quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Once again, there's an agenda here.

Someone who says: "Abstinence does not prevent pregnancy" is either living in fantasy land or they're a complete moron.

if you don't have sex, you can't get pregnant (rape aside, of course. I don't consider that "having sex").

There has been an agenda in this country for many years by the left to negate principles; they label them as "old views" or "outdated thinking" or (God forbid) "religious whacko-ism".

Yes, I believe that "abstinence ONLY" education is not going to work. There is always going to be a percentage of "rebellious" youth that will indulge in sexual activity. I'm living proof. I was a father before my 15th birthday.

However, I think it is a good idea to not completely remove the idea of abstinence from sex education programs. I think it's important for children to hear adults say (repeatedly): "The BEST way to prevent pregnancy and sexual disease is to NOT engage in sexual activity."

The left seems to want (and seems to have wanted for a long time) to remove any and all mention of abstinence from sex education programs and that is asinine.

Abstinence DOES prevent pregnancy. It is the ONLY method that is 100% effective but I think children should hear about the methods that are 99.9% effective, also. I think they should hear about the ones that are (?)77%(?) effective.

That's what's so different on the left. They want to promote dangerous behavior to advance their agenda. I'd like to prevent unplanned pregnancies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It was more the point of why you were pointing out that assertion when no one was questioning it.

Gotsteel posted a message you asked what's the point I told you... you are welcome.

GotSteel mentioned there are more effective methods of pregnancy prevention than condoms, but that he'd have to use a computer to bring them up.

Now, what was the point of mentioning other forms more effective than condoms? No one said condoms weren't very effective. No one said other methods weren't more effective than condoms. Outside of surgical actions, what could be more effective at preventing pregnancy than not having sex?

Can you see why I questioned his point? You can enjoy sex, and be reasonably sure you won't be getting pregnant if you use a condom properly. Does it matter that other methods are more effective than a condom (which, outside of not engaging in sex acts is pretty much the only way to prevent STD's (outside of those that can be gotten through mouth-to-mouth kissing)? Not really. They are all, pretty much, less effective at preventing pregnancy than not having sex.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Why did she get the morning after pill? Wasn't a condom your chosen method of pregnancy prevention? Didn't your "typical use" mean she had an incredibly low risk of getting pregnant?
Would you have even considered going to her gynecologist for the morning after pill, if you hadn't had sex the night before? If abstinence from sex isn't an effective form of birth control, shouldn't you have been more apt to go?

I think you are just being childish but let's answer that... the good thing about condoms is when they fail you know it, with a plan b it is an advantage, I don't know if my use was tipical I don't watch other couples fucking, I hope my use is more close to the perfect than the average one. By the way you missused "tipical use" in your sentence so I guess you have no clue what it means, I won't explain again read other precedent posts.
I sincerely don't understand what the point of the second part is, I mean the sex was worth it if that can answer your question... and I also have no clue what apt means I guess you didn't mean professional tennis association.

How did I misuse "typical use?"

Apt = "likely" More apt would means you would be more likely.

quote:

quote:

And, I have stated, many times in this thread, that I support comprehensive sex education classes and do not support "abstinence only" sex education classes.

Yes and this is honourable but you go on adding things that somehow makes other people not to agree with you.

I'm not attempting to talk anyone into agreeing with me. The facts of the matter are, that not having sex is more effective at preventing pregnancy. If the sex you have can result in a pregnancy, any method of prevention while having sex is less effective than not having sex at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY
People decide for themselves what "having sex" means. WebMD cannot quantify a belief system.

Okay, Clinton.

Does everyone get to decide how a pregnancy happens, too?

You can test for pregnancy. You cannot test for abstinence. THAT'S the difference.

Abstaining from sex, is nothing more than not having sex. Abstinence is a choice each and every time you have to choose to have sex or not. Abstaining today does not mean you can't have sex, or you can't use another method tomorrow.

By your definition. Other's definitions may vary based on what they believe. AKA- the Loophole.

Here's the standard for comparison: Used properly, is condom use during sex more or less effective at preventing pregnancy than abstinence (not having sex)?

