Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,813 Year: 3,070/9,624 Month: 915/1,588 Week: 98/223 Day: 9/17 Hour: 5/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   anti-abortion folks still get abortions
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 106 of 301 (298814)
03-27-2006 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by nator
03-27-2006 12:48 PM


Re: Then answer the question
Aren't you off-topic now?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by nator, posted 03-27-2006 12:48 PM nator has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 107 of 301 (298818)
03-27-2006 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:29 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
I was a teen who had sex.
do you think maybe your unhealthy attitudes toward sex are a result of this?
Ask any woman who has VD, or vaginal warts, or a yeast infection.
i had more yeast infections before i had sex and when i was not having sex than after. once more, your lack of scientific understanding is demonstrated in your posts.
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 03-27-2006 07:28 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:29 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:28 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 108 of 301 (298820)
03-27-2006 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Silent H
03-27-2006 1:12 PM


If you have two people of known health status, and they do not carry any diseases, and they have sex, no disease forms due to their having sex: yes or no?
Well technically not desease, but health issues. Kind of the same thing.
The other issues you mention are not caused by sex, they are viral or bacterial. Having sex with an uninfected person, or engaging in sexual acts which cannot allow transferral prevents one from getting anything. These issues do not suddenly spring forth abiogenetically because one has sex.
The point is holmes, that there is risk involved, and general very risky busniess, you like to argue it down to it not being risky or unhealthy to have sex.
If it's so safe and healthy, then go have unprotected sex with a 1000 woman, and then talk to me.
I understand all the points you make, but they are irrelevant to my point.
Whgile technically sex does not cause HIV, it transfers it. If everyone stopped having sex, and doing drugs, on the planet for 100 years, it would disappear, Thats says a lot to it being part of the cause. Plus since we really just don't know how it evolved, it may have well been caused by sex initially. Still not the point though.
Try to stay on the thought we are argueing not the technicalities, and our discussions will cover more ground.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 1:12 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 7:30 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 119 by Silent H, posted 03-28-2006 4:14 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 130 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-28-2006 12:12 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 132 by sidelined, posted 03-28-2006 12:47 PM riVeRraT has not replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 109 of 301 (298821)
03-27-2006 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by macaroniandcheese
03-27-2006 7:27 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
I never said sex was the only cause of yeast infections, and my scientific knowledge is just fine thank you.
Biology does not equal science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-27-2006 7:27 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 7:31 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 129 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-28-2006 12:10 PM riVeRraT has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 110 of 301 (298822)
03-27-2006 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:27 PM


Well technically not desease, but health issues.
What health issues?
If everyone stopped having sex, and doing drugs, on the planet for 100 years, it would disappear,
Well, of course it would - all humanity would be extinct. There'd be no hosts for the virus.
If it's so safe and healthy, then go have unprotected sex with a 1000 woman, and then talk to me.
Ah, right. Because the only two options are total abstinence or profligate promiscuity.
Plus since we really just don't know how it evolved, it may have well been caused by sex initially.
You really don't know anything about sexual intercourse, do you? "Hey, it causes babies to appear - why couldn't it cause a virus to appear, too?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:27 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by riVeRraT, posted 03-28-2006 7:05 AM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 111 of 301 (298823)
03-27-2006 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:28 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
Biology does not equal science.
Oh, sure. That's completely reasonable. The study of life? Absolutely irrelevant to science. Has nothing to do with it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:28 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by riVeRraT, posted 03-28-2006 7:39 AM crashfrog has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 112 of 301 (298824)
03-27-2006 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by nator
03-27-2006 8:36 AM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
just to set it straight. that was coragyps, not me. (note the presence of capitalization ). i'm proud to be so associated, however.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by nator, posted 03-27-2006 8:36 AM nator has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 113 of 301 (298825)
03-27-2006 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by crashfrog
03-27-2006 12:22 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
citation?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 12:22 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 7:40 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 114 of 301 (298826)
03-27-2006 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by macaroniandcheese
03-27-2006 7:33 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
Numbers 5. Can't be more specific.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-27-2006 7:33 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by macaroniandcheese, posted 03-27-2006 7:42 PM crashfrog has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 115 of 301 (298827)
03-27-2006 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:15 PM


