Anyone else have problems with this concept of "Safe Sex"?

[KostyaJMJ]

So the ends justify the means?

Or Human beings are nothing but programed mindless sex beasts?

Sorry, I have to reject both of these. We suffer a fallen nature, that doesn’t give us an excuse to stop trying to live the gospel. At least not if you want to see heaven it doesn’t.

No, of course the ends don’t justify the means. But, AFAIK, education is morally neutral.

 

[prstoessel]

People have continually shown throughout history that they are unwilling to give up such an enjoyable activity as sex. It isn’t going to happen. Never has, never will. Even when syphilis had reached epidemic levels in the 16th century and killed about half of those infected, people were still remarkably willing to take risks. The symptoms were terrible and the treatments were torture. People were slowly poisoned with mercury to alleviate the symptoms. They had their teeth fall out and bones start to disintegrate because of mercury. If you lived long enough your body was slowly destroyed as tissue started to disintegrate. Never has there been a clearer sign from God that He punishes pre-marital sex. Despite the risks, people put up with it to an amazing degree. “A night with Venus a lifetime with mercury”, was the saying.

Now the risks associated with safer sex seem almost negligible. You can look at STDs the way a professional stunt man might look at skinned knees.

Don’t get me wrong. I agree with the Church’s teaching on sex but I don’t think you will ever win anyone over talking about the risks involved with sex. You have to focus on something else.

So we shall thwart the will of God because of our own passions and desires.

The question was asking to name a method that is more effective than abstinence. Abstinence works 100% of the time among those who practice it. If they do not practice it, then they can expect consequences from their actions.

 

[AntiTheist]

Since abstinence works 100% of the time, there isn’t one that’s better.

The poster to whom I posed the question had said: “Every other contraceptive method (except coitus interruptus) is more effective. But the only thing which is totally effective is abstinence.”

Clearly, these sentences place “abstinence” in a separate category from “every other contraceptive method.” So I was, quite naturally, asking which contraceptive methods – other than abstinence, which the poster himself restricted from the claim – work better than condoms.

EDIT:

The question was asking to name a method that is more effective than abstinence.

NO. I was asking which method – other than abstinence, which the other poster himself restricted from his claim – works better than condoms.

This is a fundamental problem here: you people aren’t really reading what I’m writing. You’re just reacting to the contents of your fevered imaginations most of the time, which is, by the way, a symptom of an inability to focus on reality and on evidence. If you want to have a fighting chance, you’re going to have to bite the bullet and look reality squarely in the eye.

 

[prstoessel]

This is a fundamental problem here: you people aren’t really reading what I’m writing. You’re just reacting to the contents of your fevered imaginations most of the time, which is, by the way, a symptom of an inability to focus on reality and on evidence. If you want to have a fighting chance, you’re going to have to bite the bullet and look reality squarely in the eye.

You know, using media such as this to communicate among so many, not everything is going to get understood the first time around. I apologize for failing to understand your original inquiry. Indeed, I understand it now.

In my most recent NFP class, the Creighton Model has a plan-effectiveness of 99.5%. The user-effectiveness is - on average - is about 94% to 97%.

Compare to condom use of 98% if used properly (for avoiding pregnancy) and 86% actual effectiveness (based upon statistics of unwanted pregnancies of those who used them).

 

[Adam1986]

I am in rare agreement with Adam here. And here’s my reasoning:

Lol

I also agree with your statement.

 

[AntiTheist]

You know, using media such as this to communicate among so many, not everything is going to get understood the first time around. I apologize for failing to understand your original inquiry. Indeed, I understand it now.

Yeah, sorry I snapped at you. I was just getting fed up after so many people have misread me, jumped to assumptions about my arguments or motivations, etc.

But it’s often a good idea to cut people more slack, and I’ll try to do that when I deem it wise.

In my most recent NFP class, the Creighton Model has a plan-effectiveness of 99.5%. The user-effectiveness is - on average - is about 94% to 97%.

Compare to condom use of 98% if used properly (for avoiding pregnancy) and 86% actual effectiveness (based upon statistics of unwanted pregnancies of those who used them).

I’m not sure about the numbers you’re citing here, but even accepting them as true for the sake of argument, the important difference is that NFP’s plan-effectiveness depends on being able to determine periods of fertility perfectly or nearly-perfectly, which is impossible.

The condom’s effectiveness is nearly total (I thought it was 99%…maybe it depends on the brand) when it’s used properly, which is indeed possible and within the abilities of anybody who has been educated in its use.

[This is, of course, leaving aside the elephant in the room: which is that in the real world, when people have sex, it’s not always carefully planned in advance. Some immature poster brought up “romance” earlier in the thread…well, I can tell you that sometimes – not always – spontaneity is an important factor in romance and intimacy, and the NFP method becomes impractical in a lot of real world situations, which makes condom usage an even better choice]

To reiterate, I’m in favor of educating everyone in the proper way to use condoms because, if you’re going to have sex, its use is the best method in terms of preventing preganancy, lowering the chances of contracting a disease, and allowing for use in more real-world situations. And if you’re not going to have sex, the knowledge isn’t going to hurt you. And it’s certainly not going to make you want to do something you otherwise would not have wanted to do, despite what the Father-Knows-Best crowd wants you to think.

 

[prstoessel]

I’m not sure about the numbers you’re citing here, but even accepting them as true for the sake of argument, the important difference is that NFP’s plan-effectiveness depends on being able to determine periods of fertility perfectly or nearly-perfectly, which is impossible.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Closed pending mod review.