don't want to admit this issue because we love sex. The rational and logical solution to both AIDS and premarital sex is monogamy. We are simply too hormone driven as a society to do anything about it.

I will reiterate I am not offering a no sex Ed solution. I am offering this as a way to transform the current assumed rational on sex. It is entirely possible to choose to not have sex as a 16 year old despite having the ability to enjoy it. We have to make the value of waiting evident. You can see in this thread alone that despite the clear societal and personal benefit, that we as a society choose irrational over rational.
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain sex is best with 2 bi-curious fitness-model nymphos and a 6 pack of gatorade to re-hydrate repeatedly.
 
DG3 said:
Opposing viewpoint = SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Conservative viewpoint = Troll

So open to opposing thoughts around here.
Click to expand...

Boiling every societal problem down to a lack of "personal responsibility" is fucking dumb, and I don't have to respect it. If you made the smallest effort to actually participate in this conversation instead of hopping in and out everytime someone dismissed conservative talking points, you would realize that I have never denied the importance of self responsibility. Instead, you choose to defend someone else's hollow bullshit simply because I dismissed it, and you don't think that's fair to conservatives? Tough shit. 2&2 isn't "opposing" me, he's simply refusing to face reality.
 
Wrangor said:
They can with two incomes. And they won't have child support for 3 other kids either.

Regarding what we can do as a society to change our behavior: the first thing would be to admit the truth. Sex is best when confined within a lifelong monogamous relationship. How do we promote that reality? First step would be a national leader 'coming out' to this admission and promoting it in a similar manner to Michelle's promotion of healthy eating styles. Our government promotes ideals all the time. We could promote it in our sex education. We could make it a part of national party platforms. There are a million ways to promote an ideal.

What we lack is the conviction to do it. We say things like " of course that is great, but it isn't realistic" but we don't believe it. The first step towards solving a problem is admitting the problem exists. We don't want to admit this issue because we love sex. The rational and logical solution to both AIDS and premarital sex is monogamy. We are simply too hormone driven as a society to do anything about it.

I will reiterate I am not offering a no sex Ed solution. I am offering this as a way to transform the current assumed rational on sex. It is entirely possible to choose to not have sex as a 16 year old despite having the ability to enjoy it. We have to make the value of waiting evident. You can see in this thread alone that despite the clear societal and personal benefit, that we as a society choose irrational over rational.
Click to expand...

1) Leaders in the Oval Office, the governor's mansions, the mayor's offices, the pulpit, the principals office, and the kitchen table have been promoting monogamy for 5000 years. Hasn't stopped the phenomenon of sex outside of marriage.

2) No one is saying that problems don't exist. You are conflating admission that we cannot stop sex outside of marriage with some kind of ignorance of the problem. Stop trying to oversimplify every issue the way rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity do. Its not intelligent discourse, its head in the sand. If Wake was playing Golden State Warriors and you were running man-to-man and were completely unable to stop dribble penetration etc, would you just tell your team they lacked conviction or would you run some zone to try to keep them out of the paint and miss some shots?

You do what you can to address the problems with realistic tools. If everyone in the world went to sleep at the same time we would have world peace for 8 hours, right? That doesn't mean its the solution for war.
 
Last edited:
If "personal responsibility" was an applicable solution to the worlds problems than we wouldn't need government or politics or organized religion. There's literally nothing useful or helpful about simply thinking that other people should be more responsible for themselves. Coincidentally, every method that people think up for the national government to encourage personal responsibility simply just ends up with people starving on the street. That's the logical end of that solution - natural selection. Darwinism. Which is actually no solution, its simply what just happens if no one ever helps anyone else.
 
Wrangor said:
I merely repeated what you said back to you. Sorry if the mirror stings. The issue with poor sex decisions is at its root parental not education and access to contraceptives. When you are 13 your body tells you to have sex. It takes an adult to wisely advise you to consider another path.
Click to expand...

Holy shit man. That's not what anyone said. The issue with poor sex decisions is a mix of lack of education, lack of access to contraceptives, socio-economic resources, and parental involvement.

Not a single person on this board would dispute that in a vacuum, a kid with strong positive parental involvement is likely to make better sex decisions than a kid without them. But almost everyone on this board realizes that we aren't in a vacuum and there are things that have a far greater impact and are far easier to fix.
 
it is the preferred solution of those who want to do nothing to solve a problem except blame the problem-haver.
 
