950,000 Deadly Reasons to Practice Safe Sex

[CptStern]

I dunno, didn't seem t'me like thar was as much problem with disease and teen pregnancy back in them thar good ol' days afore they was a'learnin' young'uns about sex. Shucks, all this talk of 'free luv' and 'condiments' is pert near destroyin' this'yere country.

ah come on! ...how many women have you slept with? how many has the guy next door?, or his brother or his sister or whatever ..seriously how many people do you know who've had more than 15 partners? such a freakin myth ...the casanova is not the norm but rather the exception

there was just as much promiscuity in the 1500's as there is today, we're just far more aware of it then they were
man, didnt mel brooks history of the world teach you anything? "it's good to be king!"

it's in our nature to have and want sex ...how else do you explain 6 billion people on this planet?

 

[Hapless]

You're right, it's in our nature. It's in our nature to do many self-destructive things. That's why we have religions.

I know of numerous teenage mothers, one of which had her first child at 11. That's right, her FIRST child. The second was born when she was 12. Now I'm sure she and her 17 year-old boyfriend grew up with, "wear a condom" drilled into their heads, and yet her mother is now raising two kids not much younger than their mother. This is a good thing? This kind of stuff was an abberation even 30 years ago, and now it's almost the norm. There used to be a stigma attached to it, but now we celebrate it. Do you really think there is no correlation?

 

[CptStern]

teenage pregnancies were all the rage ...up until the last century, most people were married still in their teens ..it happens, education will hopefully prevent it from happening to someone else ...look, abstinence is not a realistic choice for the majority .....btw why religion crept into your post, I havent the foggiest clue ...hmmmm please dont tell me morality is tied to religion <shudder> then I MUST be a an immoral bastard cuz I dont believe in jebus! please save me oh religion cuz I be immoral and I need to repent my sins!

 

[Kommie]

That's why we have religions.

We have religions because many people desperately want almost need to know the answers to questions such as "why am I here?" "what is my purpose" "how did I get here" Religion just so happened to take on this role after the fact.

 

[CptStern]

We have religions because many people desperately want almost need to know the answers to questions such as "why am I here?" "what is my purpose" "how did I get here" Religion just so happened to take on this role after the fact.

quoted for more "ooomphf" :thumbs:

 

[Hapless]

teenage pregnancies were all the rage ...up until the last century, most people were married still in their teens ..it happens, education will hopefully prevent it from happening to someone else ...look, abstinence is not a realistic choice for everyone .....btw why religion crept into your post, I havent the foggiest clue ...hmmmm dont tell me morality is tied to religion <shudder> then I MUST be a an immoral bastard cuz I dont believe in jebus! please save me oh religion cuz I be immoral and I need to repent my sins!

I believe I've mentioned before that I'm pretty much areligious. And I consider myself to be a moral person, although others on this board may not. It's very possible for one to be moral and areligious.

My point was that we humans are driven by instinct to do a variety of stupid things. Killing, raping, stealing, sassing the police, etc. What religion does, or most religions anyway, is label these types of things sin, along with other things like worshipping false gods and the like. And it lays out consequences for one's actions. Kinda saying, "You may get away with it on earth, but in the hereafter I will pwn you." Most religions teach that no one is perfect, but everybody should try to be, regardless. It's not really the religion's fault that some people are morons and take things too far.

Take the 10 Commandments for instance. Can we all agree that it's wrong to kill (murder). Can we all agree that stealing is wrong? Loving thy neighbor is a good idea, as it avoids lawsuits and numerous calls to the police over trivial things. Coveting thy neighbor's wife is generally not a good thing, as it can lead to violations of the first commandment. And thank God for the part about remembering the Sabbath to keep it holy, or we might be working seven days a week.

 

[Viperidae]

My point was that we humans are driven by instinct to do a variety of stupid things. Killing, raping, stealing, sassing the police, etc.

I hope you're talking about killing animals. When has it been an instinct for people to kill people?

