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.

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel
Here's a helpful cartoon explaining why:



[image]local://upfiles/566126/CD9EC7F38E1B455FAC7F9B2473CD32C4.gif[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

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: MsMJAY
If we can all make up our own tests with our own parameters then every method would be 100% effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
He means it doesn't represent reality because sex and the desire to have sex is instinct, it's impossible if not extremely difficult to fight instinct. Given the proper circumstance, even those who would ideally abstain may have sex. For those who are adamant about abstinence, they can resist it, but the vast majority aren't that keen on abstinence and as a result are more inclined to have sex, which is where contraception is so important. The point is that using abstinence as the only form of sex education is only useful among a small minority, while having a more comprehensive sexual education provides much more information and decisions for those who are sexually active, young and old, to help keep them safe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

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.

B, Definitely option B
Why you ask, well because not having sex fails catastrophically much more often then even the shittiest of generic condoms. The more one uses it the more it fails and the more it fails catastrophically. And succeed or fail it's still psychologically damaging.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Abstaining from sex doesn't mean there isn't any other method used when you're not abstaining.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How anyone can argue that having sex is more effective than preventing pregnancy than not having sex is mind-boggling.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I have stated many times in this thread, that I do not support "abstinence only" sex education. Your comment makes it look like you think I'm in the "abstinence only" camp.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
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?

Let's start with the fact that what you just asked is not quantifiable. No one can tell you what the chances are of you getting someone pregnant THIS SINGLE TIME you have sex and use a condom. That has never been tested. That is simply not how birth control is tested. They do not give women pregnancy tests after every sexual encounter to see if the BC worked.
You cannot just make up your own test for birth control then compare it to other methods. It has to be tested by the same standard as every other BC method or you cannot use it for comparison
What you don't seem to understand is that a 98% effective rate does not mean that if you have sex 100 times that 2 of those times will result in pregnancy. It means that out of 100 couples who used condoms over a year's time, 2 of the women became pregnant during that year. THIS is how all methods of birth control are evaluated. You cannot apply a self-created test here then compare the results to BC methods that followed the correct test procedure. You cannot do it with condoms and you certainly cannot do it with abstinence.
You cannot make it up then call it science. If we can all make up our own tests with our own parameters then every method would be 100% effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Abstaining from sex doesn't mean there isn't any other method used when you're not abstaining.

It has correlated to that in a number of studies though.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How anyone can argue that having sex is more effective than preventing pregnancy than not having sex is mind-boggling.

Reality, check it out some time.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I have stated many times in this thread, that I do not support "abstinence only" sex education. Your comment makes it look like you think I'm in the "abstinence only" camp.

I'm not a fan of either slut shaming or slut shaming plus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
That's the failing of the people involved, not abstinence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/secret-sex-celibate-system
Although the church propagates the myth that bishops and priests are celibate, this is not based on fact. Several modern studies have used various methods to measure the degree of celibate observance. No researcher so far has assessed that more than 50 percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
That's the failing of the people involved, not abstinence.

And there it is, the standard religious idiocy. Hand out a method which doesn't work and then blame the victim when it predictably fails. Abstinence is so defective that even priests can't manage to pull it off:

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/secret-sex-celibate-system
Although the church propagates the myth that bishops and priests are celibate, this is not based on fact. Several modern studies have used various methods to measure the degree of celibate observance. No researcher so far has assessed that more than 50 percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy.

And you're expecting hormone riddled teens to pull it off....that's a fucking joke.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Progressives want to promote "independent" sexually liberated women. They do not like conventional social roles.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Instead of "right or wrong" its "do what feels good".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Women's rights.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
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?

Let's start with the fact that what you just asked is not quantifiable. No one can tell you what the chances are of you getting someone pregnant THIS SINGLE TIME you have sex and use a condom. That has never been tested. That is simply not how birth control is tested. They do not give women pregnancy tests after every sexual encounter to see if the BC worked.
You cannot just make up your own test for birth control then compare it to other methods. It has to be tested by the same standard as every other BC method or you cannot use it for comparison
What you don't seem to understand is that a 98% effective rate does not mean that if you have sex 100 times that 2 of those times will result in pregnancy. It means that out of 100 couples who used condoms over a year's time, 2 of the women became pregnant during that year. THIS is how all methods of birth control are evaluated. You cannot apply a self-created test here then compare the results to BC methods that followed the correct test procedure. You cannot do it with condoms and you certainly cannot do it with abstinence.
You cannot make it up then call it science. If we can all make up our own tests with our own parameters then every method would be 100% effective.

You can't even answer directly, either. I wasn't looking for a listing of the exact odds.

I think we both agree that having sex with a condom is more effective at preventing pregnancies than having sex without a condom. Do you agree that if you don't have sex, you don't get pregnant?

If the last time you had sex, you used a condom correctly, what impact does that have on your chances of getting pregnant the next time you have sex (assuming the results of your previous encounter did not result in a pregnancy)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

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.

B, Definitely option B
Why you ask, well because not having sex fails catastrophically much more often then even the shittiest of generic condoms. The more one uses it the more it fails and the more it fails catastrophically. And succeed or fail it's still psychologically damaging.

Thank you. Perhaps you should read up on human reproduction, and figure out how babies are made.

**Spoiler Alert: It takes sex to get pregnant. That's the science of it, even.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
Here's the problem that you don't seem to grasp.
"Abstinence education" doesn't make people abstain any more than Drivers ed makes everyone obey the speed limit.
It's really simple.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
That's the failing of the people involved, not abstinence.

And there it is, the standard religious idiocy. Hand out a method which doesn't work and then blame the victim when it predictably fails. Abstinence is so defective that even priests can't manage to pull it off:

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/secret-sex-celibate-system
Although the church propagates the myth that bishops and priests are celibate, this is not based on fact. Several modern studies have used various methods to measure the degree of celibate observance. No researcher so far has assessed that more than 50 percent of Roman Catholic clergy at any one time are in fact practicing celibacy.

And you're expecting hormone riddled teens to pull it off....that's a fucking joke.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY
It has no impact because last time it was 100% effective. By that standard it is a virtual 100% certainty that I will not get pregnant this time. Your standard makes condoms a 100% effective form of birth control. If every instance of sexual activity is counted individually that means every time I don't get pregnant the condom was 100% effective. By your own logic you just made condoms 100% effective in preventing pregnancy.

quote:

The reason you don't want to evaluate abstinence by the same method other birth control methods are evaluated by because when real scientific standards are used, abstinence is a dismal failure.
What percent of people get chose abstinence as their method of birth control get pregnant? (studies show that sexual behavior in those who choose abstinence is virtually identical to the sexual behavior of those who do not and that abstinence choosers are more likely to get pregnancy an STDs because they are less likely to use any REAL birth control.)
Studies showed that 5 years after pledging to use abstinence as their birth control, those who pledged to practice abstinence had the same rate of sexual activity as those who did not pledge. Also 82% of those who pledged to use abstinence denied that they ever took the pledge.
THAT is your statistic on abstinence effectiveness. THAT is the failure rate for using abstinence as a method of birth control.
An article from Christianity Today stated that LINK ... teens who took a virginity pledge have sexual relationships that are nearly identical to those of similar teens who did not make such a pledge. Taking a virginity pledge is at best ineffective, and may even be dangerous for the health of those who break their pledge.
Apparently even Christianity Today gets its. When evaluated by the same standards as other BC methods. (not just some stuff you make up.) abstinence is a failure.
But feel free to ignore the evidence and just shout "winning!" like Charlie Sheen does.