|
On December 04 2006 14:55 5HITCOMBO wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 14:17 infinity21 wrote:On December 04 2006 13:47 MTF wrote:On December 04 2006 13:03 infinity21 wrote:
OverTheUnder, I think you're giving high school kids too much credit here... You're assuming that teenage kids who are about to have sex will actually care about STDs. They've already been educated on what happens when they have sex. Girls get pregnant. I think we all learned that in high school, or elementary school for that matter. Honestly, it's their choice to have sex and get HIV, AIDS, STDs, and get pregnant. Getting free condoms might reduce the risk of infection but will encourage premarital sex (in high school) as I mentioned in my post above.
Remember, high school kids that have premarital sex obviously didn't learn anything in high school (with all the education on how it's so bad, risks of getting STDs, etc). They still have sex regardless. So it's a pretty risky assumption when you say they'll learn to control their sexual desires. While I'm not exactly supportive of going around and screwing whoever, whenever (I've only had one sexual partner all of my life, whom I'm engaged to), I do not like your approach to "preventing disease". Preaching abstinence instead of birth control/safe sex methods is counter-productive. Yes, it gives some moral backing, but ultimately it is up to them what they want to do, not society. Just because they're teens doesn't mean they don't deserve the right to have protection. This is all like saying you tell younger kids never to cross the street, whether they look both ways or not, because they could get hit. You shouldn't inhibit them like that, but rather let them learn and hold their hand, give them that extra safety, when they do cross. But school does everything necessary for teenagers. By the way, I'm a teenager myself, being in Grade 12. But I don't think it should be done in a way that promotes premarital sex. They (i.e. the school) teach us about the consequences of having premarital sex, such as AIDS, STDs, etc. They teach us what happens to your 16 year old girlfriend if you have unprotected sex. They teach us everything we need to make rational decisions. It's these stupid idiots that decide to have unprotected sex at the age of 16, when you're most likely not ready to be a parent, emotionally and financially. If they want condoms, they can go buy them. Seriously, just go buy condoms. It can't exactly be that difficult. I never said people should never have premarital sex. It's society, not me, that says that. To counter your point, I'd like to say that, nobody would actually hold a teenagers' hands when crossing the street. That was done when they were innocent children, incapable of making rational decisions for themselves. What they do to teenagers is give them more freedom. That is, the parents tell their teenage son that crossing the street without looking is dangerous because you can be hit by a car. I'm against the view that teenagers should be overprotected like children. We're at a point where we can make some important decisions for ourselves. The point I'm trying to make is, the school tells us of every single consequence to having unprotected, premarital sex. They say: "these are the consequences. Do it at your own risk." I honestly think they've done quite enough for us to make an educated decision. Abstinence only sex education DOES NOT WORK. Tax money spent on condoms > Tax money spent on welfare for 19 year old mothers. Also, you're still in high school, and thus have no idea how life is outside of high school. You don't know enough about this issue to give an opinion, and it's obvious in your posts. And actually, only certain societies say that it's not right to have sex before marriage. There are actually cultures in the world where free sex is practiced, and most of the younger generation doesn't hold the view that premarital sex is a bad thing. Go to college, you'll see what I mean.
Dont be so quick to be condesending torwards him simply because he is in highschool,17, and a virgin. Im a senior and 17 and who are you to tell me im not intellegent enough to make a decision on whether or not comdoms should be put in my school. Your telling me that simply because i have not gone to college are that someone hasn't experinced sex that they cant have an educated opinion on the topic. You make me sick with the way you put down infinity21. He was the first person who was in high school that responded and you put him down for having an opinion as to what goes on in HIS life. Putting condoms in high school in no way affects you at all. He is the one who should have a choice because it affects him, not some over arrogant prick who thinks he knows whats best for somebody else.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:38 YoUr_KiLLeR wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:35 infinity21 wrote:On December 04 2006 16:31 YoUr_KiLLeR wrote:On December 04 2006 16:26 infinity21 wrote:On December 04 2006 16:23 5HITCOMBO wrote:
IF SOMEONE IS NOT MARRIED AND THEY HAVE SEX 1000 TIMES, THEY STILL WON'T GET AN STD IF THEIR PARTNER DOES NOT HAVE AN STD EITHER
EVEN IF THEY DO, A CONDOM PREVENTS THE SPREAD OF SAID STD
ARE YOU TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND THIS? No, but having sex 1000 times with 1000 different partners increases the chances of you getting infected by 100000%. As I said, condoms don't prevent the spread of STDs in oral sex, just vaginal sex. And I doubt people would only have vaginal sex. My assumption is you also usually kiss during sexual intercourse. Correct me if I'm wrong. k, my final word on this, srsly. PREMARITAL SEX DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MEAN YOURE DOING IT WITH 1000 DIFFERENT PEOPLE. WHAT IF YOU HAVE 1 PARTNER THROUGHOUT HIGHSCHOOL AND YOURE BOTH SAFE?????? WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT PREMARITAL SEX, BUT STUPID RECKLESS WHORE SEX. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. gg, alt+q+q. EDIT CUZ I DIDNT REALLY QUIT: BTW I'VE NEVER HAD SEX EITHER, IM JUST NOT IGNORANT LIKE INFINITY. I said 1000 times because you said 1000 times initially. I'm not ignorant, you're ignoring my point. 1000 times and 1000 different people are not the same thing. lol????????????????????/
Alright we'll say 5. Are you happy now?
|
On December 04 2006 16:33 infinity21 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:30 5HITCOMBO wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm confused. What exactly is your point? I thought I had been addressing that for 5 pages now. For the third time now, (or w/e I lost count) schools handing out condoms to students gives off a negative image, because that basically implies that the school supports sex at the age of 14-18. That's pushing the boundaries of pedophilia. So I disagree with schools handing out condoms to teenagers.
but goddamnit, once again you are using a personal opinion regarding premarital sex to argue that the distribution of condoms in high school is BAD.
This is OBVIOUSLY not correct. IT IS JUST YOUR OPINION, NOT A FACT. You base your opinion on your view of sex which is that people should not have sex before they're 18...
I suggest we start bringing up the facts: GUESS WHAT, PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS HAD SEX AS TEENAGERS, AND WILL ALWAYS HAVE!
This is a fact whether you like it or not, and therefore the DISTRIBUTION of condoms is a good thing because it ENSURES that the people who DO have sex do it PROPERLY.
I can't really see how come you don't get this. HOLY fucking TOLEDO
excuse the bold, but I had to release my agression. olol
|
|
|
oh so premarital sex automatically means you're doing it with 5 disease infested people?
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:41 5HITCOMBO wrote:
WHAT
IS
YOUR
POINT?
I refuse to repeat myself for the 4th time.
|
and btw, please reply to my post. I have posted like 4 times and you have never replied anything... no argument maybe?
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:41 YoUr_KiLLeR wrote:
oh so premarital sex automatically means you're doing it with 5 disease infested people?
No, premarital sex means you're having sex before marriage.
|
On December 04 2006 16:40 _PulSe_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 14:55 5HITCOMBO wrote:On December 04 2006 14:17 infinity21 wrote:On December 04 2006 13:47 MTF wrote:On December 04 2006 13:03 infinity21 wrote:
OverTheUnder, I think you're giving high school kids too much credit here... You're assuming that teenage kids who are about to have sex will actually care about STDs. They've already been educated on what happens when they have sex. Girls get pregnant. I think we all learned that in high school, or elementary school for that matter. Honestly, it's their choice to have sex and get HIV, AIDS, STDs, and get pregnant. Getting free condoms might reduce the risk of infection but will encourage premarital sex (in high school) as I mentioned in my post above.
Remember, high school kids that have premarital sex obviously didn't learn anything in high school (with all the education on how it's so bad, risks of getting STDs, etc). They still have sex regardless. So it's a pretty risky assumption when you say they'll learn to control their sexual desires. While I'm not exactly supportive of going around and screwing whoever, whenever (I've only had one sexual partner all of my life, whom I'm engaged to), I do not like your approach to "preventing disease". Preaching abstinence instead of birth control/safe sex methods is counter-productive. Yes, it gives some moral backing, but ultimately it is up to them what they want to do, not society. Just because they're teens doesn't mean they don't deserve the right to have protection. This is all like saying you tell younger kids never to cross the street, whether they look both ways or not, because they could get hit. You shouldn't inhibit them like that, but rather let them learn and hold their hand, give them that extra safety, when they do cross. But school does everything necessary for teenagers. By the way, I'm a teenager myself, being in Grade 12. But I don't think it should be done in a way that promotes premarital sex. They (i.e. the school) teach us about the consequences of having premarital sex, such as AIDS, STDs, etc. They teach us what happens to your 16 year old girlfriend if you have unprotected sex. They teach us everything we need to make rational decisions. It's these stupid idiots that decide to have unprotected sex at the age of 16, when you're most likely not ready to be a parent, emotionally and financially. If they want condoms, they can go buy them. Seriously, just go buy condoms. It can't exactly be that difficult. I never said people should never have premarital sex. It's society, not me, that says that. To counter your point, I'd like to say that, nobody would actually hold a teenagers' hands when crossing the street. That was done when they were innocent children, incapable of making rational decisions for themselves. What they do to teenagers is give them more freedom. That is, the parents tell their teenage son that crossing the street without looking is dangerous because you can be hit by a car. I'm against the view that teenagers should be overprotected like children. We're at a point where we can make some important decisions for ourselves. The point I'm trying to make is, the school tells us of every single consequence to having unprotected, premarital sex. They say: "these are the consequences. Do it at your own risk." I honestly think they've done quite enough for us to