Re: messed-up virgins
What concerns me is that you relate your first sexual experience to being popped.
i wanted to say "got fucked" but decided against it. i suppose i should have stayed with my first instinct. mine was love. love based on a lie. i was in love. he may or may not have been. i am compelled to believe he was not.
it was not my first sexual experience. i was a technical virgin after being molested as a child and coerced by previous boyfriends.
maybe it's just my virginity that meant nothing.
after i finally engaged in intercourse, i noticed i had less urges, masturbated less (a mere handful of times in the year i was single afterwards), and suffered from less neuroses. and now i am able to enjoy myself occasionally instead of simply feeding a need. to prepare for arach's inevitable jibe, i joke about the need but it is little more than that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:15 PM riVeRraT has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 116 of 301 (298828)
03-27-2006 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by crashfrog
03-27-2006 7:40 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
good enough thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 7:40 PM crashfrog has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 117 of 301 (298867)
03-27-2006 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Silent H
03-27-2006 1:12 PM


quote:
Women are capable of having yeast infections without sex.
That is so very true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Silent H, posted 03-27-2006 1:12 PM Silent H has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 118 of 301 (298884)
03-28-2006 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:13 PM


Re: Content, not looks or probable politics!
You say it's all there.
What isn't there is any alternative o the viewspoints I've considered.
What isn't there is any reason to consider it to be worse to go along with the claims of the anti-abortion movement while not truly believing them than it is to have an abortion believing it to be a horrible crime.
What isn't there is any admission that you were wrong to make that claim.
So if it is all there you have no alternative that would be less harsh. Your reason for rejecting the idea that they might not truly beleive the claims was false. And you will not admit it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:13 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by riVeRraT, posted 03-28-2006 7:14 AM PaulK has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 119 of 301 (298899)
03-28-2006 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by riVeRraT
03-27-2006 7:27 PM


Well technically not desease, but health issues. Kind of the same thing.
Ahem... given the set up I stated, beyond pregnancy from unprotected vaginal intercourse, what health issues are there?
there is risk involved, and general very risky busniess, you like to argue it down to it not being risky or unhealthy to have sex.
There is no inherent risk to sex. Those that exist because it involves contact between humans, one or more of whom carry a disease, can be minimized or completely negated.
Eating and breathing around other humans carries risk, the same kinds of risks. Do you praise those that do not eat or breathe around other people?
If it's so safe and healthy, then go have unprotected sex with a 1000 woman, and then talk to me.
I am in an open sexual lifestyle. I and my gf have had sex with many women and men. To date we have never contracted nor suffered any STDs. I'm not sure what you mean by unprotected. Do you count sex without a condom, though having been tested for STDs unprotected? Do you count not engaging in risky sexual behavior, as compared to no risk sexual behavior, as unprotected?
As it is, I'd say imposing "unprotected" is unfair. That would be like me saying okay go eat a bunch of fruits, vegetables, and meats but never wash or cook them. Seriously do that and then talk to me. The fact is as a matter of common sense people generally wash and cook foods to protect themselves, not against the food, but illnesses which may be carried on or in food.
The same SHOULD go for sex. If we were less obsessed with sex and viewing it as inherently "dirty", common sense rules would be followed, and we wouldn't be facing the pandemic we are today.
Whgile technically sex does not cause HIV, it transfers it. If everyone stopped having sex, and doing drugs, on the planet for 100 years, it would disappear
If we had everyone tested, and managed to impose a form of quarantine (like we do for ANY other deadly contagion) , it would also disappear. Or if we come up with a way to defeat it medically, it will also disappear.
In Africa, a family is already immune to the virus thanks to a gene mutation regarding their immune system. Thus for them it is not a risk.
If people stopped eating and breathing we could stop so many illnesses it would be incredible. Of course everyone would be dead, or lets pretend they could somehow live, it would pretty much suck.
Plus since we really just don't know how it evolved, it may have well been caused by sex initially.
Actually we have a pretty good idea. It was a variant of SIV (a simian virus, changed to something humans could suffer from, like the bird flu thing). It was first transferred to humans by those killing simians (that would be monkeys) for meat. It could have been from eating the meat or infected blood from the monkeys entering cuts on the hunters' body.
So again, no sex as cause.
Try to stay on the thought we are argueing not the technicalities
Your "thoughts" seem to crumble to dust when one attempts to look at the technical points it relies on. That's exactly why they are important. Devil is in the details and all that.
This message has been edited by holmes, 03-28-2006 10:16 AM

holmes
"Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age." (Lovecraft)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by riVeRraT, posted 03-27-2006 7:27 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by riVeRraT, posted 03-28-2006 7:37 AM Silent H has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 120 of 301 (298920)
03-28-2006 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by crashfrog
03-27-2006 7:30 PM


Well, of course it would - all humanity would be extinct. There'd be no hosts for the virus.
Haha, I can't believe you said that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 03-27-2006 7:30 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by crashfrog, posted 03-28-2006 8:59 AM riVeRraT has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024