Should condoms be handed out

[Messianic Israelite]

The Bible teaches against illicit sex, but nowadays sex education in schools makes no distinction between sex within and without marriage. I understand that the reasoning behind handing out condoms is the argument that young people are going to have sex anyway outside of marriage, so why not ensure they are having sex "safely", but is that necessarily true. Is it true that young people would have sex anyway. I'm certain that this isn't the case for all young people, even though in this generation sex outside wedlock is commonplace. The Messiah constantly referred to his generation as an 'evil and adulterous generation' (Mark 8:38) but today people are committing adultery to the point that it isn't even considered to be sin anymore.

Yesterday, a news article came out which stated that a new scheme in Brighton is being initiated to hand out free condoms to under 25 year olds. The C-Card scheme - as it is known - which was launched last month is designed to encourage young people to become 'clued up on safer sex'. All you need is a C-card and you can pick up free condoms, lube and femidoms.

Some would argue, myself included, that handing out condoms for free is encouraging people to break the commandments, especially to have sex outside of marriage. Historically, the term coined used to describe people who were cohabitating and having sex not within the confines of marriage is 'living in sin' and this is true.

What are your thoughts about handing out condoms?

 

[Polymath257]

I think it is a very good idea and that the way religions treat sex is one of the big reasons people are rejecting religion.

If the Bible says that sex outside of marriage is wrong, then, I'm sorry, I think the Bible is evil.

 

[Altfish]

To answer the question...

Should condoms be handed out?

Most definitely, yes

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Yup. Religious beliefs around sex are culturally specific. Sex as a component of being human is universal. If your religion forbids it, it's your responsibility to follow through. It is society's responsibility to manage public health.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Bible teaches against illicit sex, but nowadays sex education in schools makes no distinction between sex within and without marriage. I understand that the reasoning behind handing out condoms is the argument that young people are going to have sex anyway outside of marriage, so why not ensure they are having sex "safely", but is that necessarily true. Is it true that young people would have sex anyway. I'm certain that this isn't the case for all young people, even though in this generation sex outside wedlock is commonplace. The Messiah constantly referred to his generation as an 'evil and adulterous generation' (Mark 8:38) but today people are committing adultery to the point that it isn't even considered to be sin anymore.

Yesterday, a news article came out which stated that a new scheme in Brighton is being initiated to hand out free condoms to under 25 year olds. The C-Card scheme - as it is known - which was launched last month is designed to encourage young people to become 'clued up on safer sex'. All you need is a C-card and you can pick up free condoms, lube and femidoms.

Some would argue, myself included, that handing out condoms for free is encouraging people to break the commandments, especially to have sex outside of marriage. Historically, the term coined used to describe people who were cohabitating and having sex not within the confines of marriage is 'living in sin' and this is true.

What are your thoughts about handing out condoms?

If you're not being forced to take condoms, your religious beliefs have been accommodated.

It's not your place to impose your personal beliefs on others, especially not when it's a matter of public health. Anyone who believes as you do can just not take the condoms.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

@Messianic Israelite - something to consider:

As someone who believes in accountable democracy, I demand a say in the rules, laws, and policies that I have to live under.

If public policy were to be dictated by the tenets of your religion, then I - an irreligious atheist - would demand a say in your religion.

Is this really what you want to see happen? Do you think your religion will be made better or worse by the influence of people like me?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Historically, the term coined used to describe people who were cohabitating and having sex not within the confines of marriage is 'living in sin' and this is true.

This is historically true only in recent history. In biblical times having sex *was* the marriage. But that's neither here nor there. We don't live in historical times. We live in the present, where the best qy to curb unwanted pregnancies and STDs is to make sex education and contraceptives accessible and available. Making them cost more doesn't encourage celibacy any more than making them unavailable at all does. It just punishes poorer people who can't afford regular contraceptive use.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, definitely they should be handed out. What some religion teaches is irrelevant. If you're opposed, don't take one but you should have no right to block sexual healthcare for others. Also, I have my own religion which is completely the opposite of yours in many ways. Concepts such as "sin" aren't a part of it.

