*Penetrative Sex Only when Willing to Raise a Child*

Page 5 of 10 [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next


Penetrative Sex
Only when ready, able and willing to raise a child 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
Only in long-term relationships in which may eventually want to have children 9%  9%  [ 6 ]
Only when think that a relationship may be long-term 28%  28%  [ 19 ]
Only after a few dates 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
Whenever it is available with someone you are attracted to 36%  36%  [ 24 ]
Whenever it is available 21%  21%  [ 14 ]
Never/only with the same sex/other option 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 67

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

06 Dec 2008, 4:51 pm

ouinon wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ouinon wrote:
Most people, ( particularly women ) , understand, consciously or not, how dangerous/lifechanging sex is/can be, and, in the jungle of modern sexual relationships, many women may be be instinctively choosing and/or reserving themselves for the men who seem to promise good genes, and/or support/protection, as a result.
Sex just isn't that dangerous most of the time.

If you are a woman the threat of motherhood or an abortion is real, every time you have penile-vaginal penetrative sex. If you are a man it probably doesn't seem so dangerous "most of the time".
.


Real, perhaps. Huge, no. Minimal, yes. It simply is not the thing to be feared that you are selling it to be.


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

06 Dec 2008, 4:55 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
ouinon wrote:
The number of abortions in the year 2000 in the USA alone was 1.31 million.


So what, where is the stat regarding failed contraception?



DentArthurDent wrote:
Yes abortion is a big deal, which is made worse by nut jobs picketing the clinics.

ouinon wrote:
I don't think that that is the most upsetting aspect of having an abortion. Do you, really?


NO, but the pro lifers make a emotionally hard decision far worse


Pro-lifers are concerned that the decisionis not emotionally hard enough. How many abortions performed are unnecessary? The last thing we would want is to have abortion, important as it is, to become just another form of elective surgery for women, like the tummy-tuck or liposuction.

To be sure, it's not abortion per se which I rail against. It's stupid unnecessary abortions I rail against, vanity aortions, abortions performed under less-than-dire circumstances.



Fraya
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,337

06 Dec 2008, 5:00 pm

ouinon wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ouinon wrote:
Most people, ( particularly women ) , understand, consciously or not, how dangerous/lifechanging sex is/can be, and, in the jungle of modern sexual relationships, many women may be be instinctively choosing and/or reserving themselves for the men who seem to promise good genes, and/or support/protection, as a result.
Sex just isn't that dangerous most of the time.

If you are a woman the threat of motherhood or an abortion is real, every time you have penile-vaginal penetrative sex. If you are a man it probably doesn't seem so dangerous "most of the time".
.


The problem is that it isn't a direct threat. If something is almost certain with well understood (through experience) consequences such as "Putting your hand in fire will hurt" that registers as a threat. Something as vague and nebulous as "You might get pregnant and have to have an abortion" just doesn't seem all that real to someone who hasn't experienced it and so can only think of it in the abstract.

As I said before you have better odds of being seriously injured or killed in a car crash than having to have an abortion but that doesn't make people stop driving.


_________________
One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
-----------
"White Rabbit" - Jefferson Airplane


Last edited by Fraya on 06 Dec 2008, 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

06 Dec 2008, 5:03 pm

If this thread is just some sly promotion of gay sex, I'm having none of it.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

06 Dec 2008, 5:07 pm

slowmutant wrote:
If this thread is just some sly promotion of gay sex, I'm having none of it.


Well you cant generally get preggers from gay sex....so it is "safe" in that sense..


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


Fraya
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,337

06 Dec 2008, 5:09 pm

slowmutant wrote:
Pro-lifers are concerned that the decisionis not emotionally hard enough. How many abortions performed are unnecessary? The last thing we would want is to have abortion, important as it is, to become just another form of elective surgery for women, like the tummy-tuck or liposuction.

To be sure, it's not abortion per se which I rail against. It's stupid unnecessary abortions I rail against, vanity aortions, abortions performed under less-than-dire circumstances.


Yeah your right we should just remove the fetuses and let them develop on their own.. oh wait you can't because it's part of the woman's body and can't survive on its own much less have thoughts or feelings so how is it a person again?

It's a growth a mass of cells no more significant than a tumor why shouldn't it be elective surgery like liposuction or a tummy tuck which are also surgeries to remove unwanted cellular material?


_________________
One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
-----------
"White Rabbit" - Jefferson Airplane


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

06 Dec 2008, 5:09 pm

ouinon wrote:
The number of abortions in the year 2000 in the USA alone was 1.31 million.

1.31 million people, would that be a good thing or a bad thing, or neither? well, on one hand, there would be more than 1.31 million going towards overpopulation, not to mention the question of how many of them would be criminals.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


ouinon
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,939
Location: Europe

06 Dec 2008, 5:12 pm

Macbeth wrote:
ouinon wrote:
If you are a woman the threat of motherhood or an abortion is real, every time you have penile-vaginal penetrative sex. If you are a man it probably doesn't seem so dangerous "most of the time".
Real, perhaps. Huge, no. Minimal, yes. It simply is not the thing to be feared that you are selling it to be.