make an educated decision. Abstinence only sex education DOES NOT WORK. Tax money spent on condoms > Tax money spent on welfare for 19 year old mothers. Also, you're still in high school, and thus have no idea how life is outside of high school. You don't know enough about this issue to give an opinion, and it's obvious in your posts. And actually, only certain societies say that it's not right to have sex before marriage. There are actually cultures in the world where free sex is practiced, and most of the younger generation doesn't hold the view that premarital sex is a bad thing. Go to college, you'll see what I mean. Dont be so quick to be condesending torwards him simply because he is in highschool,17, and a virgin. Im a senior and 17 and who are you to tell me im not intellegent enough to make a decision on whether or not comdoms should be put in my school. Your telling me that simply because i have not gone to college are that someone hasn't experinced sex that they cant have an educated opinion on the topic. You make me sick with the way you put down infinity21. He was the first person who was in high school that responded and you put him down for having an opinion as to what goes on in HIS life. Putting condoms in high school in no way affects you at all. He is the one who should have a choice because it affects him, not some over arrogant prick who thinks he knows whats best for somebody else.
Look. I don't care if you want a say in it or not. More power to you if you do.
But read my last reply to your post.
Regardless of whether or not you want them, having them available in school is a good thing for preventing STD spread and unwanted pregnancies.
Putting condoms in school does not affect him at all, because he's not going to have sex. It affects others who will have sex by making contraception readily available.
I made that 17 year old argument because he keeps bringing up in his posts about how "high schoolers are too dumb to have safe premarital sex", and I'm simply using his flaws in logic against him. By no means do I think high schoolers are dumb. Stop being offended.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:43 Sean.G wrote:
and btw, please reply to my post. I have posted like 4 times and you have never replied anything... no argument maybe?
There's a limit to how fast I can respond to 4 people flaming me at once. Thanks.
|
Infinity, please, for my clarity, could you at least direct me to a page where you had a point that we haven't answered?
Don't ask us to address your point then refuse to tell us what your point is.
|
On December 04 2006 16:44 infinity21 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:41 YoUr_KiLLeR wrote:
oh so premarital sex automatically means you're doing it with 5 disease infested people? No, premarital sex means you're having sex before marriage.
EXACTLY, thats what i've been saying. it doesn't necessarily mean disease, doing it with different partners, pregnancy.
|
scratch that last post from me sorry it poped up twice and i just kept typing. I apologize for that. And im not saying you dont have good points 5HITCOMBO for the record im for it. You can read my post i made while I was in my school. im just saying its not so "intelligent" to insult somebody simply because they made a life choice. So the only problem i had was that by what you said i shouldn't have an opinion because im 17 and in high school and that i have to go to college to aquire an opinion. thats my point. Also the one thing.
Edit: Also this whole thing is based on opinion too. He can think that having sex before 18 is idiotic. What hes saying is that he wants to not activly distribute condoms because it, even if i dont agree, will convice people who are having doubts about it think thats its just that much more safe if the school is passing them out. Thats his point from what i've gathered,
|
But obviously you have time to flame someone without a response.
|
I suggest distributing anti-rape condoms instead. (Date rape = no good.) Let the mother fuckers learn some responsibility and let them buy it for themselves like a man! I prefer spending tax dollars on real issues, not on premature horny little kids.
|
Canada3819 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:09 infinity21 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:06 YoUr_KiLLeR wrote:
no thats ridiculous. handing out condoms supports SAFE SEX. stop being retarded plz.
getting kids naked together in a room encourages premarital sex, not handing out condoms. It still supports SEX, which becomes PREMARITAL because high school students are not married. Handing out condoms is saying to everyone "Here, go have sex. But make sure you're protected". Since when did our school system support premarital sex?
FLABBERGAST.
|
On December 04 2006 16:45 _PulSe_ wrote:
scratch that last post from me sry it poped up twice and i just kept typing. And im not saying you dont have good points 5HITCOMBO for the record im for it. You can read my post i made while in my school. im just saying its not so "intelligent" to insult somebody simply because they made a life choice. So the only problem i had was that by what you said i shouldn't have an opinion because im 17 and in high school and that i have to go to college to aquire an opinion. thats my point.