 

[exchemist]

The Bible teaches against illicit sex, but nowadays sex education in schools makes no distinction between sex within and without marriage. I understand that the reasoning behind handing out condoms is the argument that young people are going to have sex anyway outside of marriage, so why not ensure they are having sex "safely", but is that necessarily true. Is it true that young people would have sex anyway. I'm certain that this isn't the case for all young people, even though in this generation sex outside wedlock is commonplace. The Messiah constantly referred to his generation as an 'evil and adulterous generation' (Mark 8:38) but today people are committing adultery to the point that it isn't even considered to be sin anymore.

Yesterday, a news article came out which stated that a new scheme in Brighton is being initiated to hand out free condoms to under 25 year olds. The C-Card scheme - as it is known - which was launched last month is designed to encourage young people to become 'clued up on safer sex'. All you need is a C-card and you can pick up free condoms, lube and femidoms.

Some would argue, myself included, that handing out condoms for free is encouraging people to break the commandments, especially to have sex outside of marriage. Historically, the term coined used to describe people who were cohabitating and having sex not within the confines of marriage is 'living in sin' and this is true.

What are your thoughts about handing out condoms?

I'm in favour.

Christianity has a long and inglorious record of trying to make people feel sex is sinful, when it is the most natural thing in the world. Historically there have been social reasons for this, of course, since bringing unwanted children into the world is highly irresponsible and can easily trap women, especially, in poverty and make it hard for them to find a permanent partner later on. But now that contraception is cheap, reliable and free of stigma (apart from the stigma some churches, including my own, try to attach to it), these reasons cease to be valid. What is sinful nowadays, is the irresponsibility of having of unprotected sex, when contraception is so easily available. There is just no excuse for it.

By the way, the Ten Commandments only prohibit adultery. The young people we are talking about here are not married so they are not adulterers.

 

[Sunstone]

I think if you advocate outlawing something solely for religious reasons then your religion should be outlawed. You have no right to impose your filthy guilt over sex on innocent young people.

 

[ChristineM]

The Bible teaches against illicit sex, but nowadays sex education in schools makes no distinction between sex within and without marriage. I understand that the reasoning behind handing out condoms is the argument that young people are going to have sex anyway outside of marriage, so why not ensure they are having sex "safely", but is that necessarily true. Is it true that young people would have sex anyway. I'm certain that this isn't the case for all young people, even though in this generation sex outside wedlock is commonplace. The Messiah constantly referred to his generation as an 'evil and adulterous generation' (Mark 8:38) but today people are committing adultery to the point that it isn't even considered to be sin anymore.

Yesterday, a news article came out which stated that a new scheme in Brighton is being initiated to hand out free condoms to under 25 year olds. The C-Card scheme - as it is known - which was launched last month is designed to encourage young people to become 'clued up on safer sex'. All you need is a C-card and you can pick up free condoms, lube and femidoms.

Some would argue, myself included, that handing out condoms for free is encouraging people to break the commandments, especially to have sex outside of marriage. Historically, the term coined used to describe people who were cohabitating and having sex not within the confines of marriage is 'living in sin' and this is true.

What are your thoughts about handing out condoms?

Sex happens, it happened a long, long, long time before religious was ever thought of. What right has religion got to limit nature?

Time and money would be much better spent in educating people about safe sex rather then pushing it underground

 

[pearl]

It is society's responsibility to manage public health.

I agree. It is not up to the public schools to teach morality. Many churches have a sex education program which teaches Human Sexuality: A Catholic Perspective for Education and Lifelong Learning. the same physiology but with the moral component. Of course it became controversial. As far as the Bible is concerned the Song of Solomon clearly does not condemn sex.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you don't want to have "illicit sex" no one is forcing you to (hopefully). You could even pick up some condoms and never use them. Bear in mind that if you do so that will be seen as success by the people behind this program.