Wrangor said:
Don't disagree. But the narrative needs to change from "sex is awesome! Go do it! And wear this rubber." To "wait, please wait - but if you have sex make sure you are protected".

And when I say the message I mean our cultural message. The one kids actually listen to. Condoms are terrible. Anyone that has worn one will agree. We can't continue to promote sex as the Wild Wild West and then act surprised when kids don't wear a condom.
Click to expand...

Where exactly is this narrative? It's certainly not in the overwhelming majority of sex-ed classes.

The best approach, as is almost always the case, is to be perfectly honest with kids about sex. "It is awesome, life is better when you are having sex. It also can have some serious negative emotional, physical, and economic consequences. Here is how you can protect yourselves from those negative consequences. For some of you the best way to protect yourselves will be to wait."

The idea that one monogamous relationship for life is the best option for every single person is pretty ridiculous.
 
Wrangor said:
Don't disagree. But the narrative needs to change from "sex is awesome! Go do it! And wear this rubber." To "wait, please wait - but if you have sex make sure you are protected".
Click to expand...

I've never disagreed with you more.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Are poor people poor? Sure. Are they all living in cardboard boxes eating dirt and bugs? No way. Do they have $5 to spend on a box of condoms to prevent 18 years of a kid? Yes they do. So they have money to buy cigs and beer and Big Macs and the latest Florida Georgia Line or Drake album, but no money at all to buy condoms, sure that makes sense.
And GTFO with "the time it takes to get them" garbage. Do they not otherwise go to a convenience store or grocery store or anywhere else? If not, where do they get said beer and cigs? And, despite how often it is alleged on this board, I am still yet to find anyone who works 80 hours a week, prohibiting them from making a trip to a convenience store, yet still doesn't have $5 from all that work to buy a box of condoms. And if they don't have a job and are on the woe-is-me welfare, then they have all goddamn day to go buy some.
Click to expand...

I would guess that you have never been poor nor know many people that are poor. I'm currently a student and operate on a monthly budget that puts me at a little under double the poverty line. I have a budget line for pretty much everything that I buy on a regular basis, including condoms. I live a pretty frugal lifestyle and I still find that there is stuff I would like to get, like beer or the new Drake album, that I have to forego on a monthly basis.

I imagine that most 15 year olds living in households below the poverty line don't have a line item budget. I also imagine they aren't given much spending money (I certainly don't give away much of my money). When I think about the budget decisions I have to make it's really not that hard to imagine a poor teenager not having the means to afford condoms (assuming he had the education, foresight, and self-control to get them in the first place).
 
If there's anything that keeps kids from fucking, its some strange asshole telling them they have no excuse. The policy just writes itself. Alright, shut it down guys, 2&2 solved teen pregnancy - turns out you just have to get tough with them on a message board.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
maybe we just let women have control of their bodies the way men do and shut the hell up if your sky-boss has qualms about it
Click to expand...

DG3 said:
I'M AN ATHEIST AND YOUR RELIGION IS DUMB AND I NEED TO TELL EVERYONE THAT I'M AN ATHEIST AND HOW DUMB I THINK CHRISTIANITY IS!
Click to expand...

I'm a Christian and I agree wholeheartedly with ITC. My sky-boss doesn't have a problem with birth control though.
 
RChildress107 said:
Where exactly is this narrative? It's certainly not in the overwhelming majority of sex-ed classes.

The best approach, as is almost always the case, is to be perfectly honest with kids about sex. "It is awesome, life is better when you are having sex. It also can have some serious negative emotional, physical, and economic consequences. Here is how you can protect yourselves from those negative consequences. For some of you the best way to protect yourselves will be to wait."

The idea that one monogamous relationship for life is the best option for every single person is pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Where is this narrative NOT present is a better question. Look at this thread for a perfect example. The facts simply don't support your conclusion. I have yet to see someone list a true benefit to society of multiple sexual partners outside of 'its fun'. On the flipside there are numerous downsides to the individual and to society. What is the potential downside of a lifelong monogamous sexual relationship outside of "you are missing out on fun" (which you aren't by the way). The sexual upside falls all on the side of a committed relationship, and all the downside falls on multiple partners no commitment. Yet we don't push the correct narrative. Instead we say 'sex is awesome, life is better when you are having it, just make sure you protect yourselves."

