Distributing Condoms in School

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
mikek
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:25 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby mikek » Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:58 pm UTC

I live in the UK and I am actually really surprised that such a developed country wouldn't provide condoms to teenagers. Teenagers fuck. They will do it whether or not you provide them with condoms. If you provide them with free condoms and educate them on why and how to use them then they will, drastically reducing STI transmission and unwanted pregnancy.

It seems pretty clear-cut...
everything under the sun is in tune
but the sun is eclipsed by the moon

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:09 pm UTC

The country in question has withdrawn federal funding from any sex-ed course that does not teach abstinence as the only safe sex option for the last 8 years. So don't get your hopes too high for any kind of modern, effectual sex education. Heck, my sex-ed classes were lame, but it's scary that they were better than those currently being taught.

Thankfully, abstinence only sex-ed has been shown to be completely ineffectual - much like rational thought might suggest. Hopefully the next administration will listen to their own findings and sponsor the change.

trickster721
Posts: 282
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:26 am UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby trickster721 » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:13 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:
trickster721 wrote:Where do you live that it's illegal for teenagers under the age of consent to have sex with each other?
There are states like Idaho where it is illegal.

Seems to me that it doesn't specify either way. It's clearly a blue law, in any case. I assume that it is actually illegal to rape a male in Idaho.

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:15 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
Alasseo wrote:I argue that people will have sex, like it, and drop the condom. When you first get the car you swear you'll buckle up every time, but it's just a quick(ie) ride down to the store, nothing could happen. You'll just drive safe, right?


I feel odd arguing this point further since you appear to have given up, but...

I would argue that among people who were too scared to have sex without a condom, relatively few would later eschew them, because the type of person who holds back from sex due to those type of fears is the type of person who actually thinks ahead and appraises risks.

However, many more shortsighted people for whom acquiring condoms was too much effort/expense/embarassment would start using them when they were free and easy to acquire.


Add apparently, from the statistics, you're correct.
Belial wrote:
Alasseo wrote:I'd never suggest or support the introduction because of my experiences so far, but I will readily admit that my age limits that significantly..


Can you clarify what you mean by this? Which introduction? What experiences?

The introduction of condoms into schools, and my experiences over the last 4 or 5 years as something of the guy everyone talks to about their problems. I'm charismatic, what can I say?

trickster721 wrote:
Alasseo wrote:
trickster721 wrote: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.
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.

So you are suggesting that teenagers enjoying consensual sex with each other is inherently bad, probably on some sort of religious grounds, since that's the only ground there is. Why should we waste time arguing with you when you're being deliberately irrational? I could be using this time for sex.


Please reread my argument? I don't see how you can possibly draw that conclusion from what I said there.

Now, later I said that from that same experience mentioned above, most kids are not ready for it when they think they are, but I have yet to see the long-term effects of it, except a very few cases of people I know older than myself.

FAKE EDIT: Bloody thing didn't go through the first time cause of a new post. Expect another one soon to prevent this from reaching epic proportions.
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:20 pm UTC

The introduction of condoms into schools, and my experiences over the last 4 or 5 years as something of the guy everyone talks to about their problems. I'm charismatic, what can I say?


Erm. You realize that, on top of being severely anecdotal, any trends you noticed across 4 to 5 years of of your own high school experience would also be affected by the fact that you were progressing upward in year the entire time? Comparing the sexual activities of 8th and 9th graders to the activities of graduating seniors, the introduction of condoms is going to be the absolute least of the change factors.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:21 pm UTC

trickster721 wrote:
Azrael wrote:
trickster721 wrote:Where do you live that it's illegal for teenagers under the age of consent to have sex with each other?
There are states like Idaho where it is illegal.
Seems to me that it doesn't specify either way. It's clearly a blue law, in any case. I assume that it is actually illegal to rape a male in Idaho.
How is this unclear?

