CrossCuT Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I can tell you that if I decided I wanted to have sex tomorrow, I wouldn't do it if I didn't have access to birth control. It's simple logic. Will there be some people stupid enough to have sex even if there is no birth control, despite the fact they don't want a baby? Yes. But they should face the consequences of their actions, not throw away the result because of their selfishness. I wouldnt have sex tomorrow even if I did have birth control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isidore_of_Seville Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I can tell you that if I decided I wanted to have sex tomorrow, I wouldn't do it if I didn't have access to birth control. It's simple logic. Will there be some people stupid enough to have sex even if there is no birth control, despite the fact they don't want a baby? Yes. But they should face the consequences of their actions, not throw away the result because of their selfishness. In this statement you have done two very silly things. First, you assumed that everyone in the world is just like you in terms of the ability to make decisions and their priorities in life. This is a bad mistake to make because it's not true and thinking that was will prevent you from being able to come up with a rational solution to any problem in society. Second, you just called the birth of a child a "consequence of someones selfish actions" Yikes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Once again I must disagree and call to question your ability to rationalize correlation and causality. You see, women were being objectified long before the introduction of the pill. If anything, it is the oversexualition of women that spawned the demand for the pill, not the other way around. I agree that the oversexualization of women is what caused the need for the pill. But the pill made objectification of women go to a level it never would have went without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 In this statement you have done two very silly things. First, you assumed that everyone in the world is just like you in terms of the ability to make decisions and their priorities in life. This is a bad mistake to make because it's not true and thinking that was will prevent you from being able to come up with a rational solution to any problem in society. Second, you just called the birth of a child a "consequence of someones selfish actions" Yikes... Once again, it appears you need to re-read posts twice in order to comprehend them. I admitted there were stupid people who don't have their priorities straight. I called abortion the consequence of someone's selfish actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I wouldnt have sex tomorrow even if I did have birth control. I wouldn't either. It was a hypothetical. Notice I said the key word "if". And start using frigging apostrophes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isidore_of_Seville Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Once again, it appears you need to re-read posts twice in order to comprehend them. I admitted there were stupid people who don't have their priorities straight. I called abortion the consequence of someone's selfish actions. That's definitely not what you said, but I can see now that's what you meant, and I won't beat you up over poor diction and sentence structure, it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havok579257 Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 They mean a lot to me! Can you please provide me with evidence that supports your claim so that it can be verified as a fact? ok, first show me there were more abortions when abortion was illegal since you claim this will happen if abortion becomes illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 That's definitely not what you said, but I can see now that's what you meant, and I won't beat you up over poor diction and sentence structure, it happens. When you're debating two people at once, and when one keeps editing his/her (I don't know if you're a girl or a guy) posts after sending them, I kind of have to reply quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Once again, it appears you need to re-read posts twice in order to comprehend them. I admitted there were stupid people who don't have their priorities straight. I called abortion the consequence of someone's selfish actions. So just because you cant supply evidence that Isodore is asking for doesnt mean you can start getting cranky and using ad hominems. Dont call people stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 So just because you cant supply evidence that Isodore is asking for doesnt mean you can start getting cranky and using ad hominems. Dont call people stupid. I do believe Isidore has been making snide remarks off and on throughout this conversation. Don't single me out because I disagree with you. And it's a stupid thing. Literally. If you don't want children but are going to have sex anyway, that's stupid in the most literal sense of the word. That's like me saying I don't like pain, but I'm going to shoot myself in the foot anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isidore_of_Seville Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I agree that the oversexualization of women is what caused the need for the pill. But the pill made objectification of women go to a level it never would have went without it. A plausible theory however once again you haven't presented anything to support it. In reality, the objectification of women has been steadily accelerating and becoming more and more visible for a very long time, and as it was clearly a problem well before the pill (and by 'well before' I don't just mean during Marilyn Monroe's era, I mean since literally the beginning of all society); that the pill has not created a situation where female objectification is any worse than it already was. What you're talking about is an over saturation of sexualization in the media and in society. This problem is more visible because of technology, but it is still the very same problem that has existed for centuries. Your argument is that the pill has made it even worse; you are wrong. The problem itself is no worse than it ever was, it's simply more visible because of technology and the spread of media, the major advancement of which happens to fall in like with the introduction of the pill, which makes for an understandable mistake on your part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 A plausible theory however once again you haven't presented anything to support it. In reality, the objectification of women has been steadily accelerating and becoming more and more visible for a very long time, and as it was clearly a problem well before the pill (and by 'well before' I don't just mean during Marilyn Monroe's era, I mean since literally the beginning of all society); that the pill has not created a situation where female objectification is any worse than it already was. What you're talking about is an over saturation of sexualization in the media and in society. This problem is more visible because of technology, but it is still the very same problem that has existed for centuries. Your argument is that the pill has made it even worse; you are wrong. The problem itself is no worse than it ever was, it's simply more visible because of technology and the spread of media, the major advancement of which happens to fall in like with the introduction of the pill, which makes for an understandable mistake on your part. Provide evidence that promiscuity was just as rampant before the pill as it is today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isidore_of_Seville Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I do believe Isidore has been making snide remarks off and on throughout this conversation. Don't single me out because I disagree with you. And it's a stupid thing. Literally. If you don't want children but are going to have sex anyway, that's stupid in the most literal sense of the word. That's like me saying I don't like pain, but I'm going to shoot myself in the foot anyway. Hundreds of animals engage in sexual activity for nonproductive reasons. It's not stupid, it's a natural desire. Natural desire is often difficult to overcome, look at the obesity rates in our country, for example. Our goal should not be to label some irresponsible and walk away. The goal should be to understand the issue and work on ways to overcome it, like education! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isidore_of_Seville Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Provide evidence that promiscuity was just as rampant before the pill as it is today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VIII_of_England Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isidore_of_Seville Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Provide evidence that promiscuity was just as rampant before the pill as it is today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concubinage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now