[iamzack]

My point is, stop blaming "The Kids" for your insurance premiums.

Fair enough. I'm just extremely unsympathetic to "teenagers can't help themselves so we need to subsidize their irresponsibility" argument.

Besides, I've got plenty of other things that raise my premiums to be grumpy about.

Lol, like we are not going to have sex if we don't have easy access to contraceptives? We can subsidize the contraceptives or we can subsidize the unwanted babies of unprepared young couples.

How hard exactly is your access to contraceptives? Is it really unaffordable or unavailable for whatever reason?

Getting an IUD is near impossible without insurance coverage. Condoms are bloody expensive.

My birth control is $18/mo with insurance. I used to use cheaper stuff, but the side effects ****ed me up.

Besides being expensive, everyone I knew when we were younger teenagers thought you had to be 18 to buy condoms (teachers aren't allowed to tell us anything except that condoms are massive failures and you might as well inject yourself with AIDS). Of course, after figuring out that wasn't right, then there's the issue of condoms always being kept in plain sight of the register. Possibly to prevent theft, but it's definitely intimidating to a 15 year old to be staring at a wall of condoms trying to figure out which ones to buy, assuming people are watching.

They should have little vending machines in high school bathrooms for condoms, like they do for tampons and pads. Easy access, affordable, no intimidation factor..

[Scotty]

No kids my age are willing to stay abstinent.

I disagree.

And that's just about the only thing I can weigh in on in this topic with any knowledge whatsoever, so I'll just see myself out.

[Grizzly]

But U.S. Catholic bishops say pregnancy is a healthy condition, not an illness.

But those pills also prevents stuff like PMS from happening.

[BengalTiger]

Are you saying that there do not exist government and private charitable programs, widely lauded by all, which attempt to provide food and shelter to teenagers and children? Because if so, I think you're living in some kind of different reality from the rest of us and no dialogue is possible.

Well those don't sponsor everybody, only the hungry and homeless. Sorry I didn't specify which teenagers I was thinking about.

P.S. $18/month should be less than you spend for food per week.

Also- wiki gives condoms Pregnancy rates (first year, latex):
Perfect use    2%
Typical use    10–18%

[Sushi]

My point is, stop blaming "The Kids" for your insurance premiums.

Fair enough. I'm just extremely unsympathetic to "teenagers can't help themselves so we need to subsidize their irresponsibility" argument.

Besides, I've got plenty of other things that raise my premiums to be grumpy about.

Lol, like we are not going to have sex if we don't have easy access to contraceptives? We can subsidize the contraceptives or we can subsidize the unwanted babies of unprepared young couples.

Or, we could subsidize neither. So cruel of me, I know.

Fair enough. I'm just extremely unsympathetic to "teenagers can't help themselves so we need to subsidize their irresponsibility" argument.

This predicates on sex being irresponsible.

Sex isn't inherently irresponsible, but it certainly can be done irresponsibly. Sex without being prepared to deal with the consequences yourself is, IMHO, irresponsible. I have nothing against birth control, but IMHO it's something that shouldn't be subsidized. I understand that it's probably "cheaper" to pay for birth control than to pay for supporting unwanted pregnancies, but I'm grumpy that I have to subsidize either.

Considering it is a biological drive of similar scale to eating or sleeping, that is at best false and more likely a deliberate distortion of reality.

I definitely disagree with this. It's certainly a strong biological imperative, but not one necessary for survival. That's a pretty crucial distinction.

[General Battuta]

Also- wiki gives condoms Pregnancy rates (first year, latex):
Perfect use    2%
Typical use    10–18%[/color]

This is why you need an IUD, which is expensive as hell but is also the #1 closest-to-foolproof method used by birth control specialists. That says something.

[iamzack]

Are you saying that there do not exist government and private charitable programs, widely lauded by all, which attempt to provide food and shelter to teenagers and children? Because if so, I think you're living in some kind of different reality from the rest of us and no dialogue is possible.

Well those don't sponsor everybody, only the hungry and homeless. Sorry I didn't specify which teenagers I was thinking about.

P.S. $18/month should be less than you spend for food per week.

It is, but only barely. Luckily, I don't pay for either as long as I eat dining hall food, and I don't have to pay the insurance premiums either.

My point is, stop blaming "The Kids" for your insurance premiums.

Fair enough. I'm just extremely unsympathetic to "teenagers can't help themselves so we need to subsidize their irresponsibility" argument.

Besides, I've got plenty of other things that raise my premiums to be grumpy about.

Lol, like we are not going to have sex if we don't have easy access to contraceptives? We can subsidize the contraceptives or we can subsidize the unwanted babies of unprepared young couples.

Or, we could subsidize neither. So cruel of me, I know.

So, what, let the babies born to kids rot?

[NGTM-1R]

I definitely disagree with this. It's certainly a strong biological imperative, but not one necessary for survival. That's a pretty crucial distinction.

Your argument makes no sense. It's necessary for the survival of the species. If you die without reproducing, the species could die. Reproduction is probably higher on the list of biological imperatives than personal survival, witness the number of species that risk their lives merely to get close to the opposite sex.

[Polpolion]

I definitely disagree with this. It's certainly a strong biological imperative, but not one necessary for survival. That's a pretty crucial distinction.