18-6101. RAPE DEFINED. Rape is defined as the penetration, however
slight, of the oral, anal or vaginal opening with the perpetrator's penis
accomplished with a female under any one (1) of the following circumstances:
1. Where the female is under the age of eighteen (18) years.

Penetrating a woman under the age of 18 with a penis is rape in Idaho. The fact that it's a blue law is equally as irrelevant to the legality of the act as the legality of the act is to this discussion.
Last edited by Azrael on Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:32 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:24 pm UTC

Yeah, by a few states' definitions of rape, a man cannot be raped. Ever. Sexually assaulted, yes, forcibly sodomized, yes, but never raped.

It is some fucked up bullshit.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:28 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
The introduction of condoms into schools, and my experiences over the last 4 or 5 years as something of the guy everyone talks to about their problems. I'm charismatic, what can I say?


Erm. You realize that, on top of being severely anecdotal, any trends you noticed across 4 to 5 years of of your own high school experience would also be affected by the fact that you were progressing upward in year the entire time? Comparing the sexual activities of 8th and 9th graders to the activities of graduating seniors, the introduction of condoms is going to be the absolute least of the change factors.


I said everyone and I meant it. :) I've talked to a range from middle schoolers to high school grads (and a smattering of college age kids, but that's rare for obvious reasons) for the time period mentioned. I've also mentioned the anecdotal nature of my experiences several times now. I think it's fairly obvious either I'm more gullible than I believe or my sample group is for some reason skewed.

I also happen to be prolific reader, and things like this interest me.
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:34 pm UTC

I'm going to guess that your sample group is skewed by your own progressing age. Not skewed in any predictable way, mind you, just shot to hell in general because there are way, way too many variables. Your own age, the age of the people you're surrounded by, the age of most of the people who talk to you (because I'm going to assume that most of your input in any given year came from people closer to your own age, regardless of how wide your range was), the shift in the group of people who are willing to talk to someone removed from their own age and peer group, the shift in the information people are willing to share truthfully and unrestrictedly with someone removed from their own age and peer group...it all adds up to not really being able to say anything.

Add to that your own confirmation bias (I'm guessing you're not a fan of premarital sex, and are unfavorably inclined toward measures you see as increasing it), and you come up with a data set that means...pretty much nothing, even on an anecdotal level.

Not trying to be offensive or anything, just collating data, as they say.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:39 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote: and my experiences over the last 4 or 5 years as something of the guy everyone talks to about their problems.
I'm glad you clarified this before I decided to be rude and question what "peer counselor" meant. Your anecdotal evidence is not a valid addition to an argument about the logic behind a discussion.

As for the quality of the anecdote: You unofficial capacity means your sample set is probably:

a) small - actually, very likely it's tiny.
b) not diverse - even compared to how not diverse a typical small suburban high school inherently is.
c) skewed by volunteerism.
d) biased by your morals - which you've even said were unusual and clearly against pre-marital sex.

Any one of these can be pointed at as a reason why your experience differs from scientific norm.


EDIT: Shit, ninja'd by the human with the charming hat. Sorry if this sounds like we're ganging up on you.

EDIT Part Deux: Silly me, I seem to have made a typo spelling out "fine gentleman".

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:51 pm UTC

Belial wrote:I'm going to guess that your sample group is skewed by your own progressing age. Not skewed in any predictable way, mind you, just shot to hell in general because there are way, way too many variables. Your own age, the age of the people you're surrounded by, the age of most of the people who talk to you (because I'm going to assume that most of your input in any given year came from people closer to your own age, regardless of how wide your range was), the shift in the group of people who are willing to talk to someone removed from their own age and peer group, the shift in the information people are willing to share truthfully and unrestrictedly with someone removed from their own age and peer group...it all adds up to not really being able to say anything.

Add to that your own confirmation bias (I'm guessing you're not a fan of premarital sex, and are unfavorably inclined toward measures you see as increasing it), and you come up with a data set that means...pretty much nothing, even on an anecdotal level.