So yes to free condom distribution.

 

[ChristineM]

If you don't want to have "illicit sex" no one is forcing you to (hopefully). You could even pick up some condoms and never use them. Bear in mind that if you do so that will be seen as success by the people behind this program.

So yes to free condom distribution.

If you dont use them, keep an eye on the use by date... Just in case, you never know if you will need them

 

[ChristineM]

I agree. It is not up to the public schools to teach morality. Many churches have a sex education program which teaches Human Sexuality: A Catholic Perspective for Education and Lifelong Learning. the same physiology but with the moral component. Of course it became controversial. As far as the Bible is concerned the Song of Solomon clearly does not condemn sex.

Why us it not up to public schools to teach children?

What fave churches the right to dictate morality, it is after all, a human (and some animals) concept that existed long before churches.

If churches feel they need to educate on non religious matters they would do well to stick to the curriculum and not impose their own biases

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I agree. It is not up to the public schools to teach morality. Many churches have a sex education program which teaches Human Sexuality: A Catholic Perspective for Education and Lifelong Learning. the same physiology but with the moral component. Of course it became controversial. As far as the Bible is concerned the Song of Solomon clearly does not condemn sex.

It may not be up to schools to teach morality, but it is the domain of schools to teach facts about science and health. Obviously many parents are horrible at teaching their children about sex, which produces messed up kids who have no idea what they're doing. There's people who have HIV who got it because they weren't taught the facts about it and didn't know how to protect themselves. Since so many parents are too stupid, schools must do it for them.

 

[Nakosis]

The Bible teaches against illicit sex, but nowadays sex education in schools makes no distinction between sex within and without marriage. I understand that the reasoning behind handing out condoms is the argument that young people are going to have sex anyway outside of marriage, so why not ensure they are having sex "safely", but is that necessarily true. Is it true that young people would have sex anyway. I'm certain that this isn't the case for all young people, even though in this generation sex outside wedlock is commonplace. The Messiah constantly referred to his generation as an 'evil and adulterous generation' (Mark 8:38) but today people are committing adultery to the point that it isn't even considered to be sin anymore.

Yesterday, a news article came out which stated that a new scheme in Brighton is being initiated to hand out free condoms to under 25 year olds. The C-Card scheme - as it is known - which was launched last month is designed to encourage young people to become 'clued up on safer sex'. All you need is a C-card and you can pick up free condoms, lube and femidoms.

Some would argue, myself included, that handing out condoms for free is encouraging people to break the commandments, especially to have sex outside of marriage. Historically, the term coined used to describe people who were cohabitating and having sex not within the confines of marriage is 'living in sin' and this is true.

What are your thoughts about handing out condoms?

I suppose, if a guy can't afford a condom, about $0.60. Though I'd think a guy who can't afford a condom ought to focus on something besides keeping his willie happy.

 

[pearl]

Why us it not up to public schools to teach children?

Public schools do not teach morality, it is not their responsibility nor within their authority, and for good reason, whose morality would they teach?

What fave churches the right to dictate morality,

That is the business of churches, to guide in matters of faith and morals.

If churches feel they need to educate on non religious matters they would do well to stick to the curriculum and not impose their own biases

That's a ridiculous comment, how one understands and lives her/his sexuality is a religious matter.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I agree. It is not up to the public schools to teach morality.

I'm not so sure. At the very least, public schools should instill values, character, and ethics.

... but religious teachings that are only justified by the fact that they're religious teachings really have nothing to do with morality, values, character, or ethics.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you dont use them, keep an eye on the use by date... Just in case, you never know if you will need them

And though you saw it in old coming of age movies, don't keep them in your wallet. A warm humid container will increase your chances of failure. Plus it molds a tacky ring in the leather. Have a bit of class.