Less. Here is the fair standard for comparison: Condoms (and all other methods of BC) are effective in preventing pregnancy during sex. Is abstinence more or less effective in preventing pregnancy during sex? I'll give you a hint: It is either less effective or it cannot be compared as a BC method.


If you have sex without a condom tonight, will your risks of pregnancy be higher, lower, or the same as every other time you have sex, if you use a condom every other time?

It would be the same risk as if I skipped using abstinence tonight. That's my point.

Is there any risk of getting pregnant while on the pill?

Yes. there is also a risk in getting pregnant while practicing abstinence. Its called human failure. Human failure is the most common cause of all birth control ineffectiveness.

Which is more important in not getting pregnant... being on the pill, or not having sex?

Most important would be having a reliable form of birth control. So that means being on the pill.

You defining abstinence as a "belief system" is all well and good... for you. Abstinence, is, however, a choice to not have sex, and has to be chosen each time the option comes up, just like a barrier method. Chemical methods do tend to require consistent use, but, again, that is a choice. You can decide to not use the pill or some other chemical method. Personally, I got snipped. Outside of my primary partner, I will use a condom, but not to prevent pregnancy.

And that's exactly why abstinence fails because you have to make exactly the same choice every time the option comes up- otherwise it fails. That's also why I said it had to be evaluated the same as every other method. You are using that method whether you CHOOSE to use it consistently or not.

Does your risk of getting pregnant from engaging in sex depend on how many times you use protection while engaging in sex, or from that particular engagement?

A woman's risk of getting pregnant depends on how consistent she is in using her chosen method of birth control.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, using condom properly during sex still has a very small risk of resulting in pregnancy. You do realize that I quoted WebMD and a box of condoms, not for the exact % risk, and just as proof that there is still risk, right?

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
This is why it doesn't matter which number you quote, putting the concept of abstinence up against any actual study on contraceptives is bullshit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the tipical use is the average use of every couple in the world, as MsMJAY pointed out you have a wrong concept of birth control that fixes on "the moment" while it is a process, for example to use condoms as a birth control method you need to have them with you any time you could feel like having sex and have them enough, properly conservated and wear them correctly, so there is no "your tipical use" as the tipical use involves people that when are short of condoms with a naked and willing woman in front of them just say "I'll take the risk" and other mistakes. No one says that abstinence if perfectly used isn't 100% effective, but the tipical use is the girl would like to wait the boy don't and he sweet talks her into accepting, so while abstinence is more effective in perfect use it is less effective in tipical use. If you don't admit it than you live in a fairly tale.
No if I didn't bought condoms and decided to resist the urge I would have been more often in the ER with my girlfirend asking for morning after pills, and the fact our bad experience didn't stopped us from having sex in the years to come can prove this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, using condom properly during sex still has a very small risk of resulting in pregnancy. You do realize that I quoted WebMD and a box of condoms, not for the exact % risk, and just as proof that there is still risk, right?

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
This is why it doesn't matter which number you quote, putting the concept of abstinence up against any actual study on contraceptives is bullshit.

Any thoughts on what is more effective at preventing pregnancy, not having sex or having sex with a different birth control method?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the tipical use is the average use of every couple in the world, as MsMJAY pointed out you have a wrong concept of birth control that fixes on "the moment" while it is a process, for example to use condoms as a birth control method you need to have them with you any time you could feel like having sex and have them enough, properly conservated and wear them correctly, so there is no "your tipical use" as the tipical use involves people that when are short of condoms with a naked and willing woman in front of them just say "I'll take the risk" and other mistakes. No one says that abstinence if perfectly used isn't 100% effective, but the tipical use is the girl would like to wait the boy don't and he sweet talks her into accepting, so while abstinence is more effective in perfect use it is less effective in tipical use. If you don't admit it than you live in a fairly tale.
No if I didn't bought condoms and decided to resist the urge I would have been more often in the ER with my girlfirend asking for morning after pills, and the fact our bad experience didn't stopped us from having sex in the years to come can prove this.