Not trying to be offensive or anything, just collating data, as they say.


I understand your points, and once the statistics came out, I admitted as much, yeah? Just for the record, at any given time, about half or a little less was from my own year. While obviously I can't be a particularly reliable measure of the validity of what people tell me (does that parse right?) I do confirm things from third parties when I can and I'm usually told the truth and usually know when I'm not, but not always.

Oh, and this is waaaay off topic by now. I'll shut up given that statistics have invalidated my reasoning..

FAKE EDIT: Damnit, quit posting while I'm typing.
Azrael wrote:
Alasseo wrote: and my experiences over the last 4 or 5 years as something of the guy everyone talks to about their problems.
I'm glad you clarified this before I decided to be rude and question what "peer counselor" meant. Your anecdotal evidence is not a valid addition to an argument about the logic behind a discussion.

As for the quality of the anecdote: You unofficial capacity means your sample set is probably:

a) small - actually, very likely it's tiny.
b) not diverse - even compared to how not diverse a typical small suburban high school inherently is.
c) skewed by volunteerism.
d) biased by your morals - which you've even said were unusual and clearly against pre-marital sex.

Any one of these can be pointed at as a reason why your experience differs from scientific norm.


EDIT: Shit, ninja'd by the human with the charming hat. Sorry if this sounds like we're ganging up on you.

EDIT Part Deux: Silly me, I seem to have made a typo spelling out "fine gentleman".


Partially a restatement of what was said above, but a) under a hundred personally, plenty more at a removed stance. b) likely the biggest issue, yeah (though where did your statistics come from?) c) could you expand on this? d) The end result is a bit unusual, yes, but I'm not against pre-marital sex per-se..but that's another discussion.
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:59 pm UTC

I understand your points, and once the statistics came out, I admitted as much, yeah?


Oh, you did, but you continued to maintain (or at least, so I gathered) that you were still against the introduction of condoms based on your own experience. So I'm undermining that too. :)

c) could you expand on this?


At the risk of ninja-ing Azrael again, volunteer bias is a problem in sociological statistics that arises when you collect information only from people who volunteer that information. Specifically, the problem is that the subset of the population who readily volunteers that information is not necessarily representative of the entire population.

For example, if you were polling the democratic primaries on a volunteer basis, and found that, within your sample, Clinton supporters outnumbered Obama supporters by 2 to 1, it might mean that Clinton supporters actually outnumber Obama supporters. But due to volunteer bias, it might just mean that Clinton supporters are twice as likely to volunteer for polls.

I have primaries on the brain, shut up.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:02 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:but a) under a hundred personally, plenty more at a removed stance.

You're saying you know (close) to 100 people well enough that you are personally cognizant of how much sex they have, the reasons that they have/do not have sex and their method/use of birth control? And that you are at least reliably aware of those metrics for plenty (another 100?) more?

I call shenanigans.

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:16 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
I understand your points, and once the statistics came out, I admitted as much, yeah?


Oh, you did, but you continued to maintain (or at least, so I gathered) that you were still against the introduction of condoms based on your own experience. So I'm undermining that too. :)

c) could you expand on this?


At the risk of ninja-ing Azrael again, volunteer bias is a problem in sociological statistics that arises when you collect information only from people who volunteer that information. Specifically, the problem is that the subset of the population who readily volunteers that information is not representative of the entire population.

For example, if you were polling the democratic primaries on a volunteer basis, and found that, within your sample, Clinton supporters outnumbered Obama supporters by 2 to 1, it might mean that Clinton supporters actually outnumber Obama supporters. But due to volunteer bias, it might just mean that Clinton supporters are twice as likely to volunteer for polls.

I have primaries on the brain, shut up.


Ah, yes, I understand the volunteer bias explained that way, but he said it in such a way that it was because I was a volunteer, it skewed it somehow. Also, I'll admit defeat on the internet on a statistical basis, but it'll take a bit more to convince me to change my belief structure..