 

[OCybrManO]

Before religion there was a general understanding of "if I don't do anything bad to them they probably won't do it to me" that kept people out of trouble. Then came religion, putting an extra layer of selfishness on top of that. In the earlier version it was "I'll be nice to people so I won't get hurt"... while the religious version is "I'll be nice to people so I won't get hurt and I will get a big reward after I die."

There were civilizations that had laws not based on the will of one or more gods. There is even a "religion" (some people argue that it isn't technically a religion because rituals and morals aren't enough, but that depends on your definition) that is basically just a set of rules and guidelines with no kind of supernatural force or after-life rewards/punishments to back them up... nothing. It is called Confucianism. It deals with what is good for a society and the individuals.

 

[Kommie]

sassing the police

is grouped with

Killing, raping, stealing

Why?

Anyway All religion does Is try to establish an unquestioning obedience to IT'S cause, that is why the whole "You may get away with it on earth, but in the hereafter I will pwn you." Was established, unquestioning acceptance of It's doctrine. Whether for good or bad.

I hope you're talking about killing animals. When has it been an instinct for people to kill people?

I suppose before serious civilizations took root other people were competition, and must die. Wolves will kill other wolves (bad example I know) on instict so It is not realy that far a jump to say that humans may have at one point had an instict to kill other humans.

 

[bliink]

It is not realy that far a jump to say that humans may have at one point had an instict to kill other humans.

I'd say you'd be pretty correct if you said we still did.
Violence and Sex are our two most in-built instincts.

 

[Pericolos0]

The religious people I think are saying that *sex* causes it, not condoms. In the churches eyes, you're not 'getting around committing a sin' by going "Hey baby, we can't use a condom, that's a sin. Let's get busy with it, Yeah!"

Also this kinda doesn't fit that well in politics.. does it?

well yeah you know what i mean, the pope stated that condoms do not work and abstination is the only way. Ofcourse hardly anyone can keep to abstination. Lots of people in south africa for example dont trust condoms anymore now.

 

[Tr0n]

wha? huh? silver ring? what the hell is that?!? explain!!!!





Hapless, what in tar-nation?, yer suppos'ta shimy to the right instead of tripping over Maybell with yer awwwful boot stomping!, get it right!! *stern does a dosey and shasays tot he left :E


disclaimer: ethnic and regional stereotypes are strictly for the use of sarcastic humour and should be taken as such, furthermore one may not, under strict penalty, infer the writer is in any way a bigot or has or has had bigoted ideology especially when in direct reference to people colourfully and colloquially referred to as "redneck"

so what am i avoiding? oh ya ...teaching teens that they should NOT have sex till they're good and dead or married...ya that'll work :rolling:

Good boy stern.

Heres your cookie.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

well yeah you know what i mean, the pope stated that condoms do not work and abstination is the only way. Ofcourse hardly anyone can keep to abstination. Lots of people in south africa for example dont trust condoms anymore now.

Abstinence IS the only way to be 100% sure. It's up to people themselves to do it or not- their right, I'm not preaching it, but that's the truth.

You can greatly reduce the chances and be relatively safe, but if you're having sex, they don't always work.

 

[Hapless]

Why?

facetious (fuh-see'-shuss)

adj : cleverly amusing in tone; "a bantering tone"; "facetious remarks"; "tongue-in-cheek advice" [syn: bantering, tongue-in-cheek]

 

[Raziaar]

Before religion there was a general understanding of "if I don't do anything bad to them they probably won't do it to me" that kept people out of trouble. Then came religion, putting an extra layer of selfishness on top of that. In the earlier version it was "I'll be nice to people so I won't get hurt"... while the religious version is "I'll be nice to people so I won't get hurt and I will get a big reward after I die."

There were civilizations that had laws not based on the will of one or more gods. There is even a "religion" (some people argue that it isn't technically a religion because rituals and morals aren't enough, but that depends on your definition) that is basically just a set of rules and guidelines with no kind of supernatural force or after-life rewards/punishments to back them up... nothing. It is called Confucianism. It deals with what is good for a society and the individuals.

