DeadYorick Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Jebus its a little more complicated then that. Plus I don't think it is very smart or nice to bash someone. Especially if they know more about a subject then you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 sorry, but your Opinion is invalidOkay then. Good argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I think DJ's point is probably covered somewhere above. If you remove the risk of pregnancy, you remove one of the reasons that people are/try to be more careful in the pursuit of carnal pleasure. Most forms of contraception aren't foolproof, and younger people can be even more irresponsible than older ones (though often not by much). It is plausible that if a younger person starts experimenting with sex and finds it liberating they may become more active (especially if she doesn't have to worry about pregnancy) and increase the chances of contracting an std. Now, not saying that sterilizing teens is going to result in a huge upswing in veneral diseases reported/contracted, but it is a potential concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthJebus05 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Jebus its a little more complicated then that. Plus I don't think it is very smart or nice to bash someone. Especially if they know more about a subject then you do. Sorry, I don't know as much as her because... because... , I can't think of a reason. I think DJ's point is probably covered somewhere above. If you remove the risk of pregnancy, you remove one of the reasons that people are/try to be more careful in the pursuit of carnal pleasure. Most forms of contraception aren't foolproof, and younger people can be even more irresponsible than older ones (though often not by much). It is plausible that if a younger person starts experimenting with sex and finds it liberating they way become more active (especially if she doesn't have to worry about pregnancy) and increase the chances of contracting an std. Now, not saying that sterilizing teens is going to result in a huge upswing in veneral diseases reported/contracted, but it is a potential concern. I was the first one to bring it up, then got tired of repeating myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Likewise, your posts never make sense to me. It's all "Look at me, I'm better than you!" and "Just because I'm friends with the admins, means I can abuse you and get away with it!". I am not aware of any place where Inyri has expressed such an opinion. I also, as an admin, do not appreciate the insinuations you make with your statement. A teenage girl gets sterilized, thus she thinks she can go and have unprotected sex with her boyfriend. It turns out that her boyfriend has a STD, and this is after they had unprotected sex. The End. You assume that all girls will think this way. You assume that the people administering the sterilizations will not impress upon the girls that it is a contraceptive measure, not an anti-STD measure. Either way, you assume either monumental stupidity or gross negligence on someone's part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthJebus05 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 You assume that all girls will think this way. You assume that the people administering the sterilizations will not impress upon the girls that it is a contraceptive measure, not an anti-STD measure. Either way, you assume either monumental stupidity or gross negligence on someone's part. Thats where you're wrong. I never said all girls are like that, never ever ever ever ever. I can keep going? I already said I freaken know this isn't a anti-std measure, it will cause more STD's, since some girls will relax and not use condoms, and accidentally get a STD from their boyfriend. :EDIT: Forgot to mention, I said 'admins', not Rouge Nine. And how did you know I was talking about this forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Thats where you're wrong. I never said all girls are like that, never ever ever ever ever. I can keep going? I already said I freaken know this isn't a anti-std measure, it will cause more STD's, since some girls will relax and not use condoms, and accidentally get a STD from their boyfriend. From your original post on the point: They would want to have unprotected sex, since they can't get pregnant, and what if their boyfriend has a STD? Thats what I'm trying to say. 'They'? That sounds a lot like a blanket statement for 'all girls' to me. And I like that your assumption is based on the fact that boys are automatic carriers of STDs AND irresponsible enough not to let their partners know AND stupid enough not to know that sterilization is not a contraceptive measure. Way to stereotype the gender. :EDIT: Forgot to mention, I said 'admins', not Rouge Nine. And how did you know I was talking about this forum? My name is Rogue Nine. I'm pretty sure the other admins would also not appreciate the sentiments you insinuate. And since we're posting on this forum and you are referring to Inyri's statements here, then I can only assume that you mean this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I've noticed a lot more expletives being used in the past week or two. Keep the language clean, people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthJebus05 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 From your original post on the point: 'They'? That sounds a lot like a blanket statement for 'all girls' to me. And I like that your assumption is based on the fact that boys are automatic carriers of STDs AND irresponsible enough not to let their partners know AND stupid enough not to know that sterilization is not a contraceptive measure. Way to stereotype the gender. My name is Rogue Nine. I'm pretty sure the other admins would also not appreciate the sentiments you insinuate. And since we're posting on this forum and you are referring to Inyri's statements here, then I can only assume that you mean this forum. Great, I must be the stupidest person in the world. Every guy has STD's, damnit. I wonder where babies come from then? Seriously, 'they' meaning idiotic girls who think being sterilized will stop STD's. They would want to have unprotected sex, since they can't get pregnant, and what if their boyfriend has a STD? Thats what I'm trying to say. I gave the bit where I don't say all guys carries STD's a bold font. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Great, I must be the stupidest person in the world. Every guy has STD's, damnit. I wonder where babies come from then? I gave the bit where I don't say all guys carries STD's a bold font. I made my position based on this statement: I already said I freaken know this isn't a anti-std measure, it will cause more STD's, since some girls will relax and not use condoms, and accidentally get a STD from their boyfriend. Your supposition is that those girls who choose to 'relax' and not use condoms will automatically get an STD from their boyfriend. Seriously, 'they' meaning idiotic girls who think being sterilized will stop STD's. Well, then you should have said so instead of being unhelpfully vague about a point you were trying to make that is central to your argument. And you have not responded on my points about the male's responsibility in the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthJebus05 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I needed to repost this: and what if their boyfriend[ has a STD? What if? I never said every guy has a STD. and what if their boyfriend has a STD? And I have no idea why you would think I think every girl would want to have unprotected sex. Why would someone think that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 It is not my fault you cannot communicate a clear message, instead relying on vague, confusing and overly generalized blanket statements and anecdotal evidence to back up your position. And this entire argument is irrelevant to the topic at hand anyway, so it is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 *Jae views this thread and lifts an eyebrow at the smoke erupting* Please find a way to not snipe at each other *, or I'll be happy to close the thread so you all won't be able to. That is all. Edit by d3: * and keep the discussion on topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Sorry about that. We'll continue the debate/discussion about Morals in another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salzella Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 More generally, it's a paranoid joke which no-one of middling intelligence or above reads. an admirable summary, if i may say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.