Azrael wrote:
Alasseo wrote:but a) under a hundred personally, plenty more at a removed stance.

You're saying you know (close) to 100 people well enough that you are personally cognizant of how much sex they have, the reasons that they have/do not have sex and their method/use of birth control? And that you are at least reliably aware of those metrics for plenty (another 100?) more?

I call shenanigans.


Well, er, yeah. I don't know how reliably once we get past the ones I personally know, certainly no less reliably than those who provided their own anecdotal evidence to support the countervailing opinion.

I thought we agreed that I lost that argument, though? *hides*
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
segmentation fault
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:10 pm UTC
Location: Nu Jersey
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby segmentation fault » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:17 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:Personally I'm against the concept for several reasons: first of all, providing condoms would, as far as I'm concerned, simply increase activity, and this would lead to people wanting "just a quickie" and not using a condom and we're back where we were.


condoms are already available...i mean they just need to go to a store. and dont think of it as an increase in sexual activity, but think of it as an increase of safe sexual activity. their hormones are flying around already, and if they are going to do it you want to encourage safe practice.
people are like LDL cholesterol for the internet

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:19 pm UTC

but it'll take a bit more to convince me to change my belief structure..


Okay. But since you've already conceded the statistical (and therefore the practical) standpoint, I'm interested in teasing this out now. What belief structure, exactly?
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Malice » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:23 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:Also, I'll admit defeat on the internet on a statistical basis, but it'll take a bit more to convince me to change my belief structure..


The close-minded thread is to your left... :p

Seriously, though. Scientific evidence proved you wrong. Are you committed to your false beliefs? Not trying to jump all over you, I'm honestly curious how you do that.
Image

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:30 pm UTC

Malice wrote:
Alasseo wrote:Also, I'll admit defeat on the internet on a statistical basis, but it'll take a bit more to convince me to change my belief structure..


The close-minded thread is to your left... :p

Seriously, though. Scientific evidence proved you wrong. Are you committed to your false beliefs? Not trying to jump all over you, I'm honestly curious how you do that.


Scientific evidence proved that my argument that we should not give out condoms because it will increase the amount of unsafe sex over safe sex was without base in reality.

It has not yet proven that it's a good idea for most teens to have sex, though honestly given the change in social mores it might not be an altogether bad one now or in the near future, but I won't.. :)
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Malice » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:16 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:Scientific evidence proved that my argument that we should not give out condoms because it will increase the amount of unsafe sex over safe sex was without base in reality.

It has not yet proven that it's a good idea for most teens to have sex, though honestly given the change in social mores it might not be an altogether bad one now or in the near future, but I won't.. :)


Ah, I see.

Personally, I don't see the logic in valuing continued abstinence in kids who don't have sex more than you value protecting kids from pregnancy and STDs, but whatever.
Image

User avatar
oxoiron
Posts: 1365
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:56 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby oxoiron » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:29 pm UTC

Goplat wrote:
Belial wrote:So, speaking in a de facto sense only, it's not a crime.
And I guess the lynching of blacks by the KKK in the post-civil war South, in a de facto sense only, wasn't a crime either, since the police often turned a blind eye to that as well.
The difference being two people taking part in a consensual act as opposed to a group of people killing another person (non-consensually, if I had to guess).
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect)."-- Mark Twain
"There is not more dedicated criminal than a group of children."--addams

Goplat
Posts: 490
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:41 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Goplat » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:40 pm UTC

Wait, any objection to underage sex has to be religious? Phrase that in the contrapositive, and it sounds like something Pat Robertson would say. "People who don't believe in God are corrupting our children, etc."

Personally, I don't see the logic in valuing continued abstinence in kids who don't have sex more than you value protecting kids from pregnancy and STDs, but whatever.
Why value the latter at all? Anyone who is both disrespectful of society enough to break the law, and stupid enough not to insist on using a condom whether access to such is subsidized or not, deserves no sympathy. Pregnancy is a problem though, because as Belial mentioned, they will get on welfare and cost a lot more money than condoms cost. I guess the law really does need to be enforced, so that they would have to abort to hide the evidence.