I fully realize I am the 1% on this topic on this boards, I am just trying to offer another opinion on the subject. One that I fully realize is VERY unpopular with current culture. Your neg rep on this thread pretty is a good indicator of the reality that despite the fact that I am honestly attempting to have a productive discussion about the topic, my opinion is treated as very hostile. It is not popular to say that sex is best waited up on until you are committed to a lifelong relationship. But to me, the facts seem to weight heavily on that side of the argument. The only argument produced thus far against it is the classic 'you are a loser/you are missing out on fun', and those are pretty shallow arguments.

Disease prevention, family planning, and the true sexual satisfaction that originates from absolute trust seems to me to be a much better way to go.

That is the narrative we should push in our sex education, while at the same time educating children about methods to protect themselves from disease and unplanned pregnancies. Instead sexual discipline seems to be an afterthought. More importantly sexual discipline is a clear afterthought to the large majority of our society. It is a false path, and it is lie that we keep telling in every advertisement, tv show, and even political plan to address these very real issues. It should be the first thing we talk about before we move on more practical prevention matters. We need to change the paradigm if we want to truly address these issues. Until we do, our bandaids will continually peel off and reveal the open wounds of our society.
 
Wrangor said:
Where is this narrative NOT present is a better question. Look at this thread for a perfect example. The facts simply don't support your conclusion. I have yet to see someone list a true benefit to society of multiple sexual partners outside of 'its fun'. On the flipside there are numerous downsides to the individual and to society. What is the potential downside of a lifelong monogamous sexual relationship outside of "you are missing out on fun" (which you aren't by the way). The sexual upside falls all on the side of a committed relationship, and all the downside falls on multiple partners no commitment. Yet we don't push the correct narrative. Instead we say 'sex is awesome, life is better when you are having it, just make sure you protect yourselves."

I fully realize I am the 1% on this topic on this boards, I am just trying to offer another opinion on the subject. One that I fully realize is VERY unpopular with current culture. Your neg rep on this thread pretty is a good indicator of the reality that despite the fact that I am honestly attempting to have a productive discussion about the topic, my opinion is treated as very hostile. It is not popular to say that sex is best waited up on until you are committed to a lifelong relationship. But to me, the facts seem to weight heavily on that side of the argument. The only argument produced thus far against it is the classic 'you are a loser/you are missing out on fun', and those are pretty shallow arguments.

Disease prevention, family planning, and the true sexual satisfaction that originates from absolute trust seems to me to be a much better way to go.

That is the narrative we should push in our sex education, while at the same time educating children about methods to protect themselves from disease and unplanned pregnancies. Instead sexual discipline seems to be an afterthought. More importantly sexual discipline is a clear afterthought to the large majority of our society. It is a false path, and it is lie that we keep telling in every advertisement, tv show, and even political plan to address these very real issues. It should be the first thing we talk about before we move on more practical prevention matters. We need to change the paradigm if we want to truly address these issues. Until we do, our bandaids will continually peel off and reveal the open wounds of our society.
Click to expand...

Popular or not popular or agreeing/disagreeing with the outcomes of monogamy are not what I am arguing. I'm arguing that no matter how right that is, there is nothing that is going to stop sex from happening outside of marriage. Not talking to kids, not executing them, nothing. It's all been tried ad nauseum. So in light of that, we must have some pragmatic approaches on top of telling them no.
 
I don't see what is so wrong with what wrangor is saying. As long as it's not scare tactics like you are going to hell or if you have sex your penis falls off then there is no problem in telling kids that it probably is best to wait to have sex when they can be responsible. Then present facts about pregnancy, STDs, etc..., while also providing facts about everything to do with sex, being like while some of you will be responsible others won't so to limit risk and so sex isn't a mystery then here's a condom, here is a girls clit, make sure to ask where the girl wants you to cum so you don't have townie guilt when you cum on her face, etc... etc...
 
ThinkingWithMyDeac said:
I don't see what is so wrong with what wrangor is saying.
Click to expand...

No one is saying he is wrong. he is incapable of having a debate without getting all victim-y.

Monogamy is great. But it is not the solution, because there is no solution. Teenage pregnancy is a problem that has to be managed, it cannot be solved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top