The main question here seems to be whether sex with a condom is a gateway drug that leads to crazed meth orgies. I'm voting no. But I can see how it would seem that way to somebody who had an awed, cartoonish perspective of all sexual activity.
I can't imagine a school actually having to pay for condoms out of their general budget. There are a zillion organizations and funds and programs who are thrilled to provide them if a school is interested.
Can nobody else think of a way that teenagers could buy condoms privately
at deep discounts?
Thanks for the backhanded insult, but I for one, don't have a cartoonish perspective, nor do I rely on porn for my sex ed. I'm not saying it's a gateway drug of any sort, I'm saying that, in all of the previous examples, when we have x number of people who don't have sex, but would with free condoms and the tacit endorsement of authority figures, and y number of people who have it anyways, the x is significant.
Furthermore, I stand by my claim that kids would forget, or decide to do without condoms at one time or another because, as Belail said, kids make shortsighted decisions. It'd be hard to convince me that anyone in America doesn't know the dangers of smoking, yet kids still go out back cause it's cool.
e946 wrote:-snip analogy-
People need to get over this "teens will have sex if we give them protection" thing. They have sex whether you tell them it's bad or not, much in the same way that a user is going to open the attatchment regardless of how hard you try to stop them. Thus, the point should be to ensure that the people who do ignore your warnings are as safe as possible in doing so.
Unfortunately virus protection/firewalls either scan your system or are always on sorts of things. If we were talking about hormonal therapy of some sort, that'd be a great analogy (cept hormonal doesn't prevent disease, unless I'm greatly mistaken...). If the virus software had to be loaded on from a disk you had to remember every time you browsed the internet, I'd agree.
Given the overwhelming response against me, I'm going to suggest this: there are many more kids not having sex than you think. Many, many more. I don't go to, but I know kids at and have been to the huge suburbian high schools, they're a dime a dozen around here. At one, you can damn near get high from walking around the halls -- but the number of kids who don't do pot at all
is, in my (quite unscientific) estimation, easily over half. It's simply that those who do are very prominent about it. I would argue the same thing in regards to teen sex, but now this is getting all anecdotal and needs some citations. I'm out of arguments except that there are more kids than people think (yes, even kids who go to high school) not having sex, but that would if the atmosphere changed, or if there was approval given. I then fall back on my suggestion that kids are lazy, shortsighted hormonally-driven crazies (most of the time) and would promptly forget their condoms or disdain there use because "honey if you love me you won't use one, and it'll feel so good!".