Haha, that first thing you said is soooo bogus. People didn't have an 'understanding' and were peaceful. Violence was very much abound before organized religion, and it stemmed from things such as greed, selfishness, hatred. You name it. None of these things are religious related, but can easily creep into the nature of individuals. The temptation of wickedness(not talking from a religious aspect here) is great in man, and if anything, I believe religions helped curb some of that. Sure, it created its own problems, but it also instilled a sense of morality into many people who knew that if they did something bad, surely they'd be punished even if they weren't caught. Whereas before, people thought that if they got away with it, it was all the better. They may have been governed somewhat by guilt, but I bet it was less apparent in humans in those days, whereas its drilled into our heads nowadays.

 

[CptStern]

Good boy stern.

Heres your cookie.

*munch, munch I'm probably old enough to be your father, munch munch*

 

[CptStern]

I believe I've mentioned before that I'm pretty much areligious. And I consider myself to be a moral person, although others on this board may not. It's very possible for one to be moral and areligious.

that's my point, morality doesnt only come from religion ..the greek philosophers taught us that

My point was that we humans are driven by instinct to do a variety of stupid things. Killing, raping, stealing, sassing the police, etc.

pardon me but ....snicker snicker ...heheheh "sassing the police!" ..that's haliarious ..sorry I just pictured a couple of effeminate men make fun of a police officers uniform ...sorry ..do continue

Take the 10 Commandments for instance. Can we all agree that it's wrong to kill (murder). Can we all agree that stealing is wrong?

yes but these morality laws were in existance way before the 10 commandments

Loving thy neighbor is a good idea, as it avoids lawsuits and numerous calls to the police over trivial things.

"hello 911?, I'd like to report that my neighbour is being overly sassy"


sorry heheheh

Coveting thy neighbor's wife is generally not a good thing, as it can lead to violations of the first commandment.

? Thou shalt have no other gods before me.?

And thank God for the part about remembering the Sabbath to keep it holy, or we might be working seven days a week.

the sabbath is saturday, well technically it starts on friday at sunset

 

[Nickcpus]

As bad as it is I hope the government never tries to control certain behaviors. I think they should raise awareness and educate the populace. Unfortunately that is much easier said than done.

I would hate to see the government extent its long arm into our sexual lives. Unfortunately I predict we will see radical changes in our lifetime.I not a mathematician but, according to the epidemic growth rate its only a matter of time before this virus affects all of us.

Should we be promoting homosexual acts and illicit drug use during these times? When should the government step in and hold people responsible for their actions? When the epidemic has reached 25% of the world’s population, or maybe 50%? I am not pointing the finger of blame and I don’t have the answers, just asking what should be done, if anything.

“The number of people living with HIV has been rising in every region, compared with two years ago, with the steepest increases occurring in East Asia, and in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (see Table, page 3). The number of people living with HIV in East Asia rose by almost 50% between 2002 and 2004, an increase that is attributable largely to China’s swiftly growing epidemic. In Eastern Europe and Central Asia, there were 40% more people living with HIV in 2004 than in 2002. Accounting for much of that trend is Ukraine’s resurgent epidemic and the ever-growing number of people living with HIV in the Russian Federation.

Sub-Saharan Africa remains by far the worst-affected region, with 25.4 million [23.4 million–28.4 million] people living with HIV at the end of 2004, compared to 24.4 million [22.5 million–27.3 million] in 2002. Just under two thirds (64%) of all people living with HIV are in sub-Saharan Africa, as are more than three quarters (76%) of all women living with HIV.”

http://www.unaids.org/NetTools/Misc...ublications/IRC-pub06/Epiupdate04_en&#46;html

 

[Kommie]

I think that people with aids ARE being held responsible for their actions, Be it being promiscuos and "unsafe" with multiple partners or sharing needles, or just not praticing "safe sex". To take it any further would simply add insult to injury.

I think if anything the populace will 'split' and the people with aids will be shunned and assaulted by the people without, they might be forced to live outside of major cities in ghettos and such. As horrible as it is thats what I see happening. Take a look back at history and this is not uncommon.