Your argument makes no sense. It's necessary for the survival of the species. If you die without reproducing, the species could die. Reproduction is probably higher on the list of biological imperatives than personal survival, witness the number of species that risk their lives merely to get close to the opposite sex.

So why subsidize birth control then?

[Turambar]

Why do you people want so many babies?  We have enough babies.  We especially don't need to have them produced by people who don't even want them. 

[General Battuta]

I definitely disagree with this. It's certainly a strong biological imperative, but not one necessary for survival. That's a pretty crucial distinction.

Your argument makes no sense. It's necessary for the survival of the species. If you die without reproducing, the species could die. Reproduction is probably higher on the list of biological imperatives than personal survival, witness the number of species that risk their lives merely to get close to the opposite sex.

So why subsidize birth control then?

His argument is that the drive for sex is incredibly powerful, but it needs to be decoupled from (now socially harmful) young reproduction.

Personally I think sex is really important for building a secure, stable relationship. Not the only thing, but until it gets worked out between the two of you, usually by practice, it's going to be a nervous unknown hanging over the whole affair. And leaving it for the wedding night is a recipe for disaster, especially for the poor bride.

[Sushi]

Or, we could subsidize neither. So cruel of me, I know.

So, what, let the babies born to kids rot?

Oops, I thought I'd deleted that.  The next paragraph down (responding to NGMT-R) was actually supposed to be a response to you, got them sort of mixed up.

To respond anyway: no, of course not. I'm OK with social services to help young mothers/mothers-to-be. I'm even OK with government sponsored ones (as local as reasonably possible), if no private charitable organizations are around to do it. But I strongly dislike the idea of having that cost added to the insurance burden for a number of reasons. A lot of that has to do with my belief that our current healthcare "insurance" system is completely fubared, and I'd rather not make it even more of a morass than it already is.

I definitely disagree with this. It's certainly a strong biological imperative, but not one necessary for survival. That's a pretty crucial distinction.

Your argument makes no sense. It's necessary for the survival of the species. If you die without reproducing, the species could die. Reproduction is probably higher on the list of biological imperatives than personal survival, witness the number of species that risk their lives merely to get close to the opposite sex.

Your point is well taken, but I stand by my assertion that you can't directly equate it with food and sleep in terms of necessity for individuals.

And leaving it for the wedding night is a recipe for disaster, especially for the poor bride.

I'm going to simply state that I vehemently disagree with this and leave it at that.

[General Battuta]

And leaving it for the wedding night is a recipe for disaster, especially for the poor bride.

I'm going to simply state that I vehemently disagree with this and leave it at that.

Sex sucks until you have a lot of practice at it. I mean, I'm sure there may be naturals out there, but for most of us, it takes mutual learning and exploration. Goes double for women.

[Klaustrophobia]

how good can a relationship be if that isn't understood and awkward sex has an effect on the relationship as a whole?

[General Battuta]

how good can a relationship be if that isn't understood and awkward sex has an effect on the relationship as a whole?

wut

Learning to have good sex is part of building a healthy relationship.

[karajorma]

Bah, if you want to reduce teenage pregnancies you could step them down to very low figures with a two step program.

1. Parents decide which program they want to put their kids into at school, abstinence only or full and frank sex ed (with birth control handed out for free).
2. If your kid becomes pregnant anyway you end up having to pay child support same as you would if you were the parent.

The second you start making parents financially responsible you'd start seeing them actually talking to their kids about sex rather than pretending it doesn't exist.

[iamzack]

Bah, if you want to reduce teenage pregnancies you could step them down to very low figures with a two step program.

1. Parents decide which program they want to put their kids into at school, abstinence only or full and frank sex ed (with birth control handed out for free).
2. If your kid becomes pregnant anyway you end up having to pay child support same as you would if you were the parent.

The second you start making parents financially responsible you'd start seeing them actually talking to their kids about sex rather than pretending it doesn't exist.

It's not really a representative sample, but for the pregnant girls I knew of in middle school and high school, that really wouldn't do a thing whatsoever.

[achtung]

Bah, just remove the "evil" surrounding early-stage abortion, give out (and educate about) effective birth control, and teach kids about STDs. The kids who **** up were likely going to **** up anyway. The kids who are somewhat responsible will not have to make the choice between the "embarrassment" of having and/or asking for contraceptives, and having unprotected sex. The responsible ones will keep being responsible, with the added bonus of free contraceptives.

This abstinence **** is getting way out of hand, and in my opinion, is almost purely religious rhetoric. Young people are going to have sex. Get used to it, and make it as safe and controllable as possible. It's crazy how people act like this "sex" thing is a new phenomenon.

Yes I said the word abortion. I love being flamebait.

[iamzack]

The kids who are somewhat responsible will not have to make the choice between the "embarrassment" of having and/or asking for contraceptives, and having unprotected sex.

The other option is stealing condoms from your parents' bedroom. That's what I did. :3

[IceFire]

I always loved the hilarious idea that if we bury our heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't happen then nothing bad will happen.

It's a species imperative that isn't "compatible" with modern society in a nubmer of ways therefore we invented all sorts of ingenius methods of preventing pregnancy. Interestingly enough... only the smartest species on the planet engage in sex for non-reproductive purposes. That was always interesting to me as well.