Sex strike

[Koldo]

Now it's my turn to start criticizing a ton of posts. Just watch this.

And if I'm not prepared to have a child at all? Birth control is essential and abortion is a necessary backup to that.

Sex strikes go all the way back to Lysistrata.

'Necessary' is a matter of perspective.

Well reproduction is the #1 biological function of sex. Fun is secondary.

Which has no relevancy even if true.

Nope, it fails quite often. You do not seem to understand human nature.

You should read again his post in the part he said: "Its peoples failure to adhere to abstinence that has a high failure rate."

If you discuss ahead of time, that is planning for the consequences. Sorry, but abortion is something that should be available since birth control does, in fact, fail occasionally.

And sorry, but not having sex, especially when in a relationship, is not an option. If you can't see that, then I don't know what else to say.

One could argue that one shouldn't be in a relationship if they are not ready to have ( more ) children, unless they are willing to do a vasectomy or a tubal ligation.

Depends on what, exactly, you mean by abstinence. Is oral sex abstinence? How about mutual masturbation?

It seems to be that demanding people be abstinent when they don't want to have children is irrational and a strategy doomed to failure. Sex is way too important as a binder in relationships. Yes, even those married people who don't want to have children.

To be honest, as a binder it is a crappy one. A whole lot of things come first, mostly things that revolve around being an actual friend to your spouse. Although the lack of sex is an indicative that something is off, the presence of sexual activity says nothing about relationships.

And to get to that point, I suspect a fair amount of sex is done to make that bond.

I wonder how you have reached this conclusion.

From the OP, you did say.....
"Hmmmm so she's encouraging women to not have sex to negate the risk of pregnancy?
Congratulations, you just backdoored your way into sexual morality! You shouldn't be having sex with anyone, your not prepared to have a child with!
I hope all liberal women join Alyssa Milano and support her sex strike. She might make moral people out of pro-choice supporters after all! "

I underlined the portions which treat sex for fun as immoral.

There is an interpretation problem in your post.

I never said that.

All I said was the reason sex exist is to reproduce.

Fun is a byproduct, therefore the secondary purpose.

Now most people do have sex more for fun than reproduction. I never denied that or said it shouldn't be so.

But it does not negate the biological fact that sex is for reproduction, not fun.

How do you determine what's the purpose of sex ? Explain the method .

Throughout history extremely poor families have had children, think yourself lucky they have, the human race has survived.

In many cases, a poor family has children to survive, the child growing to become a productive member of the family is the only method of survival. It also employes the human need to pass on their genes to future generations?

Remember, not all people live in the affluent west.

So many problems on this post...

For starters, when a family needs to have children to survive that tends to end up with child labor. I don't think this is something that you would support, right ?

Ergo Abortion is just a form of birth control for the irresponsible and unaware. Taxpayers must pay the bills for people's idea of fun. I wonder when the government will buy me a new snowboard so I do can have government funded fun.

How come ? Do you mean BC always work ? Are you one of the unaware ?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You should read again his post in the part he said: "Its peoples failure to adhere to abstinence that has a high failure rate."

I saw that, he ignored his own claim. He himself said that abstinence fails, cognitive dissonance rules at times.

 

[ChristineM]

So many problems on this post...

For starters, when a family needs to have children to survive that tends to end up with child labor. I don't think this is something that you would support, right ?

So many yet you only cited one opinion

It happens, we dont all live in the affluent west and should not shut our eyes to the poverty elsewhere just because we dont like it

 

[Enoch07]

Which has no relevancy even if true.

Sure it does. When regarding a woman calling for the sex strike to oppose the heartbeat bill which puts extra restrictions on abortions. It's relevant because using a sex strike to oppose an abortion restrictive bill is poetic. Because a sex strike makes abortion not even necessary. Do you see the irony?

How do you determine what's the purpose of sex ? Explain the method .

Biology, semen + egg = fertilization = new human. To put it simply.

 

[Salvador]

And if I'm not prepared to have a child at all? Birth control is essential and abortion is a necessary backup to that.

Sex strikes go all the way back to Lysistrata.

Soon, there might be a birth control pill for men; this male contraceptive pill has passed phase one clinical test trials. A male contraceptive pill would be a far better form of birth control than having women with unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

Effects of 28 Days of Oral Dimethandrolone Undecanoate in Healthy Men: A Prototype Male Pill

 

[Salvador]

Alyssa Milano's sex strike is misguided. Here's what actually might work (opinion) - CNN

Hmmmm so she's encouraging women to not have sex to negate the risk of pregnancy?

Congratulations, you just backdoored your way into sexual morality! You shouldn't be having sex with anyone, your not prepared to have a child with!

I hope all liberal women join Alyssa Milano and support her sex strike. She might make moral people out of pro-choice supporters after all!

A male contraceptive pill, Dimethandrolone undecanoate, might soon be available for men who want to have sexual intercourse without the risk of there being a human fetus conceived. If this male contraceptive pill were to become available on the market, then sexually active men could share in the responsibility of taking birth control along with their opposite sex partners

 

[Koldo]

Sure it does. When regarding a woman calling for the sex strike to oppose the heartbeat bill which puts extra restrictions on abortions. It's relevant because using a sex strike to oppose an abortion restrictive bill is poetic. Because a sex strike makes abortion not even necessary. Do you see the irony?

Sure, but it has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

Biology, semen + egg = fertilization = new human. To put it simply.

And how do you derive purpose from that ?

 

[Koldo]

So many yet you only cited one opinion

It happens, we dont all live in the affluent west and should not shut our eyes to the poverty elsewhere just because we dont like it

Hey, I had a lot of posts to criticize!

Is poverty an excuse to exploit child labor now ?

Don't worry, I will list the other problems:

1) Why should one regard the human race surviving as such a commendable thing ?

2) Why frame poor people that keep having children that they can't properly support as doing something good ?

3) What's up with mentioning people's need to pass their genes ? Why is that even relevant ?

 

[Revoltingest]

There is an interpretation problem in your post.

I saw the potential for that.
So I quoted the salient portion of his post.
After re-reading it, I still detect moralizing against recreational sex.

 

[Koldo]

I saw the potential for that.
So I quoted the salient portion of his post.
After re-reading it, I still detect moralizing against recreational sex.

It is not moralizing against recreational sex as a whole. It is moralizing against doing recreational sex with people that you wouldn't have a child with. It is nothing more than saying that you should be really picky about who you have sex with.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is not moralizing against recreational sex as a whole. It is moralizing against doing recreational sex with people that you wouldn't have a child with. It is nothing more than saying that you should be really picky about who you have sex with.

Quibbling with me, eh.
Let's call it detente.

 

[Shad]

How come ? Do you mean BC always work ? Are you one of the unaware ?

I never said it always works. Beside if it is general knowledge BC is not guaranteed to work (the companies do not provide such a warranty should tell people something.) that is still a problem for the individual.

How come what? Most abortion are done for no reason other than financial situations which the individual is fully aware pf before having sex. Ergo is BC.

 

[Shad]

Yes, in a sense, but not just for the irresponsible and unaware. It's for any pregnant female seeking a safe, legal abortion for any reason.

I do not support abortion for any reason that pops into someone's head.

Maybe his condom broke,

Use multiple forms of BC or use a product that is not prone to breaking.

or she was raped by her uncle,

This is rare, rape and incest (separate or both). I am willing to compromise on this point.

or her parents armed her with nothing better than an abstinence-only type of sex education.

This does not seem realistic in a 1st world nation with public education. Beside this would be the parent's problem

You might as well start discussing baby names when you take that last approach with your daughters, as Sarah Palin learned. What did they name that baby? Tripp?

I do not know much about her after McCain.

Money well spent. If the mother doesn't want this baby born, forcing her to deliver it seems like a bad idea.

Do not want a child, avoid sex. Problem solved.

Every abortion prevented is another unwanted baby born into the world.

Every none rape or incest abortion is a mulligan paid for the public for stupid people acting irresponsibly.

Unfunding abortion and agencies like Planned Parenthood because of the dominant religion's beliefs is a particularly poor idea for multiple reasons, many already given, not the least of which is allowing the American church to impose its will on all Americans, including those that do not share its values, by using the power of government to essentially turn these women into incubators for the church.

I do not agree nor support religion centered arguments.

For me, opposing that is a no-brainer. It's not about whether any given woman should get an abortion or not, nor what her reasons are. It's about who gets to make the decision - the private citizen, or the church and state.

Who made the decision to have sex? Individual, church or state? Why are the later involved in abortion when not involved in the first choice? Again just a mulligan for stupid people

And if its money you're concerned about, keep in mind that if we allow pregnant teens to get abortions and continue their educations rather than dropping out to wait tables and raise babies, you'll get your taxes back in spades when she goes on to become a middle class professional rather than an unskilled, uneducated, single mother living in poverty.

Cost isn't an issue for me. It is who pays for the stupidity of other people.

Those are your values, but not mine. If public dollars prevent unwanted babies from being born, I'll gladly chip in to support the cost.

Government's role isn't to protect stupid people from the repercussions of their actions.

I'd also be willing to underwrite a share of her college tuition and her first small business start-up loan. Developing human potential and expanding opportunity for all are prominent liberal and humanist values.

Start a charity then.

Conceded? I freely admit it. Abortion is a form of birth control. That's its purpose.

Ergo it's medical application is rare and it is just a mulligan for the stupid. When will government provide me with free services if my loans are over my head? None....

That's why abortions are done - to prevent an unwanted birth.

