Time To Admit It: the church was right on birth control

[Zxian]

While I don't disagree with the general statement that "people should be responsible for their actions", I still think this is correlation rather than causation. The article only talks about America (so does the one comparing out-of-wedlock births with crime rates). Making a generalized statement and using a specific example is poor reasoning.

Secondly, statements like this make the author sound completely asinine.

The inventor of the cure for cancer might be someone's fourth child that they decided not to have.

Yes, that something that might have happened might have caused that other wonderful thing. Oh, but the family probably couldn't afford to put the child through university to learn the necessary skills in order to actually find the cure for cancer.

 

[cyclohexane]

The truth is - if birth control were not available, women would be much less likely to put out. Texashiker would most certainly never get laid. Dunno why he bitching about birth control.

 

[Texashiker]

I cant really say this was good or bad. However, when we made it possible for women to have sex without consequences the world changed forever.

Not just women, but also men.

Birth control is a wonderful thing when used properly. But when society takes a 16 year old girl, gives her the pill, then tells her its ok to have sex, what is she going to do? Chances are she is going to have sex.

She forgets to take a pill, gets sick takes antibiotics,,,, whatever happens but she gets pregnant. Now what?

Society told this young girl and young man there would be no consequences for their actions. So now what?

Dunno why he bitching about birth control.

I am not complaining about birth control.

Like everything else in life people should be responsible when they use it.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Birth control is a wonderful thing when used properly. But when society takes a 16 year old girl, gives her the pill, then tells her its ok to have sex, what is she going to do? Chances are she is going to have sex.

She forgets to take a pill, gets sick takes antibiotics,,,, whatever happens but she gets pregnant. Now what?

Society told this young girl and young man there would be no consequences for their actions. So now what?

What's the alternative? Going back to pre-birth control, restricting access and preaching abstinence? That's not going to undo the broad social changes that have taken place as a result of the sexual revolution, you'll just end up with a lot more teenage pregnancy. Ranting about changes in sexual morality isn't going to accomplish anything except making you look like a crotchety old man who can't stand that women are having more sex now. The problem continues to be people like you who don't like what's happened with regards to sexuality vis-a-vis young people fucking and try to implement failed abstinence-only policies that don't actually change the broader culture. If you really want to help, you should be in favor of ramping up teaching of birth control measures so that young people don't treat the pill like magical voodoo fairy dust and realize that if it isn't taken properly, it doesn't work. People are going to have sex regardless; increase access to and understanding of birth control and you'll do more good than desperately clinging to the past.

 

[Texashiker]

What's the alternative?

How do you make someone take responsibility for their actions when they shun responsibility? How do you make that 20 year old take time with his daughter that came from a one night stand?

My wife and I have a friend of the family who got knocked up. She is in her early 20s, the baby daddy has 3 other kids by 3 different women. He has nothing to do with any of the kids. So that is 4 kids that will grow up without a father figure.

Since the 1960s there has been a trend of just do what you want sexually. Where does this leave the children?

People are going to have sex regardless; increase access to and understanding of birth control and you'll do more good than desperately clinging to the past.

Its not about the sex, its about avoiding the unintended consequences of their actions.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Its not about the sex, its about avoiding the unintended consequences of their actions.

So you'd agree that helping minimize those consequences is a fairly important goal? In that case, birth control should be widely available and people should be instructed in the proper way to use it to maximize its efficacy. We need people to be aware than antibiotics stops the pill from working or doubling up condoms actually increases the likelihood of breakage. The more informed people are about birth control methods and the greater access they have to these methods, the fewer unwanted pregnancies we'll see. And, for that matter, sexually transmitted infections, which is also something we should be concerned with when it comes to unintended consequences of sex.

 

[Texashiker]

So you'd agree that helping minimize those consequences is a fairly important goal?

If there is no penalty, there is no deterrent.

If you minimize the consequences, are people likely to repeat the behavior?

In that case, birth control should be widely available and people should be instructed in the proper way to use it to maximize its efficacy. We need people to be aware than antibiotics stops the pill from working or doubling up condoms actually increases the likelihood of breakage. The more informed people are about birth control methods and the greater access they have to these methods, the fewer unwanted pregnancies we'll see. And, for that matter, sexually transmitted infections, which is also something we should be concerned with when it comes to unintended consequences of sex.

How much greater access do we need? The only thing I can think of is over the counter birth control pills.

 

[Zaap]

People should start being a bit more honest on this subject.

I'll say it, all the rest of us know it, but most won't dare say it:

I'm GLAD that most of those aborted over the past -let's say 40 years- aren't around to be whatever problem to an already overcrowded society. I'm glad they're not all here needing jobs no one is offering. I'm definitely glad many aren't here committing crimes and/or leeching more off public assistance. I'm glad many aren't here to vote in even larger blocks for an even worse and more vile brand of greedbag tax and spend politician.

It's not that all of them would have automatically ended up terrible people- it's just that virtually all of them were/would have remained unwanted, would have likely then been born into terrible situations, impoverished, etc, leading to neglect, abuse and a host of other things that wouldn't exactly bode well for molding model citizens.

