• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trigger warning: Does 100% birth control exist?

Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
columbus said:
Nonsense.
People who do Choose against potentially fertile sex don't get pregnant.
Fetal children aren't some kind of parasite drifting around looking for a host to infect. They are the result of a rather specific Choice. Sorry if the facts don't support your agenda.
Tom
Click to expand...
Of course they do. People "choose" not to get pregnant and yet accidents happen. They drink too much. The get carried away. They do it "just once". People are not perfect.

Fetal children may not be parasites, but they are not "human beings" in the eye of the law, or in the eyes of all people. I do not think that the argument can be proved either way. As it is the law right now favors the rights of the pregnant woman. If you want to change things the burden of proof is upon the anti-abortion people.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
columbus said:
Neither of those suggests that my point is anything but factual.

Talking to pro-feticide rights people often feels like talking to creationists. Simply refusing to see facts that interfere with your agenda doesn't make them go away.
Tom
Click to expand...
You presented no facts. And you are projecting. I could just as well call you "pro-slavery". It is just as justified as your pro-feticide remark.
 
Kangaroo Feathers

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
columbus said:
Neither of those suggests that my point is anything but factual.

Talking to pro-feticide rights people often feels like talking to creationists. Simply refusing to see facts that interfere with your agenda doesn't make them go away.
Tom
Click to expand...
I don't know what the heck you think you're talking about, but the point everyone else was discussing when you butted in was abstinence only education. See post #34 Trigger warning: Does 100% birth control exist?)

Abstinence only education which, as the articles I provided shows, is actually really bad at reducing unwanted pregnancy. If you are talking about anything else, you are off topic, if you ARE talking about AOE, and claiming it is effective, it is you that is denying reality. No third option.
 
C

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Kangaroo Feathers said:
If you are talking about anything else, you are off topic, if you ARE talking about AOE, and claiming it is effective, it is you that is denying reality. No third option.
Click to expand...
The topic of the OP is 100% effective birth control.
Changing the subject to the dreadful track record of substituting "abstinence only" for comprehensive sex ed, starting early, is what's off topic.
There is a 100% effective birth control method, and you know it.
Tom
 
Kangaroo Feathers

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
columbus said:
The topic of the OP is 100% effective birth control.
Changing the subject to the dreadful track record of substituting "abstinence only" for comprehensive sex ed, starting early, is what's off topic.
There is a 100% effective birth control method, and you know it.
Tom
Click to expand...
Except that telling people "just say no" doesn't actually equate to people ACTUALLY "just saying no". Which is the point we're discussing. No one said "abstinence doesn't work", the point, though, is that relying on abstinence by itself is a really ineffective method, because people who are relying on it don't often STAY abstinent.

So, OK, yes, TECHNICALLY, abstinence is 100% effective. If you don't have sex, you won't get pregnant. Happy? Now that we've addressed that, shall we move on to what's PRACTICAL, rather than feel good theoreticals? Hmmm?

TL:dr "if you don't have car accidents you don'tr need seat belts", while true, is not actually a good argument against seat belts.
 
C

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Subduction Zone said:
You presented no facts. And you are projecting. I could just as well call you "pro-slavery". It is just as justified as your pro-feticide remark.
Click to expand...
The fact is that abstaining from potentially fertile sex will prevent pregnancy.
You could call me pro-slavery if you want to be wrong. Just as you can say there's no way to prevent pregnancy.

Or, if monkeys evolved into humans there wouldn't still be monkeys.
Say anything you want to. But reality is what doesn't go away when people don't believe it.
Tom
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
columbus said:
The fact is that abstaining from potentially fertile sex will prevent pregnancy.
You could call me pro-slavery if you want to be wrong. Just as you can say there's no way to prevent pregnancy.

Or, if monkeys evolved into humans there wouldn't still be monkeys.
Say anything you want to. But reality is what doesn't go away when people don't believe it.
Tom
Click to expand...
And the fact is that people cannot totally abstain from having sex. Your so called solution is a failure that leads to increased abortions.

And I would be less wrong in calling you pro-slavery than you would be in calling others pro-fetuscide. Your method has been tested. It does not work. Why can you not reason rationally on this topic? In other areas you do not have this problem.

I too want to see fewer abortions. That is why I am pro-Planned Parenthood. If you were reasoning rationally you would be too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top