 

[burner69]

Haha, that first thing you said is soooo bogus. People didn't have an 'understanding' and were peaceful. Violence was very much abound before organized religion, and it stemmed from things such as greed, selfishness, hatred. You name it. None of these things are religious related, but can easily creep into the nature of individuals. The temptation of wickedness(not talking from a religious aspect here) is great in man, and if anything, I believe religions helped curb some of that. Sure, it created its own problems, but it also instilled a sense of morality into many people who knew that if they did something bad, surely they'd be punished even if they weren't caught. Whereas before, people thought that if they got away with it, it was all the better. They may have been governed somewhat by guilt, but I bet it was less apparent in humans in those days, whereas its drilled into our heads nowadays.

Of course its not bogus. It's how I live the first 18 years or so or my athiest life, then I decided to pop a moral code on myself... but being nice all the time can be boring... so I toned it down a bit. But do you really think that pre-religion cave men would just walk up to another guy picking berries, beat the crap out of him (for the berries) and not expect some kind of retaliation from either the guy, if he survived, or his tribe (or whatever they called it).
Greed existed before religion, and exists after. It's just my opinion from my experience through life - but I don't think religion's 'added layer' prevented anymore violence than it created.

Abstinence IS the only way to be 100% sure. It's up to people themselves to do it or not- their right, I'm not preaching it, but that's the truth.

You can greatly reduce the chances and be relatively safe, but if you're having sex, they don't always work.

Very true. But as mentioned before it's unworkable. Why? Because the desire to reproduce is the most fundamental purpose of our living - biologically speaking. And in us guys, that dosen't mean waiting until marriage, biologically, that means waiting til puberty and getting it as much as possible.
Now, of course we do abstain in some respects - I for one didn't go around raping all the girls as soon as I hit puberty, and then there's standards, theirs and mine.
I respect that you can avoid sex, but let's be honest, most can't - and you can hardly blame them for it. For some it's like abstaining to eat food, or drink. For others, more like abstaining from playing HL2

i hereby wanna thank all the religious fanatics (including the pope) that are claiming condoms cause aids. I hope they have any idea what they're causing

I think legally anybody, pope or otherwise, should NOT be able to publically say this kind of thing. It's killing people. If he went around saying "Shoot thy neighbour" we'd lock him up. Sort your life out popey!

I think that people with aids ARE being held responsible for their actions, Be it being promiscuos and "unsafe" with multiple partners or sharing needles, or just not praticing "safe sex". To take it any further would simply add insult to injury.

I think if anything the populace will 'split' and the people with aids will be shunned and assaulted by the people without, they might be forced to live outside of major cities in ghettos and such. As horrible as it is thats what I see happening. Take a look back at history and this is not uncommon.

(I'm not having a go at you personally, but I've seen this kind of thing many times before, both in a religious and non religious sense... so....)
Punished by whom? By God? By the all forgiving God? What about the people who get it through blood transfusions? Or the many many people, in Africa especially, who contracted it through being raped - is being raped a sin? What about people smoking heroin? Is that OK? Because they don't get AIDS.
And why are the other sinners not being punished so harshly what about greedy corporations who're making poor children work for bugger all then selling the trainers they make for £70 a pair.
What about those pesky terrorists?
What about that bloody pope, who's helping the disease get spread.
That guy who splashed me when he drove past me yesturday.

Point is, there are many MANY things worse than doing drugs and having sex.

Horrible indeed, yes, hope it never gets that way.


One question by the way guys - why don't full blood transfusions work? Anyone know?

 

[Kommie]

(I'm not having a go at you personally, but I've seen this kind of thing many times before, both in a religious and non religious sense... so....)
Punished by whom? By God? By the all forgiving God? What about the people who get it through blood transfusions? Or the many many people, in Africa especially, who contracted it through being raped - is being raped a sin? What about people smoking heroin? Is that OK? Because they don't get AIDS.
And why are the other sinners not being punished so harshly what about greedy corporations who're making poor children work for bugger all then selling the trainers they make for £70 a pair.
What about those pesky terrorists?
What about that bloody pope, who's helping the disease get spread.
That guy who splashed me when he drove past me yesturday.