I'm GLAD those who weren't able to/didn't want to raise another unwanted kid, didn't let on to do so in the name of someone else's religious belief or political view or whatever else. I admit it. The world, this country is better off for it. I dont give a fuck if its PC or not to admit it. It's not a statement of cruelty or of hating children, in fact, exactly the opposite. I don't know why anyone imagines they're doing kids any big favor by cramming them in with tons more unwanted/neglected kids that would otherwise have been aborted.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

If there is no penalty, there is no deterrent.

If you minimize the consequences, are people likely to repeat the behavior?

So your goal is to stop people from having sex. You've already mentioned that abstinence-only policies don't work; people are going to have sex. Why does there need to be a deterrent? Is it because sex is immoral? That's a value judgment that not everyone shares, and enforcing your morality on everyone else isn't what this country is about. I just don't understand where you're coming from with this; you seem to be contradicting yourself at every turn. Does your preferred society have people abstaining from sex until they're married? Because that's an idealist utopia that is completely unrealistic in the real world.

 

[Texashiker]

So your goal is to stop people from having sex.

No, not at all.

Does your preferred society have people abstaining from sex until they're married?

What I would like to see, and something I think the linked article in the opening post talks about, is for both parents to take responsibility for a child when birth control fails.

 

[brandonb]

So your goal is to stop people from having sex. You've already mentioned that abstinence-only policies don't work; people are going to have sex. Why does there need to be a deterrent? Is it because sex is immoral? That's a value judgment that not everyone shares, and enforcing your morality on everyone else isn't what this country is about. I just don't understand where you're coming from with this; you seem to be contradicting yourself at every turn. Does your preferred society have people abstaining from sex until they're married? Because that's an idealist utopia that is completely unrealistic in the real world.

This goes for Zaap above you as well.

What is the first thing that happens to a single woman when they end up pregnant and decide to have the child? They grow up... Right? They live a more responsible life, because they can't act like kids anymore. Do you think they are more or less willing to pop out another kid after having one? To be a bit more protective in not only in their sexual partners, but a bit more protective while having sex. There is more at stake. They learn the lesson that sex is more than sexual pleasure. There is risk involved, and it's life altering. Now we've given women an out, they can alter the life of the fetus and eliminate it to escape that life changing event. But if they choose to keep it, it's life altering for the woman, right?

Now the question is this: If it's that life altering, why should it be taken so lightly? It has nothing to do with abstaining from sex. But it's a lot more than "in the heat of passion, I wasn't able to put on a condom. I wasn't able to control myself." Not being able to control yourself would land you in jail in most cases. If I'm not able to control my sexual urges and I didn't have a willing partner, I'd end up in jail for rape. If I'm not able to control my emotions like anger, I could end up in jail for assault.

Why is that sex gets a free pass? It's a think you should be able to enjoy provided you are being responsible. Much like drinking alcohol!

To address Zaap: The woman is likely to gain a respect for life after having a child. So while the child might have been unwanted. In more cases than none, the woman ends up wanting the child more than ever. How many times have you heard that a child was an accident. Doesn't mean the parents love them any less and probably gain that appreciation after the child is born, and are better off as humans for it.

 

[Texashiker]

Do you think they are more or less willing to pop out another kid after having one?

Honest answer, I think it depends on how much welfare she is getting, family support, and education the mother has.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Now the question is this: If it's that life altering, why should it be taken so lightly? It has nothing to do with abstaining from sex. But it's a lot more than "in the heat of passion, I wasn't able to put on a condom. I wasn't able to control myself." Not being able to control yourself would land you in jail in most cases. If I'm not able to control my sexual urges and I didn't have a willing partner, I'd end up in jail for rape. If I'm not able to control my emotions like anger, I could end up in jail for assault.

Why is that sex gets a free pass? It's a think you should be able to enjoy provided you are being responsible. Much like drinking alcohol!

Because birth control is one of those things where we can actually have some modicum of control over the outcome? If there were a pill that prevented assault or rape, do you think society would really be opposed to allowing people to take it? "We can't let men take this anti-assault pill, they need to take responsibility for their violent impulses!" Part of taking responsibility is minimizing the risk unplanned consequences, and that's what birth control offers. If you're strictly talking abortion, that's a different topic then what the OP is about, and indeed my own points about birth control in the form of pills or contraceptive devices.

 

[cyclohexane]

No, not at all.




What I would like to see, and something I think the linked article in the opening post talks about, is for both parents to take responsibility for a child when birth control fails.

And what l like to see is myself with a massive pile of money, along with unlimited hookers and blow. It's not about what you like to see - you can tell everyone to not be douchy. Trying to control morality is the reason why the GOP today is hated by all and has lost all credibility.

 

[nehalem256]

This goes for Zaap above you as well.

What is the first thing that happens to a single woman when they end up pregnant and decide to have the child? They grow up... Right? They live a more responsible life, because they can't act like kids anymore. Do you think they are more or less willing to pop out another kid after having one? To be a bit more protective in not only in their sexual partners, but a bit more protective while having sex. There is more at stake. They learn the lesson that sex is more than sexual pleasure. There is risk involved, and it's life altering. Now we've given women an out, they can alter the life of the fetus and eliminate it to escape that life changing event. But if they choose to keep it, it's life altering for the woman, right?