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:50 pm UTC

Goplat wrote:Wait, any objection to underage sex has to be religious? ... Anyone who is both disrespectful of society enough to break the law ...
You've twice in that post confused underage with premarital. Any objection to safe premarital sex is incredibly likely to be a religious/moral objection.

As for valuing protection for sexually active teens - STDs are also expensive. HIV even more so. And deadly.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:52 pm UTC

Are you paying attention at all? What you're claiming is illegal is not at all illegal in most states, and in the few states where it is against the letter of the law, it is often not against the spirit of the law and would not hold up to any form of judicial scrutiny.

So, your slavish devotion to the law aside, you're pretty much just wrong.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:57 pm UTC

Don't forget, not only is the sex in his 'distributing condoms = condoning illegal sex' not actually/always/enforceable illegal but the argument itself was also:

a) a straw man.
b) logically refuted by precedence and example.
oh and c) tangential.
Last edited by Azrael on Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:09 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.

Goplat
Posts: 490
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:41 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Goplat » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:08 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:You've twice in that post confused underage with premarital.
Premarital sex isn't illegal where I live, and unlses you're going to try to claim that the condoms are supposed to be for the teachers, then we are talking about not just premarital but underage sex.
Any objection to safe premarital sex is incredibly likely to be a religious/moral objection.
Any objection to anything is a moral objection. You can't say anything is good or bad without morals, because that's what morals are.
As for valuing protection for sexually active teens - STDs are also expensive. HIV even more so.
Only if treated.
And deadly.
Your point being?

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:10 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:
Alasseo wrote:It has not yet proven that it's a good idea for most teens to have sex, though
Ding Ding Ding!

That's the end of this one folks. This was never about whether teens should have sex or not. That ... that's an entirely different discussion.

You shouldn't feel less manly/nerdy about "losing" this argument. But you should feel bad for trying to hide your religious (moral) views behind logic and reason.


I never said it was, you people are confusing two different arguments completely. I believed that a distribution of condoms would increase unsafe sex more than it would increase safe sex. I also believe that teen sex is in general a bad idea. However, statistics have shown me wrong on the first point, so, pending proof for or against my second belief, I drop my opposition to the distribution of condoms, but decline to support it, either. At no point did I (intentionally) try to "hide" my views behind logic, it simply did not enter into the discussion at first.

Malice wrote:
Alasseo wrote:Scientific evidence proved that my argument that we should not give out condoms because it will increase the amount of unsafe sex over safe sex was without base in reality.

It has not yet proven that it's a good idea for most teens to have sex, though honestly given the change in social mores it might not be an altogether bad one now or in the near future, but I won't.. :)


Ah, I see.

Personally, I don't see the logic in valuing continued abstinence in kids who don't have sex more than you value protecting kids from pregnancy and STDs, but whatever.


Just so you're certain I'm addressing this, I don't. I held that, and let me just start quoting myself here,
Alasseo wrote:Scientific evidence proved that my argument that we should not give out condoms because it will increase the amount of unsafe sex over safe sex was without base in reality.
I believed that the introduction of condoms at school would lead to, in the end, more pregnancies and STDs. I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but really..

Also, could I publicly distance myself from Goplat? I brought up that in some jurisdictions, it could be illegal, but given that a school was distributing condoms, it'd be reasonable to assume that either it wasn't illegal before or the law had changed, with or without (doesn't matter..) the express purpose of allowing this. I have no idea where he's going, either.
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:15 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:Also, could I publicly distance myself from Goplat?


Unnecessary. It's like comparing a guy with views to a troll.

Hmm. I'm bad at similes.

