Quoted from Box A Rox

So far the world and it's 7 Billion People seem to have proved the Abstinence plan a dismal failure.  

I think it was the "if it feels good, do it" philosophy of the 60's along with the success of sex ed taught in schools that was the dismal failure.  You can't honestly believe that 7 Billion people was a result a philosophy of abstinence.  What's even funnier, you throw the 7 million number around like it means something.  What should the earths population be?

Quoted from Box A Rox

Humans are hard wired to have sex... almost like an addiction.

OMG!! The desire to procreate is an "addiction?  Again, humans are victims of biology, and government has the answer to correct the human condition of libido.  I'm sure the department of social services can form a sub department to address this affliction.

If the endless supply of subsidized contraceptive doesn't work, then we can mandate contraceptive and monitor usage, and if that doesn't work, maybe at that time, there will be a drug that can eliminate that addictive urge to procreate.  

I'm telling you, these statists are absolutely mad.  Every aspect of human behavior MUST be controlled in pursuit of the utopia.

Quoted from CICERO

I think it was the "if it feels good, do it" philosophy of the 60's along with the success of sex ed taught in schools that was the dismal failure.  You can't honestly believe that 7 Billion people was a result a philosophy of abstinence.  What's even funnier, you throw the 7 million number around like it means something.  What should the earths population be?

The world's population was probably around 2 billion before the concept of 'abstinence' was even thought of.  People
are designed to have sex, and by the present world population, we're quite good at it!
Birth control works... abstinence doesn't.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Humans are hard wired to have sex... almost like an addiction.  To prevent unwanted pregnancies, the "Abstinence
Plan" is the least successful of all options.

Much of the Catholic Church's view on birth control and abortion seem to be self conflicting.  IMO, the Church opposes
birth control because it opposes premarital sex.  Allowing birth control for married couples seems to be an
acceptable choice for the the Church... especially since 98 Percent Of Catholic Women Use Birth Control That
is  Banned By Church.

Our statement  that abstinence is the least successful of all options is --- 100% incorrect and SCIENCE  proves that I am correct.    You must provide scientific evidence that a baby has been conceived when a human couple -- human male and human female -- have abstained from having sex.   I challenge you to provide scientific proof that a human couple that has not had sex  (with each other or "on the side") has gotten pregnant.   (and leave out the Virgin Mary example)

As for Roman Catholic teaching on sex -- it is rooted in the belief that Marriage is Sacrament -- ALL people married and unmarried are called to live a life of  Chastity  (chastity is not the same thing as celibacy).  Chastity means that sex is reserved for married couples and when the purpose of the sex is  (unitive and procreative ---   unitive meaning that the couple is having sex to strengthen the marital union or a sign of their marital union as a full expression of the love between the two .... (as an example -- they aren't just having sex because he is bored and horny - and she just wants to get it over with so he won't whine all weekend)

procreative - means that the couple is OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY of creating life --- even if the couple knows that one of the pair is infertile or whatever ---  the couple is at least OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY of creating life.   That is why the Church opposes artificial birth control -- like condoms -- because while the sex may be unitive .. the couple is not "open to the possibility of creating life".

Humanae Vitae  (the encyclical from the 1970's that banned artificial contraceptive use) is one of the most beautifully written documents --- about the HOLINESS/sanctity, beauty and purpose of Marriage.

Most Catholics and Non-Catholics completely misunderstand Catholic teaching on Marriage and Sex  -- the Catholic need to be better educated by their priests and catechists --- and Non-Catholics should attempt to be better informed on the subject.

Quoted from CICERO

OMG!! The desire to procreate is an "addiction?  Again, humans are victims of biology, and government has the answer to correct the human condition of libido.  I'm sure the department of social services can form a sub department to address this affliction.

If the endless supply of subsidized contraceptive doesn't work, then we can mandate contraceptive and monitor usage, and if that doesn't work, maybe at that time, there will be a drug that can eliminate that addictive urge to procreate.  

I'm telling you, these statists are absolutely mad.  Every aspect of human behavior MUST be controlled in pursuit of the utopia.

LMAO!!! One of Cicero's best Posts ever!

He thinks that people have sex to "procreate"!!! Yea right!