Point is, there are many MANY things worse than doing drugs and having sex.

Horrible indeed, yes, hope it never gets that way.


One question by the way guys - why don't full blood transfusions work? Anyone know?

I am not saying that AIDS/HIV is some sort of punishment, I just meant that a majority have reap(ed?) what they have sown. Though I simply was not thinking and forgot the other methods of contracting it. I just wanted to clear things up so I dont sound like one of those "EVERYONE WHO HAS AIDS DESERVES IT!" types.

I think Full blood transfusions don't work because the patients would die, because if the slightest drop of blood was left it would all be for naught. But I'm no doctor.

 

[CptStern]

I am not saying that AIDS/HIV is some sort of punishment, I just meant that a majority have reap(ed?) what they have sown. Though I simply was not thinking and forgot the other methods of contracting it. I just wanted to clear things up so I dont sound like one of those "EVERYONE WHO HAS AIDS DESERVES IT!" types.

I think Full blood transfusions don't work because the patients would die, because if the slightest drop of blood was left it would all be for naught. But I'm no doctor.

* calls up father who's had 3 complete blood transfusions in 3 years to see if he's still alive ...yup *

 

[burner69]

* calls up father who's had 3 complete blood transfusions in 3 years to see if he's still alive ...yup *

Any idea why it dosen't flush out AIDS?

 

[Hapless]

that's my point, morality doesnt only come from religion ..the greek philosophers taught us that

I...uh....I think that was my point as well...

pardon me but ....snicker snicker ...heheheh "sassing the police!" ..that's haliarious ..sorry I just pictured a couple of effeminate men make fun of a police officers uniform ...sorry ..do continue

No reason for me to pardon you. I was being facetious. That's actually somewhat of a southern colloquialism, "You sassin' me, boy?" "What'd you arrest him for?" "Sassin' the police."

"hello 911?, I'd like to report that my neighbour is being overly sassy"


sorry heheheh

While I meant for that to be humorous, you'd be surprised at how true it is. People call in over the stupidest stuff. I've had people call in because their neighbor built a privacy fence, and they thought they were trying to hide something. People...

? Thou shalt have no other gods before me.?

I don't know. Maybe it's like joining a gang. Once you're in, you're in forever. :E

 

[CptStern]

Any idea why it dosen't flush out AIDS?

I dont know, my dad doesnt have aids

 

[Nickcpus]

I think that people with aids ARE being held responsible for their actions, Be it being promiscuos and "unsafe" with multiple partners or sharing needles, or just not praticing "safe sex". To take it any further would simply add insult to injury.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I am compassionate and realize it would be a horrible fate to contract HIV or AIDS, guilty or not they are being punished. Aids is not an airborne virus, it’s contracted because someone, somewhere broke some kind of rule and by doing so they placed everyone at risk.

Now I’m not a mathematician but the epidemic appears to be moving closer to an alarming exponential growth rate. If and when this happens you can be assured the populace will split and the government will be forced to take radical steps. It could very well be the uninfected who are assaulted and forced to live outside of major cities.

I think if anything the populace will 'split' and the people with aids will be shunned and assaulted by the people without, they might be forced to live outside of major cities in ghettos and such. As horrible as it is thats what I see happening. Take a look back at history and this is not uncommon.

Again let me say, I am not pointing the finger of blame and I don’t have the answers.
I’m just pointing out a potentially dangerous threat.



.

 

[burner69]

Breaking rules? Civilisation splitting?

What?

This sounds like a George Romeo film or something. It may have happened in the past, but do you think with todays laws we'll let people with AIDS, or people without AIDS, just chuck everyone out of the city? Why would that happen?

 

[The Monkey]

Yes, condoms are the best solution, but to call people idiot, just because they don't want to wear a condom is plain stupid. Have you even heard about cultures? Imagine this happening to you that live in the first world. (This is a really crappy example, but here it goes). Some scientist in China has come up with a cure that stops all diseases; all you have to do is cut your tongue off.
Hope you get my point.