No it is a mulligan for the stupid that put next to no thought before and during the act of sex. Do not want a kid? Do not have sex. Simple really.

That's why we want to keep it a safe and legal option. American girls and women including Christian ones will continue having abortions whether they are recriminalized in America or not. Some will go to other countries, some will visit underground abortion clinics.

So?

 

[Shad]

Colour it red and bring in big bold letters

TENSION SHEET

And they would be on to a winner

View attachment 29066

Only works for Rimmer related stress and Kippers

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Biology says so. The primary purpose you have sexual organs and a reproductive system, is to reproduce. Fun is secondary.

Supposing one lives some 80+ years, and has the average two children. Reproduction is far from being the main function or purpose of sexual activity.
Out of a sex life of some 65 years, only two involve procreation. only some ( 1.3% ) of those years.
Or 2 out of 3380 sex acts, if it is only indulged on average once a week. (0.06%)
Reproduction is clearly secondary, the act of love , bonding and share pleasure is Primary.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I do not support abortion for any reason that pops into someone's head.



Use multiple forms of BC or use a product that is not prone to breaking.



This is rare, rape and incest (separate or both). I am willing to compromise on this point.



This does not seem realistic in a 1st world nation with public education. Beside this would be the parent's problem



I do not know much about her after McCain.




Do not want a child, avoid sex. Problem solved.



Every none rape or incest abortion is a mulligan paid for the public for stupid people acting irresponsibly.



I do not agree nor support religion centered arguments.



Who made the decision to have sex? Individual, church or state? Why are the later involved in abortion when not involved in the first choice? Again just a mulligan for stupid people



Cost isn't an issue for me. It is who pays for the stupidity of other people.



Government's role isn't to protect stupid people from the repercussions of their actions.



Start a charity then.





Ergo it's medical application is rare and it is just a mulligan for the stupid. When will government provide me with free services if my loans are over my head? None....



No it is a mulligan for the stupid that put next to no thought before and during the act of sex. Do not want a kid? Do not have sex. Simple really.



So?

That is all unrealistic
People do, and will continue to have sex.
Girls and women will have unwanted pregnancies. { for whatever reason)
Neither they, nor the state, nor anyone else needs the resultant population increase.
Terminations of those pregnancies are necessary.

If the state forces the carrying of a pregnancy to full term, against a female's wishes,
The state should look after and pay for the upkeep of that child.

Moral codes and religion do not come into it.

 

[ChristineM]

Hey, I had a lot of posts to criticize!

Is poverty an excuse to exploit child labor now ?

Don't worry, I will list the other problems:

1) Why should one regard the human race surviving as such a commendable thing ?

2) Why frame poor people that keep having children that they can't properly support as doing something good ?

3) What's up with mentioning people's need to pass their genes ? Why is that even relevant ?

Jolly good.

No but it happens, .but keep your eyes shut and it will magically disappear.

1 Who said if was commendable? Oh you put it in there for sake of argument... Ok, have fun with that.

2 who is saying its good? Oh you put it in there for sake of argument... Ok, again

3 read some biology and psychology papers to see how important it is for diversity. And of course it was relevant to the question i answered. I dont suppose you bothered reading that

 

[Enoch07]

Supposing one lives some 80+ years, and has the average two children. Reproduction is far from being the main function or purpose of sexual activity.

Avg 2 births per family is not a sustainable birth rate for any species. You need to at least maintain or superpass 3+ births per pair of species to have a thriving population. That is basic biology/evolution.

Also you are mistaken. I did not say that reproduction was the only purpose. Just that it is the primary purpose. It has other purpose, but they are not as important.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Avg 2 births per family is not a sustainable birth rate for any species. You need to at least maintain or superpass 3+ births per pair of species to have a thriving population. That is basic biology/evolution.

Also you are mistaken. I did not say that reproduction was the only purpose. Just that it is the primary purpose. It has other purpose, but they are not as important.

The world is already over populated by humans.
Two births per couple would be a sensible way to painlessly reduce the population to a sustainable level. which would also be alleviated by those who have no children. We had a thriving population in the 1960's when the words population was half that of now.
My figures show that, for a majority of people, reproduction is by far the least important factor in peoples relationships during their life time.
It is totally unrealistic and draconian to ban terminations.

 

[Koldo]

I never said it always works. Beside if it is general knowledge BC is not guaranteed to work (the companies do not provide such a warranty should tell people something.) that is still a problem for the individual.

How come what? Most abortion are done for no reason other than financial situations which the individual is fully aware pf before having sex. Ergo is BC.

There is no doubt abortion is generally used for BC. I dare say it is not even for financial reasons most of the time since you can give the baby for adoption after it is born with minimal financial hassle. Nevertheless, my question is:
How come abortion is a form of BC only for the unaware and the irresponsible considering other forms of BC can fail even at perfect usage ?