Sex is the means to procreate and if the only time that  humans had sex was when they intended to produce a baby,
this thread would be unnecessary.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Our statement  that abstinence is the least successful of all options is --- 100% incorrect and SCIENCE  proves that I am correct.    You must provide scientific evidence that a baby has been conceived when a human couple -- human male and human female -- have abstained from having sex.   I challenge you to provide scientific proof that a human couple that has not had sex  (with each other or "on the side") has gotten pregnant.   (and leave out the Virgin Mary example)

As for Roman Catholic teaching on sex -- it is rooted in the belief that Marriage is Sacrament -- ALL people married and unmarried are called to live a life of  Chastity  (chastity is not the same thing as celibacy).  Chastity means that sex is reserved for married couples and when the purpose of the sex is  (unitive and procreative ---   unitive meaning that the couple is having sex to strengthen the marital union or a sign of their marital union as a full expression of the love between the two .... (as an example -- they aren't just having sex because he is bored and horny - and she just wants to get it over with so he won't whine all weekend)

procreative - means that the couple is OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY of creating life --- even if the couple knows that one of the pair is infertile or whatever ---  the couple is at least OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY of creating life.   That is why the Church opposes artificial birth control -- like condoms -- because while the sex may be unitive .. the couple is not "open to the possibility of creating life".

Humanae Vitae  (the encyclical from the 1970's that banned artificial contraceptive use) is one of the most beautifully written documents --- about the HOLINESS/sanctity, beauty and purpose of Marriage.

Most Catholics and Non-Catholics completely misunderstand Catholic teaching on Marriage and Sex  -- the Catholic need to be better educated by their priests and catechists --- and Non-Catholics should attempt to be better informed on the subject.

Abstinence is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy.
My post was:
To prevent unwanted pregnancies, the "Abstinence Plan" is the least successful of all options.
I stand by my post.  Planning not to have sex is a very different thing in the real world than NOT HAVING SEX.  
(Just ask Bristol Palin)

Quoted from Box A Rox

Sex is the means to procreate and if the only time that  humans had sex was when they intended to produce a baby,
this thread would be unnecessary.

LMAO!!

You again have it backwards...Sex is the means to procreate...If humans had sex when they didn't intended to procreate, with the understanding that IS how humans procreate, people would no longer be a victim of their decision and this thread would be unnecessary.  People would start regulating their OWN behavior.  Instead, they play the victim like a good sheep, and wait for a solution to their behavior from the state.  As we know, there a plenty of people out their perpetuating this victim of libido "addiction" BS.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Abstinence is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy.
My post was:
To prevent unwanted pregnancies, the "Abstinence Plan" is the least successful of all options.
I stand by my post.  Planning not to have sex is a very different thing in the real world than NOT HAVING SEX.  
(Just ask Bristol Palin)

You criticized the Roman Catholic Church for promoting abstinence for sex outside marriage -- and suggested that it was not a successful option.

The FACT is that abstinence  has been proven 100% effective in preventing pregnancies  -- the problem is when INDIVIDUALS  fall short/fail  -- not the Roman Catholic Church.   The Church's teaching is a good one and would be 100% effective in preventing pregnancies and other undesirable problems (STDs)  ..if INDIVIDUALS stuck to the plan.

So you stop criticizing the Roman Catholic Church and worry more about addressing the problem of SIN in the human world.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

The FACT is that abstinence  has been proven 100% effective in preventing pregnancies  -- t

S.

And refraining from drinking is 100% effective in preventing DWI....We get it.
But you have to get that this isn't the 16th century. Look all around you, sex is used to sell just about everything from Viagra to car insurance...its the way its, no putting the Genie back in the bottle.

Last time I checked, the Vatican didn't run this country. The Roman Catholic church supports a lot of worthy virtues, I just wished that they would practice what they preach a little more often.

Quoted from 55tbird

And refraining from drinking is 100% effective in preventing DWI....We get it.
But you have to get that this isn't the 16th century. Look all around you, sex is used to sell just about everything from Viagra to car insurance...its the way its, no putting the Genie back in the bottle.

Last time I checked, the Vatican didn't run this country. The Roman Catholic church supports a lot of worthy virtues, I just wished that would practice what they preach.

The Vatican doesn't run the country -- no said it does.  Believe me,  America would be a lot better off it returned to the values and teachings of Roman Catholicism, Protestant Christianity and Judaism.  I am just saying that  Box of Rocks and others like to blame the Roman Catholic Church and its teachings for the problems in the world ------ when in fact .. the teachings are NOT the problem.