I posted figures on the last page for abortion in Australia; a very big study found that 33 out of 1000 women in their twenties had had an abortion, 70 % of them because of contraceptive failure. 19 out of 1000 women from puberty to the menopause had had one.

In 2001 the number of live births in the USA was around 4 million. That is 14.5 births per 1000 people.
In 2003 the number of abortions was 1.3 million.

Penile-vaginal penetrative sex for fun/companionship/because that is "what one does" is very dangerous.

Fraya, it is causing more deaths per year than cancer, which is obviously many more than die each year in car crashes.
.



Last edited by ouinon on 08 Dec 2008, 11:22 am, edited 2 times in total.

Fraya
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,337

06 Dec 2008, 5:12 pm

greenblue wrote:
ouinon wrote:
The number of abortions in the year 2000 in the USA alone was 1.31 million.

1.31 million people, would that be a good thing or a bad thing, or neither? well, on one hand, there would be more than 1.31 million going towards overpopulation, not to mention the question of how many of them would be criminals.


Statistically? There would be 6,500 murderers among them.


_________________
One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
-----------
"White Rabbit" - Jefferson Airplane


slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

06 Dec 2008, 5:13 pm

Macbeth wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
If this thread is just some sly promotion of gay sex, I'm having none of it.


Well you cant generally get preggers from gay sex....so it is "safe" in that sense..


No, not with the threat of AIDS it isn't. Ironically enough, the safest form of sex is the kind you have with yourself.



Fraya
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,337

06 Dec 2008, 5:16 pm

ouinon wrote:
Fraya, it is causing more deaths per year than cancer, which is obviously many more than die each year in car crashes.
.


Yeah I misspoke I meant seriously injured or killed. I find it interesting that you say "deaths" when speaking of a mass of cells that is no more alive and aware than a tumor though.


_________________
One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
-----------
"White Rabbit" - Jefferson Airplane


Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

06 Dec 2008, 5:20 pm

ouinon wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ouinon wrote:
If you are a woman the threat of motherhood or an abortion is real, every time you have penile-vaginal penetrative sex. If you are a man it probably doesn't seem so dangerous "most of the time".
Real, perhaps. Huge, no. Minimal, yes. It simply is not the thing to be feared that you are selling it to be.

I posted figures on the last page for abortion in Australia; a very big study found that 33 out of 1000 women in their twenties had had an abortion, 70 % of them because of contraceptive failure. 19 out of 1000 women from puberty to the menopause had had one.

In 2005 the rate of death by cardiovascular disease, ( the most common cause of death ), was 22 out of 1000. And the number of deaths from (all ) cancers was 19 out of 1000.

In 2001 the number of live births in the USA was around 4 million. That is 14.5 births per 1000 people.
In 2003 the number of abortions was 1.3 million.

Penile-vaginal penetrative sex for fun/companionship/because that is "what one does" is very dangerous.

Fraya, it is causing more deaths per year than cancer, which is obviously many more than die each year in car crashes.
.


How much sex though? 33 from 1000.. and how many times had they engaged in copulation before they got pregnant? I find it hard to believe that each and every one of them became pregnant on their first go....


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


ouinon
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,939
Location: Europe

06 Dec 2008, 5:23 pm

Fraya wrote:
I find it interesting that you say "deaths" when speaking of a mass of cells that is no more alive and aware than a tumor though.

Whatever it is nine out of ten women who abort experience depression, grief, etc, etc, etc, ( as I said a couple of pages back ), as if something very serious had happened.

Do you think that they would feel better if they received counselling for having a tumour cut out, ... or for bereavement?
.



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

06 Dec 2008, 5:23 pm

Fraya wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
Pro-lifers are concerned that the decisionis not emotionally hard enough. How many abortions performed are unnecessary? The last thing we would want is to have abortion, important as it is, to become just another form of elective surgery for women, like the tummy-tuck or liposuction.

To be sure, it's not abortion per se which I rail against. It's stupid unnecessary abortions I rail against, vanity aortions, abortions performed under less-than-dire circumstances.


Yeah your right we should just remove the fetuses and let them develop on their own.. oh wait you can't because it's part of the woman's body and can't survive on its own much less have thoughts or feelings so how is it a person again?

It's a growth a mass of cells no more significant than a tumor why shouldn't it be elective surgery like liposuction or a tummy tuck which are also surgeries to remove unwanted cellular material?


Quote:
It's a growth a mass of cells no more significant than a tumor


WRONG! A fetus is a very special cluster of cells because of its potential for human life. Each is a potential human beng, unlike tumours. You are exacly the kind of morally bankrupt individual that should never have access to abortions.



ouinon
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,939
Location: Europe

06 Dec 2008, 5:24 pm

Macbeth wrote:
How many times had they engaged in copulation before they got pregnant? I find it hard to believe that each and every one of them became pregnant on their first go.

I imagine it's a bit like smoking.
.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

06 Dec 2008, 5:28 pm

ouinon wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
How many times had they engaged in copulation before they got pregnant? I find it hard to believe that each and every one of them became pregnant on their first go.

I imagine it's a bit like smoking.
.

In that it has a cumulative effect? That's just daft and bears no resemblance to actual biology.


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]