Goplat wrote:Premarital sex isn't illegal where I live, and unlses you're going to try to claim that the condoms are supposed to be for the teachers, then we are talking about not just premarital but underage sex.


The place you confused "premarital" and "underage" is here:

goplat wrote:Wait, any objection to underage sex has to be religious? Phrase that in the contrapositive, and it sounds like something Pat Robertson would say. "People who don't believe in God are corrupting our children, etc."
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:16 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:
Azrael wrote:
Alasseo wrote:It has not yet proven that it's a good idea for most teens to have sex, though
Ding Ding Ding!That's the end of this one folks. This was never about whether teens should have sex or not. That ... that's an entirely different discussion.
I never said it was ...
You're the one who brought it up. Right. There. In. The. Quote. Followed immediately be me saying that it should be an entirely different discussion.

And yes, we all know what the original point of your argument was and that it's been disproven.

Goplat wrote:
Azrael wrote:You've twice in that post confused underage with premarital.
Premarital sex isn't illegal where I live, and unlses you're going to try to claim that the condoms are supposed to be for the teachers, then we are talking about not just premarital but underage sex.
High school. High. School. We've all been talking about high school aged kids. You know, the ones that are, by most states' standards, over the age of consent. You keep trying to make this about under age sex. It. Is. Not. About. Underage. Sex.

So yeah, we all pretty sure you're being purposefully outlandish, trying to elicit some huge explosive reaction. Great. Would you mind knocking it off?

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:28 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:-snip pyramid-
We're not confused. But you certainly seem to be, so let me spell it out:

The appropriateness of teen sex on the whole is not the topic. You're the one who brought it up. Right. There. In. The. Quote. (Twice, even.)

And yes, we all know what you *were* saying and that it's been disproven.
-snip-


It was brought up several times before, notably by trickster. The quote in question comes from here, however. It was in no way my intention to change this into a debate on teens having sex or not, I was simply clarifying my point.. Malice did not understand the distinction between the two points, I clarified. You already understood the distinction, but apparently thought I was trying to make a new argument about teens having sex at all. There is no conflict here, unless I still don't understand your point?
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

trickster721
Posts: 282
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:26 am UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby trickster721 » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:38 pm UTC

Yeah, you just briefly fell back on "more sex is worse anyway" when people started attacking "condoms will cause more unsafe sex" with actual data. We understand. They're both wrong, so it doesn't matter.

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:41 pm UTC

Malice: "If you've been logically proven to be wrong, why do you still object?"
Alasseo: "Because of personal beliefs that teens shouldn't have sex"
Azrael: "Ding, thread's done. Nothing more can be accomplished here - his remaining objection is that "teens shouldn't have sex" based on vague and probably religious beliefs."
Alasseo: "I didn't say that teens shouldn't have sex!"
Azrael: "Yes, yes you did."
Alasseo: "But I didn't *mean* that we should talk about why I think that."

Oh good, we agree. Not to talk about it.

Ding! Thread's done.

User avatar
Alasseo
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Alasseo » Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:51 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:Malice: "If you've been logically proven to be wrong, why do you still object?"
Alasseo: "Because of personal beliefs that teens shouldn't have sex"
Azrael: "Ding, thread's done. Nothing more can be accomplished here - his remaining objection is that "teens shouldn't have sex" based on vague and probably religious beliefs."
Alasseo: "I didn't say that!"
Azrael: "Yes, yes you did."
Alasseo: "But I didn't *mean* that we should talk about it."

Oh good, we agree. Not to talk about it.

Ding! Thread's done.


Not quite, from my perspective.
Malice wrote:
Alasseo wrote:Also, I'll admit defeat on the internet on a statistical basis, but it'll take a bit more to convince me to change my belief structure..


The close-minded thread is to your left... :p

Seriously, though. Scientific evidence proved you wrong. Are you committed to your false beliefs? Not trying to jump all over you, I'm honestly curious how you do that.