The problem is that individually -- Catholics and Non-Catholics have chosen to ignore the wisdom of Holy Mother Church ....  and go around having unprotected sex like a bunch of wild animals,  dropping all standards of decency and self-control in everything from  every day life to advertising and television programming.

also --  I believe that your comment   "it is the way it is"  -- is a cop out ...  you are basically saying - "in the battle of good vs. evil --- you are willing to let satan win".

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

also --  I believe that your comment   "it is the way it is"  -- is a cop out ...  you are basically saying - "in the battle of good vs. evil --- you are willing to let satan win".

There are certain things you need to manage rather than outlaw.. One glaring example, Prohibition...geez what a great success that was...How many died in the name of social engineering? How many people were saved when Prohibition was repealed? There will always be vices, and people who will abuse those vices, whether it be gambling, drinking or sex...but to outlaw them will only create a black market and more violence.

I think semi-legalization of drugs and prostitution is worth looking at, because criminalizing them hasn't got us too far. There should be things that should never be legalized, i.e. violent crime. Violent crime differs because innocent people are the victims. Activity like substance abuse, etc, is mostly self-induced.

Quoted from 55tbird

There are certain things you need to manage rather than outlaw.. One glaring example, Prohibition...geez what a great success that was...How many died in the name of social engineering? How many people were saved when Prohibition was repealed? There will always be vices, and people who will abuse those vices, whether it be gambling, drinking or sex...but to outlaw them will only create a black market and more violence.

I think semi-legalization of drugs and prostitution is worth looking at, because criminalizing them hasn't got us too far. There should be things that should never be legalized, i.e. violent crime. Violent crime different because innocent people are the victims. Activity like substance abuse, etc, is mostly self-induced.

There is a difference between a person VOLUNTARILY choosing to abide by the values and teaching of his/her church or place of worship and the government passing laws to restrict the exercise of our free will/choice.

I was not around during Prohibition -- and I never said that I supported CIVIL laws against drinking ... I never said that I supported CIVIL laws against sex or any other "vice".

Personally, I believe that the drinking age should be lowered back to 18 -- if you can die for your country in war .. you should be able to buy a drink legally.  

  I believe that gambling should be legalized -- why should only organized crime, foreign interests  and the Native Americans  be allowed to make money on gambling ???

I believe that it is ludicrous and unconstitutional to deny a privately owned bar or restaurant or other place of business the right to allow its patrons to smoke cigarettes.    The people who don't like the smoke will go to places that are smoke free ---- let the free market choose which businesses survive .. smoke free or smoking allowed.

As for legalizing drugs --- I guess I would have to say that it depends on which drugs that you are speaking about.    Marijuana -- I am 75% leaning towards legalization.     Harder drugs --- no way.   But even then -- you can always find a doctor -- like Michael Jackson did -- to prescribe the stuff.  

Finally --- I don't believe the government should be banning trans fat and passing laws telling us what we should or shouldn't eat.    However, I do like the law which requires restaurants to post nutritional information --- and would go one step further  EVERY restaurant  (not just chains) should have that information available.  There is no GOOD reason why Schenectady County requires chains to post that information but lets restaurants that are not a part of a chain off the hook.

OMG

Dr Troll just spoke....now an authority on this subject of birth control...

And birth control is an option for women in control of their own bodies and feelings...and decisions.

I believe that the government should not interfere with this subject....

so far as I am concerned...good ol' boys club making decisions for women....

When a doctor is killed because of his involvement with abortion...that's far fectched ....and radical...

A practicing Catholic I chose  my beliefs....and have no regrets.

Quoted from Patches

OMG

Dr Troll just spoke....now an authority on this subject of birth control...

And birth control is an option for women in control of their own bodies and feelings...and decisions.

I believe that the government should not interfere with this subject....

so far as I am concerned...good ol' boys club making decisions for women....

When a doctor is killed because of his involvement with abortion...that's far fectched ....and radical...

A practicing Catholic I chose  my beliefs....and have no regrets.

I am no expert (as some people profess to be on every topic). Only comment to your post is that my belief is that birth control, etc., shouldn't be a decision burdened on one party, since it takes two to tango.  I think it's a topic for two "participants" to discuss and meet a mutual decision.

Quoted from joebxr

I am no expert (as some people profess to be on every topic). Only comment to your post is that my belief is that birth control, etc., shouldn't be a decision burdened on one party, since it takes two to tango.  I think it's a topic for two "participants" to discuss and meet a mutual decision.

I agree. However.........whatever the 'mutual decision' is...........they need to take personal and financial responsibility for it! The taxpayers should not have to pay for their 'mutual decisions'.