The problem with statistics like this is that 1 person in 100 isn't bad, unless you're that 1 person, to which, it's 100%.

Getting pregnant from sex is about that moment. My risk of pregnancy doesn't increase if some other guy's vasectomy surgery didn't take. My risk of STD transmission isn't any higher if everyone else in the world uses a condom wrong. My risks are all about what I do. If I don't use a condom, my risk of STD transmission is higher that time. The next time, my risk won't be any greater if I'm wearing a condom because I didn't last time.

It is an "each time" thing. You won't get someone pregnant this month if you forgot to wear a condom last July.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY
People decide for themselves what "having sex" means. WebMD cannot quantify a belief system.

Okay, Clinton.
Does everyone get to decide how a pregnancy happens, too?
You can test for pregnancy. You cannot test for abstinence. THAT'S the difference.

Doesn't answer the question. Please not the "how" and not "if" difference.

Abstaining from sex, is nothing more than not having sex. Abstinence is a choice each and every time you have to choose to have sex or not. Abstaining today does not mean you can't have sex, or you can't use another method tomorrow.
By your definition. Other's definitions may vary based on what they believe. AKA- the Loophole.

Here's the standard for comparison: Used properly, is condom use during sex more or less effective at preventing pregnancy than abstinence (not having sex)?
Less. THANK YOU!!! Here is the fair standard for comparison: Condoms (and all other methods of BC) are effective in preventing pregnancy during sex. Is abstinence more or less effective in preventing pregnancy during sex? I'll give you a hint: It is either less effective or it cannot be compared as a BC method.

Abstinence and having sex are mutually exclusive. No hint necessary. You are missing that deciding to not have sex is a method of preventing pregnancy.

If you have sex without a condom tonight, will your risks of pregnancy be higher, lower, or the same as every other time you have sex, if you use a condom every other time?
It would be the same risk as if I skipped using abstinence tonight. That's my point.
Is there any risk of getting pregnant while on the pill?
Yes. there is also a risk in getting pregnant while practicing abstinence. Its called human failure. Human failure is the most common cause of all birth control ineffectiveness.
Which is more important in not getting pregnant... being on the pill, or not having sex?
Most important would be having a reliable form of birth control. So that means being on the pill.

Wrong. Not having sex is more important than being on the pill. You can be on the pill and get pregnant. You can't get pregnant if you don't have sex.

You defining abstinence as a "belief system" is all well and good... for you. Abstinence, is, however, a choice to not have sex, and has to be chosen each time the option comes up, just like a barrier method. Chemical methods do tend to require consistent use, but, again, that is a choice. You can decide to not use the pill or some other chemical method. Personally, I got snipped. Outside of my primary partner, I will use a condom, but not to prevent pregnancy.
And that's exactly why abstinence fails because you have to make exactly the same choice every time the option comes up- otherwise it fails. That's also why I said it had to be evaluated the same as every other method. You are using that method whether you CHOOSE to use it consistently or not.

How is abstinence my method of choice if I'm having sex? If I'm having sex, I'm not abstaining. If you aren't using a condom, your method of pregnancy prevention isn't condoms.

Does your risk of getting pregnant from engaging in sex depend on how many times you use protection while engaging in sex, or from that particular engagement?
A woman's risk of getting pregnant depends on how consistent she is in using her chosen method of birth control.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the tipical use is the average use of every couple in the world, as MsMJAY pointed out you have a wrong concept of birth control that fixes on "the moment" while it is a process, for example to use condoms as a birth control method you need to have them with you any time you could feel like having sex and have them enough, properly conservated and wear them correctly, so there is no "your tipical use" as the tipical use involves people that when are short of condoms with a naked and willing woman in front of them just say "I'll take the risk" and other mistakes. No one says that abstinence if perfectly used isn't 100% effective, but the tipical use is the girl would like to wait the boy don't and he sweet talks her into accepting, so while abstinence is more effective in perfect use it is less effective in tipical use. If you don't admit it than you live in a fairly tale.
No if I didn't bought condoms and decided to resist the urge I would have been more often in the ER with my girlfirend asking for morning after pills, and the fact our bad experience didn't stopped us from having sex in the years to come can prove this.

