When was sex invented?

[sweetnpetite]

some of the religious arguments against sex

Sex spreads disease

so does shaking hands (and we don't consider *that* immoral]

There's no such thing as 'safe' sex

There's no such thing as 'safe' living. Sure there is 'safer' life, there are things you can do to *reduce* your risk, but you can't entirely eliminate it.

Sex is a moral issue.

Sex is a health issue, a personal issue, and a moral issue. By moral issue I mean it is between the individuall, his/her morals, his/her god/s, and his/her clergy (if any) NOT between his government and their morals.

Sex can be compared to drugs or cigarettes or drinking or loaded guns.


Sex is a biological drive. Drugs, alchohol, cigarettes and weapons are not.

Abortion is murder.

I happen to agree with this one. I do believe that life begins at conception. I also believe that if government wants to care about and protect the unborn, it should care about and protect the born. In adition WAR is murder too (in my oppinion) War kills children- innocent children, just as it kills adults. Sometimes it is deamed necessary and 'acceptable loss' or lesser of two evils. Personally, I don't agree with this philosophy either. I'm sort of divided on this issue. (Athough I used to be strongly pro-life/anti-abortion)

 

[minsue]

SnP -

Leaving aside the abortion argument (either side), aren't you preaching to the choir here?

- Mindy

 

[sweetnpetite]

SnP -

Leaving aside the abortion argument (either side), aren't you preaching to the choir here?

- Mindy

Yep.

Just had to get it out of my system

 

[Gary Chambers]

Re: some of the religious arguments against sex

Sex spreads disease

so does shaking hands (and we don't consider *that* immoral]

Abortion is murder.

I happen to agree with this one. I do believe that life begins at conception. I also believe that if government wants to care about and protect the unborn, it should care about and protect the born. In adition WAR is murder too (in my oppinion) War kills children- innocent children, just as it kills adults. Sometimes it is deamed necessary and 'acceptable loss' or lesser of two evils. Personally, I don't agree with this philosophy either. I'm sort of divided on this issue. (Athough I used to be strongly pro-life/anti-abortion)

It's a tough call Sweet, and one I admire anyone for actually managing to take a reasonable stand on one way or another. I take your point that life begins at conception, but there is the other side of the coin: the woman carrying the child is a life too, and one must ponder whether it's acceptable to tell a woman that she 'must' carry that child inside her own body for nine months and then give birth, followed by motherhood. While these are natural drives for most women, they are also very personal experiences, and one wonders whether anyone has a right to dictate that another should be forced to undergo such an experience against her will.

Personally I find it much easier to pass judgment on a load of capitalist pigs, creaming wealth off the top of the economy by discounting workers' wages and diverting public assets into their private coffers. That brand of evil is more clearly defined and more easily recognised.

I must also add that George Bush's trashing of family planning programs in the USA and other nations, especially very poor nations in Africa that can't afford to feed their people, puts opponents of birth control in very wicked company. There are extremist nut cases on both sides of the abortion argument. The unfortunate thing right now is that one such extremist has managed to gain a position of incredible power.

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: some of the religious arguments against sex

...one must ponder whether it's acceptable to tell a woman that she 'must' carry that child inside her own body for nine months and then give birth...one wonders whether anyone has a right to dictate that another should be forced to undergo such an experience against her will.

One doesn't wonder. One knows.

One is not a walking incubator; one is a person of whom a uterus is but a part.

Humbly,

S

P.S. The late Carl Sagan wrote an article about the idea that "life begins at conception" and he proposed that we ought to define human life at its beginning the way we define it at the end: we routinely allow removal of life support from persons whose "brain waves" are no longer recognizably human. The same applies to a human fetus before the third trimester.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I'm sorry.

I didn't mean to open an abortion debate.

I only meant to say that I find it interesting that certain politicians seem to find one type of killing completley and morally appaling, and another kind (which brings the same result) 'acceptable'

If you are Pro-Life (under any circomstance) then how can you be Pro-War? (Or support, order or declare war under any circomstance)

And also, when the child is born- he/she is mommy's problem. Cruddy daycare? No books in school? No food on the table? Not my problem. Not worthy of my tax money. IF it is your responsabiliey to 'save a life' you better damn well care what happens to it after that- or wtf's the point?

Liberally,

Sweet

 

[Boxlicker101]

Re: Re: some of the religious arguments against sex

It's a tough call Sweet, and one I admire anyone for actually managing to take a reasonable stand on one way or another. I take your point that life begins at conception, but there is the other side of the coin: the woman carrying the child is a life too, and one must ponder whether it's acceptable to tell a woman that she 'must' carry that child inside her own body for nine months and then give birth, followed by motherhood. While these are natural drives for most women, they are also very personal experiences, and one wonders whether anyone has a right to dictate that another should be forced to undergo such an experience against her will.

Personally I find it much easier to pass judgment on a load of capitalist pigs, creaming wealth off the top of the economy by discounting workers' wages and diverting public assets into their private coffers. That brand of evil is more clearly defined and more easily recognised.

I must also add that George Bush's trashing of family planning programs in the USA and other nations, especially very poor nations in Africa that can't afford to feed their people, puts opponents of birth control in very wicked company. There are extremist nut cases on both sides of the abortion argument. The unfortunate thing right now is that one such extremist has managed to gain a position of incredible power.

I have never heard of an extremist nut case who was pro-choice. There are plenty of them who are anti-abortion, and if you want, you can call them pro-life although I think that is a poor description of such people. I have never even heard of a person who was pro-abortion. Pro-choice people realize, I believe, that sometimes people find themselves in bad situations, and are faced with several options, none of them good. In thise situations, the people must choose the option they consider to be least bad, and I believe that a woman who chooses abortion is making such a choice.