Malice did not see the distinction between me admitting defeat that statistically, the increase in safe sex far outweighed the increase in unsafe sex with regards to distributing condoms, but not changing my view that generally, most teens shouldn't have sex.

Just before you say that it was my fault anyways...yeah, reading back, in my haste to post before switching classes, I did not fully parse Belail's statement and took "experience" to mean "general beliefs". Mea culpa, I agree the thread is over, as I'm not going to respond to trickster.

EDIT: Caught you editing! (props on your clarification there, but I just thought I'd mention it :p)
Eruantale wrote:(I did... I've always wanted to get a Dudley Do-right out of a vending machine)

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Azrael » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:01 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:Malice: "If you've been logically proven to be wrong, why do you still object?"
Alasseo: "Because of personal beliefs that teens shouldn't have sex"
Azrael: "Ding, thread's done. Nothing more can be accomplished here - his remaining objection is that "teens shouldn't have sex" based on vague and probably religious beliefs."
Alasseo: "I didn't say that teens shouldn't have sex!"
Azrael: "Yes, yes you did."
Alasseo: "But I didn't *mean* that we should talk about why I think that."


Fixed wrote:Malice: "If you've been logically proven to be wrong, why do you still object?"
Alasseo: Malice, I do not think you see the distinction between me admitting defeat that statistically, the increase in safe sex far outweighed the increase in unsafe sex with regards to distributing condoms, but not changing my view that generally, most teens shouldn't have sex.
Azrael: "Ding, thread's done. Nothing more can be accomplished here - his remaining objection is that "teens shouldn't have sex" based on vague and probably religious beliefs."
Alasseo: "I didn't say that teens shouldn't have sex!"
Azrael: "Yes, yes you did."
Alasseo: "But I didn't *mean* that we should talk about why I think that."


Truly, I do not see a comment worthy distinction between the two. But hey, excessively wordy additions to scene-in-brief scripts are witty.

User avatar
aetherson
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:26 pm UTC
Location: Hand Basket...wait where are we going again?

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby aetherson » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:10 pm UTC

Sorry Azrael, the thread's not quite done.

Something that hasn't been brought up yet is this:

I think one of the main problems with the teen drugs/ sex/ alcohol (you thought I was going to say rock and roll didn't you?) is that in the U.S. we've let the school system take on the role of teaching responsibility and societal mores to our children. Parents don't do this anymore. (yes, i'm over generalizing)

Note that I didn't say condoms shouldn't be given out for free.
Yes, health education is currently espousing a woefully ignorant message.
Abstinence is the only way to guarantee pregnancies will not occur. But, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't teach a child (yes, some teenagers are still very much children these days...) about disease, the reproductive system, pregnancy the whole spiel.
As to whether this is morally right, we should leave that to the parents.

The flip side of this argument is that how do we ensure that parents are teaching their children what is "right and wrong".
We don't.
But, as a society, we need to find a way to force people to take responsibility for themselves.

As to how to do that, i'm not yet sure. Short of assigning someone to follow people around with a wiffle ball bat and bopping them upside the head every time they did something stupid. But hey, it could be turned into a public works project. That way unemployment would go down...
01001101 01100001 01100100 01100101 00100000 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01001100 01101111 01101111 01101011 00100001

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:13 pm UTC

It would be *nice* if parents would take responsibility and make sensible decisions vis-a-vis their children.

Unfortunately, since it doesn't look like they're going to start doing that any time soon, and since I have to live in a society with their children, it's in my best interest to advocate having the government do it for them.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:15 pm UTC

A lot of parents teach their children what they want them to learn. This is why "what happens in our schools" is such a hot topic.

Abstinence is not the only way to ensure that pregnancies happen, as "abstinent-only" sex education shows a rise in the rates of teen pregnancy and STD's. Educating people to make the right decisions has the opposite effect.

And to whoever said teens shouldn't be having sex, I'm sorry, but for a lack of better way to put it:
BWA HA HA HA HA HA!!! Yeah! Puppies shouldn't wag their tails, and married couples should never argue!
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
aetherson
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:26 pm UTC
Location: Hand Basket...wait where are we going again?