The problem with statistics like this is that 1 person in 100 isn't bad, unless you're that 1 person, to which, it's 100%.

Getting pregnant from sex is about that moment. My risk of pregnancy doesn't increase if some other guy's vasectomy surgery didn't take. My risk of STD transmission isn't any higher if everyone else in the world uses a condom wrong. My risks are all about what I do. If I don't use a condom, my risk of STD transmission is higher that time. The next time, my risk won't be any greater if I'm wearing a condom because I didn't last time.

It is an "each time" thing. You won't get someone pregnant this month if you forgot to wear a condom last July.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, using condom properly during sex still has a very small risk of resulting in pregnancy. You do realize that I quoted WebMD and a box of condoms, not for the exact % risk, and just as proof that there is still risk, right?

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
This is why it doesn't matter which number you quote, putting the concept of abstinence up against any actual study on contraceptives is bullshit.

Any thoughts on what is more effective at preventing pregnancy, not having sex or having sex with a different birth control method?

the big problem with not having sex is you don't have sex.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the tipical use is the average use of every couple in the world, as MsMJAY pointed out you have a wrong concept of birth control that fixes on "the moment" while it is a process, for example to use condoms as a birth control method you need to have them with you any time you could feel like having sex and have them enough, properly conservated and wear them correctly, so there is no "your tipical use" as the tipical use involves people that when are short of condoms with a naked and willing woman in front of them just say "I'll take the risk" and other mistakes. No one says that abstinence if perfectly used isn't 100% effective, but the tipical use is the girl would like to wait the boy don't and he sweet talks her into accepting, so while abstinence is more effective in perfect use it is less effective in tipical use. If you don't admit it than you live in a fairly tale.
No if I didn't bought condoms and decided to resist the urge I would have been more often in the ER with my girlfirend asking for morning after pills, and the fact our bad experience didn't stopped us from having sex in the years to come can prove this.

The problem with statistics like this is that 1 person in 100 isn't bad, unless you're that 1 person, to which, it's 100%.
Getting pregnant from sex is about that moment. My risk of pregnancy doesn't increase if some other guy's vasectomy surgery didn't take. My risk of STD transmission isn't any higher if everyone else in the world uses a condom wrong. My risks are all about what I do. If I don't use a condom, my risk of STD transmission is higher that time. The next time, my risk won't be any greater if I'm wearing a condom because I didn't last time.
It is an "each time" thing. You won't get someone pregnant this month if you forgot to wear a condom last July.

Again you are thinking like a man. A woman's risk of getting pregnant tonight very well does increase if she forgot to take a pill last week. Her risk of getting pregnant is higher this month if she forgot to take her shot last month. Inconsistent usage is still considered usage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY


Abstinence and having sex are mutually exclusive. No hint necessary. You are missing that deciding to not have sex is a method of preventing pregnancy.

So you cannot test it, you cannot falsify it and you cannot compare it to real contraceptives. That means it is not scientifically a form of birth control. It is a faith based system.

How is abstinence my method of choice if I'm having sex? If I'm having sex, I'm not abstaining. If you aren't using a condom, your method of pregnancy prevention isn't condoms.

It's called using it inconsistently. It's how humans beings normally do things.


That doesn't answer the question, and you know it. Let's assume you have sex tonight, and aren't on a chemical birth control method. If you use a condom properly, is your risk of getting pregnant higher, lower, or the same from tonight's sex, if you didn't use any birth control method half the time you had sex the previous 6 months?

I'm not sure I understand the question but if you are asking if condoms are more effective than not using BC at all then the answer is of course they are. But if you are using condoms as your method of birth control its your method whether you use it consistently or not. It is still your chosen method of birth control. It's effectiveness is not evaluated based on each time you have sex. It is evaluated based on the number of people who chose it as their method and how many of them had a pregnancy. That is how birth control is evaluated. And that is how abstinence, if considered BC, has to be evaluated. By the same standard.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, using condom properly during sex still has a very small risk of resulting in pregnancy. You do realize that I quoted WebMD and a box of condoms, not for the exact % risk, and just as proof that there is still risk, right?

