Contra-Contraception

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by morethanpretty

If she had sex around 8PM Friday and didn't go to planned parenthood until 6PM on Mon...thats only 70hrs...well within the 120hr limit.

The longer you leave it the less effective it is. It's not 100% failsafe, which is why you are asked to make a note of the date you take it and return in two weeks if you have not had a bleed.

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

At the core, I hate the idea of abortion and contraception used so that people can light up their pleasure centers with reckless abandon, but I honestly hate to see it denied to those who use it properly just as much. My trouble is, the university crowd falls squarly within catagory #1 and that's where I live, so my bias gets pretty big.

Just checking that I have this right before I respond to it, you hate the idea that contraception allows people to have sex for pleasure?

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Just checking that I have this right before I respond to it, you hate the idea that contraception allows people to have sex for pleasure?

I kinda picked up on that one too. He did qualify it by saying "with reckless abandon," so I think it's promiscuity (however you define that) that he's against. It's true that the more partners you have, the more likely it is that you will be spreading some STDs, so he does have a point.

I'd be interested to hear what he has to say. I'm personally very fond of contraception.

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

The longer you leave it the less effective it is. It's not 100% failsafe, which is why you are asked to make a note of the date you take it and return in two weeks if you have not had a bleed.

Yes, but my point is that she went in on mon. the pill would still have a chance to be effective. I don't believe anything is 100% failsafe, even if the condom hadn't broke, she still had a chance of getting pregnant. Condoms aren't 100% effective against diseases either. There are pores in every substance, and the HIV virus is actually smaller than the pores in a latex condom.

[morethanpretty]

BTW how do you do the quote thing...I couldn't figure it out...maybe because I've been up for a really really long time...?

[wolf]

All the interesting fiddly bits.

Yup... that's what anals for you nut!

[Sundae]

I'm pretty fond of it myself - contraception that is.
I also don't have a problem with promiscuity, although it's not my personal lifestyle choice.

I say if people want to sleep around, let them. Making sure they're not breeding at the same time? Great idea. But then I'd be for putting a 3 year contraceptive implant in all 15 year old girls, so I appreciate I'm the opposite end of the scale.

[9th Engineer]

yeah, saying I'm against sex for pleasure is oversimplification to the point of killing the message. I don't have time for a full clarification now but I'll see if I can explain in a little while. In the mean time I'll say again that I used the term pleasure center to try to express what I mean. Think of the mice that will starve themselves so that they can keep pressing the button. I wouldn't equate it exactly with self destructive behavior in pursuit of pleasure, but since the safe guard isn't always there, danger can come from getting so used to not having to use common sense that you get burned eventually. Dang, that's not as good as I hoped but it'll have to do for now...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Uh huh, so you're not getting any, right?
Channeling that energy into success?

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

yeah, saying I'm against sex for pleasure is oversimplification to the point of killing the message. I don't have time for a full clarification now but I'll see if I can explain in a little while. In the mean time I'll say again that I used the term pleasure center to try to express what I mean. Think of the mice that will starve themselves so that they can keep pressing the button. I wouldn't equate it exactly with self destructive behavior in pursuit of pleasure, but since the safe guard isn't always there, danger can come from getting so used to not having to use common sense that you get burned eventually. Dang, that's not as good as I hoped but it'll have to do for now...

That completely avoided the question.
Are you against sex for pleasure? What is the issue, specifically, with contraception?
It ain't hard.

So, you like the Pope, want all the poor Irish to keep having babies that they can't feed? Is that it? Or do you really think they are going to stop having sex... just like all the teens of the world... "it really does not feel that good, honey. It's all hype, honesty. Mom and I did it because we had to." Sure. Tell me another one.

Or are you going to tell us that it is "different" for married couples?

BTW, there seems to be some confusion. Not all pills are "abortion" pills.
Day after pills keep pregnancy from happening within 72-120 hours of intercourse... there is no abortion/miscarriage. Just no pregnancy at all. ENTIRELY different from RU-486 and others of that nature.

[Elspode]

It is still a direct violation of the Will of God (tm), and therefore an abomination. (Just doing my part to fan the flames of irrationality, here)

[9th Engineer]

My issue is actually not specifically contraception at all, it's certain attitudes that I don't care for. Sex is risky, bottom line, how you go about it is what determines your chances of problems. What erks me is people who assume that using a condom or being on the pill eliminates that risk and then if something goes wrong whine -> "but this wasn't supposed to happen". My response, "You may have reduced your risk to 1% or lower but you drew the short straw there bud". I see sex outside of marriage as having a higher risk potential, that's all, and the more risk someone takes for pleasure the less sympathy I have for them if they get burned. **btw, None of this is related to the womans blog anymore**
Do I think that teens are going to stop having sex, no, but it's still voluntarily accepted risk. So to make it clear, I don't care at all about contraception at all one way or the other. You want to be a sex maniac? Go ahead, but I don't give a damn if you get burned. You want to have 11 kids and way overextend your budget because you think rubbers are evil? Go ahead, but don't come to me for a handout.

EDIT: in response to #76
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on whether or not that last explanation was aimed at me.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

My issue is actually not specifically contraception at all, it's certain attitudes that I don't care for. Sex is risky, bottom line, how you go about it is what determines your chances of problems. What erks me is people who assume that using a condom or being on the pill eliminates that risk and then if something goes wrong whine -> "but this wasn't supposed to happen". My response, "You may have reduced your risk to 1% or lower but you drew the short straw there bud". I see sex outside of marriage as having a higher risk potential, that's all, and the more risk someone takes for pleasure the less sympathy I have for them if they get burned. **btw, None of this is related to the womans blog anymore**

Exactly. None of that was ever related to the blog, but in the beginning you were acting as if it were.

[Trilby]

It's obvious that the whole thing smacks of gender discrimination. If men got preggers you can bet your sweet syrupy pancakes that on-demand birth control would be OTC and de-rigeur. So would immediate epidurals and heroin for menstrual cramps.

I've noticed many male docs who poo-poo'ed a woman's pain in labor but fell all over themselves to Rx the IV morphine for epididymitis.

Abomination is not sin.
If you are not going to run around freaking out every time you see a cotton/poly blend shirt, a garden with carrots and peas planted or someone eating shrimp... then just get over the whole abomination thing.
Hell, people don't care about sin... washing your car on Saturday is a mortal sin... no one gives a shit. Let it go.