Now the question is this: If it's that life altering, why should it be taken so lightly? It has nothing to do with abstaining from sex. But it's a lot more than "in the heat of passion, I wasn't able to put on a condom. I wasn't able to control myself." Not being able to control yourself would land you in jail in most cases. If I'm not able to control my sexual urges and I didn't have a willing partner, I'd end up in jail for rape. If I'm not able to control my emotions like anger, I could end up in jail for assault.

Why is that sex gets a free pass? It's a think you should be able to enjoy provided you are being responsible. Much like drinking alcohol!

To address Zaap: The woman is likely to gain a respect for life after having a child. So while the child might have been unwanted. In more cases than none, the woman ends up wanting the child more than ever. How many times have you heard that a child was an accident. Doesn't mean the parents love them any less and probably gain that appreciation after the child is born, and are better off as humans for it.

You obviously missed this article:

Stepp has three children by three different fathers. The father of her eldest child, 10-year-old Isaiah, is serving 30 years in federal prison for armed robbery.

"He's met my son one time, when he was a baby. And he decided that he didn't want him," she says.

Stepp's middle child, 8-year-old Shyanne, usually sees her father every other weekend. But the father of her younger son is also in prison. Stepp says he's been behind bars for selling cocaine since she was pregnant. He has never met 1-year-old Makai.

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/11/155103593/to-beat-odds-poor-single-moms-need-wide-safety-net

 

[Jaskalas]

So you'd agree that helping minimize those consequences is a fairly important goal?

If there is no penalty, there is no deterrent.

If you minimize the consequences, are people likely to repeat the behavior?

Earth to Mr. Robot, we are humans. We are going to !@#$.

Atomic Playboy has it right.

How much greater access do we need? The only thing I can think of is over the counter birth control pills.

Maybe if we had more open and honest communication with teens about sex, and removed the societal stigma surrounding it, we could get them to behave in a more responsible manner instead of being all hush-hush about it.

Telling them it is a Sin is a non-starter.

 

[Victorian Gray]

And the reason that such a law was passed is that women were still killing their babies and dumping them in a river.

Perhaps if safe-haven laws had existed in the past there would have been less infanticide

"institutional foundling homes first emerged in late-14th-century Italy as distinct charitable initiatives of civic governments, confraternities, and guilds, and aimed to curb the exposure and to channel the abandonment of infants, most of whom were illegitimate."

"Foundlings were most often abandoned by single mothers (servants, slaves, prostitutes, and other marginal persons) who lacked the economic or social resources to raise a child on their own. Abandonment frequently took place within days of birth, and girls were more frequently abandoned than boys (Pullan 1994). Early Renaissance commentators wrote of large numbers of illegitimate infants being thrown in rivers and on trash heaps"

http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195399301/obo-9780195399301-0126.xml

 

[Ausm]

To avoid poverty a woman is better off marrying a guy with just a HS diploma than being a college educated single mom.

Can you possibly get data from a more Rightwing affiliation?

 

[Victorian Gray]

Study: Crime rates linked to out-of-wedlock births



The world is a soulless mess on a downward trajectory. This current liberal society is unsustainable and will collapse. What will rise up from the ashes will be more traditional and in line with Nehalem's thinking.

And it might even last a 1000 years....

 

[Victorian Gray]

One of the best post I have ever read.

Damn, but you are easily impressed.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Not just women, but also men.

Birth control is a wonderful thing when used properly. But when society takes a 16 year old girl, gives her the pill, then tells her its ok to have sex, what is she going to do? Chances are she is going to have sex.

Examples of "society" telling a 16 year old girl that it's ok for her to have sex at that age?

 

[Victorian Gray]

If there is no penalty, there is no deterrent.

If you minimize the consequences, are people likely to repeat the behavior

Ah the good old days

 

[Paratus]

Why is anyone bothering to argue with the OP?

Didn't he say in another thread he's in his early forties and a multiple grandfather?

He wouldn't know reproductive responsibility if it bit him on the ass.

 

[Munky]

Maybe if we had more open and honest communication with teens about sex, and removed the societal stigma surrounding it, we could get them to behave in a more responsible manner instead of being all hush-hush about it.

Telling them it is a Sin is a non-starter.

I keep hearing this argument often, and it comes off as trying hard to sweep the issue under the rug. We already have sex ed classes in schools, and have had them for a while. It's not like these people don't know what they're doing. The real issue is they don't think the undesired outcome will happen to them.

Just like speeding on the road. Everyone knows you're not supposed to do it, but because most of the time people get away with it, they keep doing it. Same thing with unprotected sex. We know the risks. But we do it despite our knowledge, not due to the lack thereof. And at least from my experience, stigma is not even registered in their mind when people are going at it.

 

[Oldgamer]

The truth is - if birth control were not available, women would be much less likely to put out. Texashiker would most certainly never get laid. Dunno why he bitching about birth control.

Ding ding ding! LOL