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
This is why it doesn't matter which number you quote, putting the concept of abstinence up against any actual study on contraceptives is bullshit.

Any thoughts on what is more effective at preventing pregnancy, not having sex or having sex with a different birth control method?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY
Abstinence and having sex are mutually exclusive. No hint necessary. You are missing that deciding to not have sex is a method of preventing pregnancy.
So you cannot test it, you cannot falsify it and you cannot compare it to real contraceptives. That means it is not scientifically a form of birth control. It is a faith based system.

Bullshit. You can't test it? Seriously? Let's do some testing, then. Let's get a whole bunch of fertile people and get them to not have sex. Let's see how many get pregnant. Tested.

quote:

How is abstinence my method of choice if I'm having sex? If I'm having sex, I'm not abstaining. If you aren't using a condom, your method of pregnancy prevention isn't condoms.
It's called using it inconsistently. It's how humans beings normally do things.

And, when you aren't using it, you aren't using it. That's sorta in the description. If you typically use condom, and then don't use a condom and get a gal pregnant, you can't blame that on the condom.

quote:

That doesn't answer the question, and you know it. Let's assume you have sex tonight, and aren't on a chemical birth control method. If you use a condom properly, is your risk of getting pregnant higher, lower, or the same from tonight's sex, if you didn't use any birth control method half the time you had sex the previous 6 months?

I'm not sure I understand the question but if you are asking if condoms are more effective than not using BC at all then the answer is of course they are. But if you are using condoms as your method of birth control its your method whether you use it consistently or not. It is still your chosen method of birth control. It's effectiveness is not evaluated based on each time you have sex. It is evaluated based on the number of people who chose it as their method and how many of them had a pregnancy. That is how birth control is evaluated. And that is how abstinence, if considered BC, has to be evaluated. By the same standard.

Not the question I was asking. I'll attempt to clarify (I accept that my question wasn't clear).

Assumption #1: Your sole method of birth control consists of using a condom.
Assumption #2: In the past 6 months, half the time you had sex, you didn't use a condom (the other half you used a condom properly).
Assumption #3: You have sex tonight.

If you use a condom properly during sex tonight, is your risk of getting pregnant from tonight's sex higher, lower, or the same because you didn't use any birth control half the time in the previous 6 months?

If you use a condom properly during sex tonight, is your risk of getting pregnant from tonight's sex higher, lower, or the same if Assumption #2 was that you used a condom properly every time you had sex in the previous 6 months?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, using condom properly during sex still has a very small risk of resulting in pregnancy. You do realize that I quoted WebMD and a box of condoms, not for the exact % risk, and just as proof that there is still risk, right?

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
This is why it doesn't matter which number you quote, putting the concept of abstinence up against any actual study on contraceptives is bullshit.

Any thoughts on what is more effective at preventing pregnancy, not having sex or having sex with a different birth control method?

In reality not abstinence.

A. Not having sex.
B. Having sex, but using a form of birth control properly

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, using condom properly during sex still has a very small risk of resulting in pregnancy. You do realize that I quoted WebMD and a box of condoms, not for the exact % risk, and just as proof that there is still risk, right?

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
This is why it doesn't matter which number you quote, putting the concept of abstinence up against any actual study on contraceptives is bullshit.

Any thoughts on what is more effective at preventing pregnancy, not having sex or having sex with a different birth control method?

In reality not abstinence.

What is more effective at preventing pregnancy:

A. Not having sex.
B. Having sex, but using a form of birth control properly

I just need a letter from you, Ken. A or B? Hell, it doesn't even have to be capitalized.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
What is more effective at preventing pregnancy:

A. Not having sex.
B. Having sex, but using a form of birth control properly

I just need a letter from you, Ken. A or B? Hell, it doesn't even have to be capitalized.

Neither. Because you option A does not represent reality.
The question is when people profess to use as their birth control method
A) abstinence
or
B) any other form of birth control
which results in fewer pregnancies and fewer STD's?
The answer is B.