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby aetherson » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:23 pm UTC

Izawwlgood:
I never said that abstinence only education was the way to go.
I said that abstinence was the only 100% guaranteed way to not get pregnant. Well, depending on your beliefs, there was that ONE time...but I don't think this is the right place to talk about that.

Belial:
I agree. It would be *nice*. And since they aren't, something should be done about that problem. I think taking care of that would help clean up a slew of other issues.
01001101 01100001 01100100 01100101 00100000 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01001100 01101111 01101111 01101011 00100001

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Belial » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

aetherson wrote:I said that abstinence was the only 100% guaranteed way to not get pregnant. Well, depending on your beliefs, there was that ONE time...but I don't think this is the right place to talk about that.


Not to get pregnant? Yeah. There are a few good ways not to stay pregnant, though.

Belial:
I agree. It would be *nice*. And since they aren't, something should be done about that problem. I think taking care of that would help clean up a slew of other issues.

Oh sure. But you come anywhere *near* telling parents how to raise their kids, and they throw a shit fit of monumental proportions.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
aetherson
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:26 pm UTC
Location: Hand Basket...wait where are we going again?

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby aetherson » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

No disagreement from me there.
I think everyone should know what options are open to them.
As far as what one thinks is morally right, schools shouldn't touch though. In my opinion at least.

Teaching a child responsibility for their actions shouldn't be something that should be arguable.

I'm a drug addict because I slipped and fell and that needle filled with heroin landed in my arm.
She got pregnant because she tripped and fell and my penis ended up in her vagina.
I was walking through that store and that CD happened to fall into my coat pocket I didn't notice.
Yes these seem a bit absurd. But, really. How absurd?

The only way schools could ever do this is if we pull the children out of the home once they're old enough to wipe their own behinds and sent them to live in a large, (state or privately) funded educational system/ boarding school-esque environment....effectively becoming the surrogate parents they are now perceived to be...
01001101 01100001 01100100 01100101 00100000 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01001100 01101111 01101111 01101011 00100001

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Distributing Condoms in School

Postby Malice » Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:12 pm UTC

Alasseo wrote:
Azrael wrote:
Alasseo wrote:It has not yet proven that it's a good idea for most teens to have sex, though
Ding Ding Ding!

That's the end of this one folks. This was never about whether teens should have sex or not. That ... that's an entirely different discussion.

You shouldn't feel less manly/nerdy about "losing" this argument. But you should feel bad for trying to hide your religious (moral) views behind logic and reason.


I never said it was, you people are confusing two different arguments completely. I believed that a distribution of condoms would increase unsafe sex more than it would increase safe sex. I also believe that teen sex is in general a bad idea. However, statistics have shown me wrong on the first point, so, pending proof for or against my second belief, I drop my opposition to the distribution of condoms, but decline to support it, either. At no point did I (intentionally) try to "hide" my views behind logic, it simply did not enter into the discussion at first.


Okay. So by not supporting it, you're saying, "Things would be worse if we did this," where "worse" means "what I think is worse". You're saying, "This is a bad idea but I can't objectively prove that." (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

I'm just trying to put your two opinions--"A distribution of condoms would increase safe sex more than unsafe sex" (proven by statistics and agreed to you by), and "I believe teen sex is in general a bad idea"--together.

You haven't explained why you think teen sex is a bad idea. I think there are really only three arguments that can be made along those lines, none of them very good. You could say, "Teens aren't emotionally ready for it." You could say, "Teens are more at risk for STDs and pregnancy." Or you could say, "It's wrong because God said so". Other people may have assumed you meant the latter; my intention was to preclude the "at risk" one.

But that's getting the cart before the horse.

Why do you think teen sex is a bad idea?

---

Regarding parental responsibility... Belial has it right.
Image


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests