Men - What do you propose to do to effectively reduce the abortion rate?

From your link...

Try reading your own links....Especially the part about PROMOTING ABSTINENCE....Which is exactly what the study I linked to showed. You're just hysterical. Calm down.

 

The best way is to have a required program in high school that teaches students how much of a pain in the ass it is to have a baby. So basicly take care of a fake baby that cries and gives you misery for a good amount of time.

But hey if the couple wants to get an abortion, then they should be able to get an abortion. Its their life. And then people say "oh no! that's murder!" Then now were talking about this kid having a high risk of not being well taken care of and s/he could become a murderer himself, or a homeless druggy from his/her parent neglect. And then the community would have to pay to deal with this (*)(*)(*)(*). Nope not worth the risk. People who think abortions should be illegal do not see the whole picture. people think differently and couples should have abortions if they feel they can't take care of it.

But, don't get me wrong. it is not the right thing to do.

 

Your ONE study was hopelessly flawed here is a systematic review http://www.bmj.com/content/324/7351/1426.abstract

 

And this is what I've been saying. The above quote is about comprehensive sex education which ALWAYS includes abstinence teaching. You have now gone full circle from advocating abstinence-only programs to advocating comprehensive sex ed. I guess that's a good thing.

 

Underage kids may not have the experience, but they certainly do have the PHYSICAL EQUIPMENT and they WILL use it to gain experience. The only LOGICAL thing to do is to provide all underage children with ALL the information they may or may not need, JUST IN CASE. You cannot stop them from having sex, all you can do is help them to keep safe, when and if they do.

 

The previous references proved two things:
1- that kids that got abstinence only education were slightly (16%) less likely to have sex.
2 - that kids that received abstinence only education were MORE likely to have pregnancies!

What the references did NOT show at all, was how many children under both sets of education got a STD?

So far from the facts referenced, I would say that fewer gets getting pregnant is the better alternative. And, since that comes with TOTAL sex education and not abstinence only, then so far there is a clear winner.

Now, will one of you do the research to learn under what kind of instruction the children get LESS STD?

So far, everyone seems to forget that Sexual training does NOT exist just for the prevention of sex or pregnancy, but also for the PREVENTION of disease? How many idiotic parents fail to teach their children to wash their hands before eating? And how many FAIL to teach them how to prevent STD?

 

Until such a time as biology changes, and men can get pregnant, then, except in the case of rape, the woman is totally responsible for getting pregnant!

The woman can stop the man from impregnating her, why is it the fault of the man if the woman refuses to accept that responsibility?

 

Exactly, but so many parents (especially the religious ones) assume their children will actually listen to them.

 

If you are so concerned about keeping kids safe, then emphasizing abstinence is the best course of action. You cannot consider you've done your job teaching children by giving them the equipment to have 'safe' sex because you'll never know if they used it or used it properly.

 

Emphasizing abstinence is fine, as long as you also provide them with everything they need to have safe sex, just in case they do decide to go that far.

 

That, in fact, is the profile of the most successful sex-ed programs according to the study. Which is what I have been saying. Some folks recoil at the very word 'abstinence' with visions religious zealots wanting to install chastity belts on all little girls.

 

Read up on "condom trees"

You would be AMAZED at the reduction in STD's they have caused

http://www.thebody.com/content/art19813.html

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2003/05/29/866400.htm

 

So you are willing to let 15% of underage girls get an abortion....Why?

Please post where I EVER supported 'abstinence-only' you are either reading what you want to read, cannot comprehend the written word, or are purposely trying to obfuscate the issue.

It has been 'pointed out to you' that this discussion was NEVER about abstinence-only yet you continue to bang that drum as if your life depended on it. Do yourself a favor and stop trying to re-frame the discussion and move the goalposts every time you are out classed.

 

That's funny....Some would say gross too.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhiahcqBGtA"]condom tree - YouTube[/ame]

Yeah keep those 'Abos' from reproducing...Aussies wouldn't want THAT now would they?

[/quote]

Condom availability supports sexually active underage girls and boys...gee what a suprise....

 

Condom availability supports sexually active underage girls and boys...gee what a suprise....[/QUOTE]

sorry but the title of that piece is

Condoms do not promote sex in schools - study

 

It would be nice if men weren't so self- centered and shallow that they decide they want to nail every female that they can without any intent at marriage. The woman that they will marry will be the one that will not allow it. no doubt.

but, as unfair as it is, it is the woman's responsibility to say no and protect her body and her marriageability, her reputation and her self esteem. THAT is the only way to force men into maturity.

 

My point exactly, sex-only education is not as effective as an emphasis on abstinence. It seems that some people here read 'emphasis on abstinence' and comprehend 'abstinence only.' This is a sign of propaganda and brainwashing.

 

"Do men really have stronger sex drives than women?

Well, yes, they do. Study after study illustrates that men's sex drives are not only stronger than women's, but much more straightforward. The sources of women's libidos, by contrast, are much more difficult to pin down."

http://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare

Now, given this knowledge, why are we teaching our little girls to get abortions, take pills and shooting them up with novel serums?

Agreed but, it is not 'unfair' it is just nature and I agree that it is 100% the woman's responsibility because, they (woman) control the human sexual reproduction process 100%.

I also agree that because of hormonal drives, men will act irresponsibly, just as women who are menstruating or in menopause can be outright temporarily (or even serially) insane!!

 

i'm sorry. Are you looking for an argument? LoL

 

You're right. RPAI, WE SHOULD be teaching our daughters about the power they have. AND the responsibility.

And dad oughta be meeting His daughter's date at the door, and letting him know exactly what is expected of Mr. Hot pants for the evening.

 

Nope, I just read your post and thought I'd add some support. However flea-bitten it turned out to be...Didn't mean to argue at all.

 

Well i appreciate that. seriously. It wasn't flea bitten at all. I tried to rep you but apparently i've repped you sometime in the recent past.

 

Exactly...It boggles my mind that the feministas have almost completely gutted the teaching of traditional values to girls. The consequences have been to sexualize girls at younger and younger ages and to lower the requirements for men (who have a higher sexual drive) to gain access to sex with women/girls.

In the old days, a man had to run a gauntlet before he had access to sex with a female. He had to be able to support himself and any would be spouse and family, he had to be approved by the father, family and friends, he had to 'court' her (translation...spend money to prove he had the means), had to 'earn' her hand and even get married BEFORE he could have sex with her.

Been there done that...

 

Late to the party. I might have some input on this topic but someone's gonna have to summarize it for me because I'm not gonna sift through 35 pages of man hating.

 

There's no man hating here. It's reality.