Way to go, South Dakota!!

[zzapp the witch]

Meh, if they outlaw abortion, women will just go back to the old ways. Smart women will do it the right way.

A woman who is determined to terminate a pregnancy will not be stopped, I'm sure most of you can agree on that.

[Brigiid]

Or they might choose to behave more responsibly and prevent the problem in the first place. Ya never can tell.

[zzapp the witch]

So I guess getting pregnant while on birth control is irresponsible to you? Or while using a condom? etc? How would you propose to fix that situation?

[Brigiid]

If having sex can lead to pregnancy and you don't want to get pregnant and you can't be sure that birth control will work for you...

...duh?

[zzapp the witch]

So, do you want more kids?

[Brigiid]

I don't have kids, but yeah, I want kids someday.

[zzapp the witch]

So when you're done having kids, I take it you and your man won't have sex ever again in your relationship?

[Brigiid]

Uh, no. We'll do what's reasonable to ensure that we don't get pregnant again, but not to the point of aborting a pregnancy to avoid having a child.

[Davek]

Originally Posted by zzapp the witch

So when you're done having kids, I take it you and your man won't have sex ever again in your relationship?

get yer friggen tubes tied or something.

DUH!

[zzapp the witch]

Duh, nothing. Our local pharmacist and his wife never wanted kids. She had her tubes tied. Well, here comes number one....tubes tied again....number two...tubes tied yet again....number three....she got a tubal ligation.

So you can't tell me that that is better than birth control.

Originally Posted by Brigiid

Uh, no. We'll do what's reasonable to ensure that we don't get pregnant again, but not to the point of aborting a pregnancy to avoid having a child.

So, you admit that even you are going to be irresponsible enough to have sex even though you might not want a child at that time?

[Brigiid]

I wonder how many people accidentally get pregnant while practicing abstinence...

Hrm.

[Brigiid]

Originally Posted by Zzapp

So, you admit that even you are going to be irresponsible enough to have sex even though you might not want a child at that time?

Yes, yes I will be irresponsible enough to have sex even though I might not want a child at the time. Your point?

[Drysdale]

Originally Posted by zzapp the witch

Duh, nothing. Our local pharmacist and his wife never wanted kids. She had her tubes tied. Well, here comes number one....tubes tied again....number two...tubes tied yet again....number three....she got a tubal ligation.

So you can't tell me that that is better than birth control.



So, you admit that even you are going to be irresponsible enough to have sex even though you might not want a child at that time?

I love how you turn an anecdote into facts in your head... For every 1 story of tubal ligation failing, I'll bet I can find 100+ of birth control pills failing, rubbers breaking, or pulling out failing. So yeah, I can tell you that it's better than most other forms of birth control, mutants excluded.

[Everclear]

Actually it's not THAT uncommon. Some newlywed friends of mine also got pregnant while on the pill. They were making what would be considered a reasonable effort to not get pregnant. Of course they are having the baby, not aborting it. The point is that it is true, abstinance is the only sure fire way to not get pregnant, but is that reasonable to ask of people? I suppose the answer to that varies by person.

At the very least, you are arguing against what many on the boards have labeled as a "natural" desire are you not? I would also point out that although I intensly dislike the idea of people suggesting gays should fight thier desires (because I consider them jsut as natural), I DO respect someone who is willing to fight thier own desires, and cannot fault them for asking others to do what they themselves do. I would not argue with thier consistancy. I would, however ask if that was a feasible solution to this problem? Yes, theoretically abstinance would be ideal, but is this something we can reasonably expect from people? If not, do we give up or try to find a solution that will actually be effective, if not perfect?

I don't like the idea of abortions, but I will not presume to pass a blanket judgement on all cases, to which I am not privvy to details. In he absence of facts, my default preference is the one with the most options.

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Brigiid

I don't even like sentience as a benchmark. I prefer conception, but hey.

Sorry, don't like the idea of just formed clump of cells being given human rights...especially when its inside a real living human being.

Originally Posted by Brigiid

By week 7, the brain's already developed and growing. That sounds an awful lot more like a person than a ball of cells or a parasite, to me.

Not fully developed. I've heard the brain stem isn't fully formed till 6 months. Of course, I've seen other reports that say brain waves start at 8 weeks. *sigh* We need a damn definitive unbiased study.

Originally Posted by Brigiid

If we're going to be in the business of legislating abortions, I do think there needs to be a legal definition for the beginning of life.

Thank God someone agrees with me! They current situation where women can abort at 8 months, but Peterson can get double homicide is fucking ridiculous and contradictory in the legal system.

Originally Posted by Axgar

for instance if they took this piece of scum that did this and hung him on national TV people would get the picture that rape is NOT going to be tolerated and if you get caught you die........ I bet the rape count would go wayyyyyyyyyy down and if it didn't it would be a good time to become a mortician.

Haven't we already proven capital punishment doesn't work?

Originally Posted by Zzapp

Meh, if they outlaw abortion, women will just go back to the old ways. Smart women will do it the right way.

A woman who is determined to terminate a pregnancy will not be stopped, I'm sure most of you can agree on that.

Agreed, but the woman would also get a murder charge if caught.

Originally Posted by Zzapp

Duh, nothing. Our local pharmacist and his wife never wanted kids. She had her tubes tied. Well, here comes number one....tubes tied again....number two...tubes tied yet again....number three....she got a tubal ligation.

I'm not much on medical malpractice, but I think that would call for it lol. Same doctor each time?

Originally Posted by Brigiid

I wonder how many people accidentally get pregnant while practicing abstinence...

How many people are injured in car accidents that never step in a vehicle?

[AresProphet]

Originally Posted by Brigiid

I wonder how many people accidentally get pregnant while practicing abstinence...

Hrm.

None. But how many people try to practice absitinence, then fail? The very definition of abstinence as a birth control method makes it produce skewed results. If you have sex, you did not practice abstinence and therefore the method didn't fail.

But if you were a practicing abstinent, and went to a party and said "screw it" and knocked boots with someone, then the method did fail.

Abstinence is not a foolproof birth control method. I'd argue that it's the least effective method out there, when used alone, because it relies on the self-control of the practicer rather than a physical barrier to pregnancy. All it takes is one lapse in judgment. That happens far more often than a condom breaking.

[Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Heretic

Haven't we already proven capital punishment doesn't work?

Nope! Next!

[zzapp the witch]

Well, EC got closest to my point.

Originally Posted by Brigiid

Yes, yes I will be irresponsible enough to have sex even though I might not want a child at the time. Your point?

My point is that you are seeming to hold people to a higher standard than you will even hold yourself.

[Brigiid]

Originally Posted by Heretic

How many people are injured in car accidents that never step in a vehicle?

For your next great trick, maybe you could tell us what relevance that has to the conversation at hand?

Originally Posted by Ares

Abstinence is not a foolproof birth control method.

If used correctly, yes it is. If you're not going to stick to your guns, then no, it won't work for you - just like not using a condom or not taking your birth control pills.

Originally Posted by Zzapp

My point is that you are seeming to hold people to a higher standard than you will even hold yourself.

How's that?

I practice safe sex within the confines of a committed and monogamous relationship. I'm financially secure enough to afford a child if we were to get pregnant anyway. While a pregnancy would be unplanned and unexpected at this point, I'm confident in continuing to fuck like bunnies because I know that even if birth control does fail, we can handle it.

Looking at this from the opposite direction, if I were not in a monogamous relationship with someone I felt comfortable raising a child with or putting up with for the rest of eternity, I wouldn't be having sex with them. Then I don't have to worry about birth control failing and me getting pregnant and us not a) wanting to be together or b) being able to afford it.

See? I prefer prevention of a bad situation, to letting the bad situation happen because I can't control my hormones, and then having to fix the mistake later.

That's the standard I hold myself to, and that's all I ask of other people.

[AresProphet]

Originally Posted by Brigiid

If used correctly, yes it is. If you're not going to stick to your guns, then no, it won't work for you - just like not using a condom or not taking your birth control pills..

And I maintain that the rate of people not "sticking to their guns" is far higher than the failure rate of condoms or the pill. Anyone have some data on the rate of premarital sex among students who have completed abstinence-only sex-ed?

[Brigiid]

Originally Posted by Ares

And I maintain that the rate of people not "sticking to their guns" is far higher than the failure rate of condoms or the pill.

Abstinence, when used correctly, is 100% accurate. Condoms and the pill, when used correctly, are said to have 99%+ accuracy. The key is to actually use it, whatever "it" is.

I'm not sure what your point is.

[zzapp the witch]

I guess you're just one of those people that just has to wait for reality to kick in full bore.

[AresProphet]

Originally Posted by Brigiid

Abstinence, when used correctly, is 100% accurate. Condoms and the pill, when used correctly, are said to have 99%+ accuracy. The key is to actually use it, whatever "it" is.

I'm not sure what your point is.

When used correctly.

We're going in circles. Let me try to clarify.

(A) A person wishing to avoid unplanned pregnancies must select a method of birth control. Options include pills, condoms, or abstinence.

(B) A person decides on a method.

(C) No matter which one it is, we can define the failure rate as: (proportion of times attempted to use method and failed to do so) + (proportion of times used method and method failed). As in:

% of times he forgets to wear a condom and has sex + % of times the condom fails and produces a pregnancy.

Or % of times she forgets to take the pills and ends up engaging in sex which could produce a pregnancy + % of times pills failed to prevent pregnancy.

OR % of times attempted to abstain but failed and ended up having sex + % of times abstinence failed to prevent pregnancy.


Now, let's compare the methods. For condoms, the break % is about 1% we'll assume, but how often does a broken condom result in pregnancy? Multiply that percentage (25%? 50%?) by 1% to get your true failure rate for a broken condom, since not every act of unprotected sex produces a pregnancy

Now for the extra component of the failure rate. How likely is a guy to mess up and forget the condom, yet still have sex? I'd guess it's a low proportion for anyone in a relatively stable relationship. We don't really need to know just yet, I'll just call it P(C).


For the pill: we'll say it fails only 0.1% because it must result in a pregnancy to be a failure, less than a condom but still statistically significant. How likely is a woman to forget to use it? It's ridiculously easy to take a pill daily. The failure rate here has to be low. I'll call it P(P), where P(C) > P(P)


For abstinence: if properly used, there is a 0% chance of pregnancy. But how often does an abstinent person lapse? This requires more than just forgetting to carry a condom or forgetting to refill a prescription. Again, if you use statistics from abstinence-only sex-ed as an example of how someone told to abstain does not do so, you could come up with an approximate answer. I'll call it P(A) and say that P(A) > P(C) > P(P). For the record: my sex-ed in middle school was abstinence-only. I can list at least a dozen girls in my graduating class of 500 who ended up with a kid before high school was up.


That's my entire hypothesis, that a person attempting abstinence as the sole method of birth control is more likely to engage in unsafe sex than someone using a more passive form of birth control.[CODE]

[Brigiid]

Originally Posted by Zzapp

I guess you're just one of those people that just has to wait for reality to kick in full bore.

Meaning?

Originally Posted by Ares

That's my entire hypothesis, that a person attempting abstinence as the sole method of birth control is more likely to engage in unsafe sex than someone using a more passive form of birth control.

The simple fact is that if you're not having sex, you aren't going to accidentally get pregnant. If you are having sex, you stand a chance of getting pregnant. Your argument about willpower makes sense, but it doesn't negate anything I've said.

[AresProphet]

Originally Posted by Brigiid

Meaning?


The simple fact is that if you're not having sex, you aren't going to accidentally get pregnant. If you are having sex, you stand a chance of getting pregnant. Your argument about willpower makes sense, but it doesn't negate anything I've said.

Because what you say does not address the underlying issue: abstinence is not 100% effective at preventing people from having sex.