I abstained from abstainance years ago.
Works for me.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Abstinence schmabstinence!
Abstinence schmabstinence!Follow
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
It's saying, "Don't touch the tools until you are ready to make something."
I know. What in the world did we ever do before sex ed classes? Although those broken penises must have cost healthcare fortunes!
Actually not too many years ago it was more common for couples to wed in their early teens. Sex ed wasn't needed.
On the flip side if more parents would quit depending on the school systems to raise their children, that might help.
Edited, Dec 7th 2007 1:26pm by Katie
The One and Only Katie wrote:
On the flip side if more parents would quit depending on the school systems to raise their children, that might help.
Abstinence may be the best method of preventing unplanned kiddies but abstinence-only education is not the best means of effectively teaching teens.
Edited, Dec 7th 2007 1:58pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
5 posts
bhodi,
Let's take it one step further. Since sex is obviously such a hot topic shouldn't we have these public educators introduce all aspects of it at an earlier age? What do you think, 3rd grade? Is that the age we teach these children how to properly use a condom? I mean the sooner they know the more protected from these horrible diseases they are, right? It's obvious parents aren't up to the task of properly educating their children in the responsibilities of parenthood. After we've turned over the teaching of sexual practices to the state we can focus on how to get the people to turn over their health practices to the state next. Maybe then we can get all these fat f*cks to start taking care of themselves so they're less of a burden on an already overtaxed health system. Just imagine a fully sexed population of in shape hotties; what a world it would be.
Quote:
I mean abstinence TRULY is the safest method, so lets do everything in our power to completely eliminate any education that doesn't deal with it. Forget that only a fraction of a fraction of the population ever reaches marriageable age with the curse intact.
Let's take it one step further. Since sex is obviously such a hot topic shouldn't we have these public educators introduce all aspects of it at an earlier age? What do you think, 3rd grade? Is that the age we teach these children how to properly use a condom? I mean the sooner they know the more protected from these horrible diseases they are, right? It's obvious parents aren't up to the task of properly educating their children in the responsibilities of parenthood. After we've turned over the teaching of sexual practices to the state we can focus on how to get the people to turn over their health practices to the state next. Maybe then we can get all these fat f*cks to start taking care of themselves so they're less of a burden on an already overtaxed health system. Just imagine a fully sexed population of in shape hotties; what a world it would be.
wbuffet wrote:
Let's take it one step further. Since sex is obviously such a hot topic shouldn't we have these public educators introduce all aspects of it at an earlier age? What do you think, 3rd grade? Is that the age we teach these children how to properly use a condom? I mean the sooner they know the more protected from these horrible diseases they are, right?
As for sex itself, I told my kid about sex when he was old enough to seriously ask about it which was in 2nd grade. So I wouldn't have a real problem with contraceptive education in the 3rd or 4th grade. But I think it's pretty pointless to do then and I assume enough parents would take issue that it's not a battle worth fighting. Come 7th grade or so, the stakes grow progressively higher.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
Let's take it one step further. Since sex is obviously such a hot topic shouldn't we have these public educators introduce all aspects of it at an earlier age? What do you think, 3rd grade? Is that the age we teach these children how to properly use a condom? I mean the sooner they know the more protected from these horrible diseases they are, right? It's obvious parents aren't up to the task of properly educating their children in the responsibilities of parenthood. After we've turned over the teaching of sexual practices to the state we can focus on how to get the people to turn over their health practices to the state next. Maybe then we can get all these fat f*cks to start taking care of themselves so they're less of a burden on an already overtaxed health system. Just imagine a fully sexed population of in shape hotties; what a world it would be.
I was going to respond to your actually silly argument, but then I looked at how many socks you've had muted in the past, and decided pointing that out would be just as effective with considerably less effort involved
What is it... twelve accounts banned or muted so far, including your main account?
Varrus shall not be silenced!
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
5 posts
Jophed,
and you sincerely responded. Today's been a good one.
and you sincerely responded. Today's been a good one.
Getting me to post is about as challenging as getting the oceans to follow the tide. S'what I do.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
5 posts
groogle,
Is it silly? I've heard that the UK are denying state offered health care because some guy refused to stop smoking, and the operation was on his foot.
Personally I can't wait until the state starts determining whether someone qualifies for state funding based on what bad habits they engage. Maybe next we can start drug testing those who receive any state funding. With the state in control the skies the limit.
Quote:
I was going to respond to your actually silly argument
Is it silly? I've heard that the UK are denying state offered health care because some guy refused to stop smoking, and the operation was on his foot.
Personally I can't wait until the state starts determining whether someone qualifies for state funding based on what bad habits they engage. Maybe next we can start drug testing those who receive any state funding. With the state in control the skies the limit.
5 posts
jophed,
ah but getting you to answer a question that's so absurd is another matter altogether.
Quote:
Getting me to post is about as challenging as getting the oceans to follow the tide. S'what I do.
ah but getting you to answer a question that's so absurd is another matter altogether.
Yeah. You apparently missed the McD's/BK debate 
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Joph will answer anything.
Hey Joph? What color are my pajamas?
Hey Joph? What color are my pajamas?
Transparent.
Those are some silly pyjamas.
Those are some silly pyjamas.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Pajamas are silly. Commando is the best.
wbuffet wrote:
I've heard that the UK are denying state offered health care because some guy refused to stop smoking, and the operation was on his foot.
Next?
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Recent Visitors: 275
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (275)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Abstinence schmabstinence!
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC