This is going to be cut/snip/quote hell....sorry.
Originally posted by: SagaLore
What's wrong with defending safe sex?
There is no such thing as "safe" sex, unless you've abstained until marriage. But that's really not what I'm getting at... if somebody has herpes, I'm not having sex with them, condom or not. Condom's are like an Umbrella - it's made to keep the rain off you but it doesn't mean you aren't going to get wet.
True, but then again nothing in life is 100%. To further the car analogy: you have airbags, seatbelt, crumple zones, etc. All will help prevent injury in an accident, but none will 100% guarantee that you'll live if you get in a wreck. Most of the literature regarding herpes and condoms indicates that sex with a partner who has an active outbreak, even with a condom, is a bad idea and that you should use condoms even when there's no obvious outbreak in order to minimize the risk of transmission as much as possible.
And what's with the whole "liberal propaganda" thing? You make it sound like some kind of conspiracy or something.
Well I wasn't being 100% serious about that. That was just an ultra-conservative outburst.

The problem I see is that even adults get convinced that sex is safe... it can be mader safer but the risk is always preventable. I need to drive my dangerous car to sustain my life with a source of income but sex is just for fun.[/quote]
Okay...you threw me off with that bit.

I guess this is and always will be a personal decision. You can abstain or not.
You're correct that you can have microtears in your skin here and there via abrasion (or probably shaving in your dad's case) and transmission can occur since virii are so incredibly tiny. This doesn't mean we all need to hide in a bunker wrapped in saran for the rest of our lives.

I don't need to stick it in every hole I find either.

I don't eat raw eggs because I could get salmonella poison.. and thats only a temporary condition.[/quote]
As above, it's all about minimizing the risks. Obviously if you have a lot of partners, your odd of getting exposed to something or other are higher. Conversely, there are plenty of people out there who are in long-term relationships, who aren't married, who have sex. Again, it's a personal thing.
STD's are not going away, but then neither is sex so the only middle ground is to take reasonable precaution (condoms) and move on.
You really aren't scared to get herpes? What about hiv?[/quote]
Well, I've been married for 5 years and with the same woman for 12 so it's not really applicable to me currently, but when I was on the singles scene I didn't lie awake at night worrying about it. If you wear a condom and know your partners (as well as you can, obviously) the risks are minimal. Not to harp on this being a personal thing, but I'm just not willing to excise that aspect of intimacy from a relationship based on the small odds that I'll contract an STD (especially since most are curable and only one is by definition fatal). Again, no one said anything about running around and boinking like bunnies secure in the knowledge that you can take a pill and be all better, just that sex can be relatively safe. You, on the other hand, are comfortable in a non-physical relationship prior to marriage. Most people aren't, but it's a free country, right?
I mean, it's entirely possible you'll die in an auto accident on your way home today as well no matter how careful a driver you are.
:Q

But I'm providing a house and funds to support my wife and family... not getting some...[/quote]
Well, sex is funny like that. It's certainly not essential to one's existence unless you want kids, but it is our second strongest drive (behind hunger/thirst) so it's gonna drive a lot of people batsh*t to abstain. I don't need to do a lot of things I do, but there's a line between a well-rounded existence and being insulated and miserable.
There has to be a reasonable cutoff point in how much padding we put between ourselves and the world and I just happen to think that total abstinence is overkill.
That's a respectable opinion. But just don't sugar coat the risks by saying that condoms will prevent the spread of herpes.[/quote]
Fair enough. I think I clarified this in the minimizing risks discussion.
There were almost 100,000 deaths attributed to accidents (slightly over 40,000 by cars alone) in the US in 2000, vs. approximately 20,000 attributed to AIDS/HIV. Is it liberal propaganda urging us to drive our cars and kill each other in huge numbers? :Q
Well no... liberal propoganda wants us to drive smaller weak-framed cars so we get crushed in an accident.

[/quote]
That's for another thread, I'd say. (mmmmm......SUV flame-fest)
One other point I feel I must make for the sake of argument: suppose you abstain, meet a wonderful woman, marry her a year or two later, and then you both discover that she has herpes which has been dormant prior that point (or is the asymptomatic type) that she contracted from a previous partner? This is not an unreasonable scenario since many who carry the virus don't display symptoms. I mean, you did everything right by your standards and you still get herpes....from your spouse, no less. You stated that you'd never have sex with someone carrying the virus, but now you've married someone who does. Do you just never have sex and resort to artificial insemination to have kids? Divorce her? What?