 

[Pericolos0]

Any idea why it dosen't flush out AIDS?

because HIV isnt mainly located in the blood.

 

[Kommie]

Please don’t misunderstand me. I am compassionate and realize it would be a horrible fate to contract HIV or AIDS, guilty or not they are being punished. Aids is not an airborne virus, it’s contracted because someone, somewhere broke some kind of rule and by doing so they placed everyone at risk

I understand what you meant and why you did, I never considered you to be some sort of monster or cruel person for it.

This sounds like a George Romeo film or something. It may have happened in the past, but do you think with todays laws we'll let people with AIDS, or people without AIDS, just chuck everyone out of the city? Why would that happen?

In a society that won't allow two people to marry simply because of their sexuality? The whole it will never happen here argument has no substance, because laws or a guilty consciensce(sp?) wont stop anything when mob hysteria and hatred come into play.

Have you heard of the wave? Assuming you haven't (which you should look into, it's very interesting) There was a high school teacher, who in order to show how easy it was for something like what happened in nazi germany to take hold, Had his students create a seperate group of people who had nazi ideals or something like that, It grew and grew until it was horribly out of control. The students in "the wave" seperated themselves from the others and became extremely violent against the other students who did not agree with them. All the while the membership skyrocketed. It just shows that when it comes down to it things such as laws and morals can be easily brushed away.

--edit--
here is a link
http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/3145/wave.html#nofiction
It isnt great but it gives you a basic idea
http://www.toddstrasser.com/html/thewave2.htm

 

[Edcrab]

The_Monkey- its one thing to understand why a culture might be unwilling to change but parralleling the use of a rubber contraceptive to oral mutilation is a bit extreme. I'd certainly wear daft contrivances on my genitals to avoid disease, mind.

The fact is that too many people continue to wrongly see Africa as a continent overflowing with ignorant tribesmen who talk gibberish and wear feathers while squandering all efforts to aid them- there is a large and varied community in the country, and often the problem isn't so much culture or even education as it is attitude.

Conveniently and conversely- although no tribe could be called "untouched"- the reclusive nature of some cultures has helped to shield them from the networked invasion of HIV, since they lack the extended contact less secluded locales enjoy. Arguably, a lesser but equally publicised victim of AIDS is the more developed part of Africa, where style is somehow seen as more important than safety. Condoms just aren't "cool" in some social circles, and that's a big issue.

 

[Nickcpus]

Breaking rules??

The rules that HIV and AIDS play by.

Civilisation splitting?

Now I’m not a mathematician but the epidemic appears to be moving closer to an alarming exponential growth rate. If and when this happens you can be assured the populace will split and the government will be forced to take radical steps.
Do you know the meaning of exponential growth rate?
If HIV/AIDS reaches exponential growth rate, it would only take a small amount of time before a large percentage of world’s population would become infected. As to what the percentage would have to be before social controls break down would be purely speculation.

This sounds like a George Romeo film or something. It may have happened in the past, but do you think with todays laws we'll let people with AIDS, or people without AIDS, just chuck everyone out of the city? Why would that happen?

The world has never faced an epidemic of this size or nature. If it continues to grow it could eventually break down social controls. You know people would panic, all speculation, lets hope for our sake it never reaches that magnitude. And yes I suppose you could relate it to George Romeo’s work, underlying meaning that man just can’t get along with each other.

 

[Murray_H]

because HIV isnt mainly located in the blood.

Well, the virus attacks CD4+ lymphocytes, which are found in the blood (white BLOOD cells), but the virus can also attack some neurons and glial cells, which aren't in the blood.

 

[Pericolos0]

Well, the virus attacks CD4+ lymphnocytes, which are found in the blood (white BLOOD cells), but the virus can also attack some neurons and glial cells, which aren't in the blood.

Well, I'm no anatomist, but i know white blood cells aren't always present in the blood. They kinda come in when theres danger. AFAIK they spend there time in the lymph system
http://www.med.umich.edu/opm/newspage/images/lymph system.gif

oh well this isnt what the discussion is about