DUDE
I JUST TOLD YOU
I DON'T THINK HIGH SCHOOLERS ARE STUPID
I THINK THEY'RE VERY INTELLIGENT
BUT IN PAGES 6-10 INFINITY BRINGS UP HOW HIS POINT IS THAT HIGH SCHOOLERS ARE TOO STUPID TO HAVE SAFE PREMARITAL SEX
I USED A DEVICE KNOWN AS IRONY TO POINT THE FLAW IN HIS LOGIC OUT (because actually explaining it to him failed for 5 pages)
I mean, I'm trying to give all the credit I can to high schoolers, but you and infinity are quickly shaking my faith in them.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:44 5HITCOMBO wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:40 _PulSe_ wrote:
Dont be so quick to be condesending torwards him simply because he is in highschool,17, and a virgin. Im a senior and 17 and who are you to tell me im not intellegent enough to make a decision on whether or not comdoms should be put in my school. Your telling me that simply because i have not gone to college are that someone hasn't experinced sex that they cant have an educated opinion on the topic. You make me sick with the way you put down infinity21. He was the first person who was in high school that responded and you put him down for having an opinion as to what goes on in HIS life. Putting condoms in high school in no way affects you at all. He is the one who should have a choice because it affects him, not some over arrogant prick who thinks he knows whats best for somebody else. Look. I don't care if you want a say in it or not. More power to you if you do. But read my last reply to your post. Regardless of whether or not you want them, having them available in school is a good thing for preventing STD spread and unwanted pregnancies. Putting condoms in school does not affect him at all, because he's not going to have sex. It affects others who will have sex by making contraception readily available. I made that 17 year old argument because he keeps bringing up in his posts about how "high schoolers are too dumb to have safe premarital sex", and I'm simply using his flaws in logic against him. By no means do I think high schoolers are dumb. Stop being offended.
First of all, I never said high school students were too dumb to have safe premarital sex. I was referring to the people who WERE having premarital sex. How can you say it won't effect me at all? Do you know if I'm going to have sex before graduation? It's a lot less likely than some jock that I'll have sex by the end of grade 12 but it's ridiculous to say that decision won't effect me at all.
|
On December 04 2006 16:44 infinity21 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:43 Sean.G wrote:
and btw, please reply to my post. I have posted like 4 times and you have never replied anything... no argument maybe? There's a limit to how fast I can respond to 4 people flaming me at once. Thanks.
Dude, we are not flaming you. We are trying to make you understand that you have no argument against the distribution of condoms in high schools.
If you do, give me ONE. Just ONE argument against it.
What you've been doing all along is to state your opinion on premarital sex, but as I have said a 1000 times before, this does not change the fact that having sex as a teenager is normal, and that therefore, the distribution of condoms at high schools is a POSITIVE thing..
At least answer this one question.. DO YOU, or DO YOU NOT understand what I am saying here?
|
United States20667 Posts
On December 04 2006 16:38 Chibi[OWNS] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2006 16:33 infinity21 wrote:On December 04 2006 16:30 5HITCOMBO wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm confused. What exactly is your point? I thought I had been addressing that for 5 pages now. For the third time now, (or w/e I lost count) schools handing out condoms to students gives off a negative image, because that basically implies that the school supports sex at the age of 14-18. That's pushing the boundaries of pedophilia. So I disagree with schools handing out condoms to teenagers. Wait you don't want to hand out condoms because technically that would be promoting pedophilia?
Chibi: Oh noes! someone inhibiting progression of pedophilia as accepted fetish?!
Anyways. I think this whole condom business works as a short term fix, because it will lower pregnancies and STDs and all that. But long term, there still needs to be a better plan. Condoms don't work 100% of the time, younger age of sex will grow more and more accepted (Japan age of consent is like... 12) so young people will have sex more and more, and I really doubt the responsibility of 13 year old kids and their ability to use condoms correctly.
So overall, providing condoms would result in long term trend of increases in pregnancies, STDs, etc because more people will have sex, and condoms don't work as well as people think. A major problem is that people put way too much faith in condoms' ability to both a) be a contraceptive and b) keep safe from STD.
And... expensive. I don't want to pay taxes for this. If people want to have sex they can go buy condoms themselves. And yes, I'm against providing welfare for people who got into fiscal trouble by fault of their own. And yes, I think getting pregnant at 16 is really the mother's fault. American free education teaches that sex results in children -.-;; and it should be fairly evident that a child at sixteen won't help your education.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
