Human promiscuity is objectively incorrect

[Cirdan_XII]

Oh, so nothing then to do with promiscuity. Mea culpa.

I don’t know about the USA, but I’ve heard from Germany that a significant part of the increase is not people getting infected there but immigration of people who may already have been infected a long time ago.

The same with many other diseases of all hues that were virtually wiped out and that are now coming back.

But it’s not something doctors like to mention because nobody wants to be accused of being anti-immigration.

 

[Cirdan_XII]

Consistent condom use can reduce the risk/slow the spread of STDs. Condoms can not prevent STDs from spreading: only reduce the risk.

Condoms create a false sense of security. Without condoms, many people will refrain from promiscuous activity due to fear of getting an STD. Availability of condoms thus removes a barier to promiscuity and increases promiscuity. The cruel thing is that condoms are not 100% effective, and therefore their availability may actually be contributing to spread of STD.s

 

[Aquinas11]

My guess is actually that people see an unplanned pregnancy as the worst thing that can happen when they have sex and other means of preventing pregnancy are more reliable

Yes - they’re unable to see all risks of unprotected promiscuous sex (STD and unwanted pregnancy) due to reduced brain function, which is what I said. Someone engaging in promiscuous sex is like a drug addict - rational risks are put on back burner to getting the fix

 

[fhansen]

Promiscuity by itself doesn’t cause STDs, although it undoubtedly increases the risk

By the same token, failure to use condoms doesn’t cause STDs either.

 

[Zaccheus]

Yes - they’re unable to see all risks of unprotected promiscuous sex (STD and unwanted pregnancy) due to reduced brain function, which is what I said

Promiscuity has multiple harmful effects, but I have never before heard any report that it causes brain damage.

 

[Aquinas11]

Promiscuity have multiple harmful effects, but I have never before heard any report that it causes brain damage.

Why do you think promiscuity causes brain damage? I suppose it could depending on the severity of the sex act

 

[Zaccheus]

Zaccheus:

Promiscuity have multiple harmful effects, but I have never before heard any report that it causes brain damage.

Why do you think promiscuity causes brain damage? I suppose it could depending on the severity of the sex act

I do not think promiscuity causes brain damage. I was disputing your claim that promiscuity reduces brain function.

 

[Aquinas11]

I do not think promiscuity causes brain damage. I was disputing your claim that promiscuity reduces brain function.

You first raised issue of “brain damage”, which is a medical term associated with permanent brain injury, e.g. from motorcycle accident, stroke, etc. Go ahead and quote me using that term if you’re “disputing” it. My post dealt with “rational risks being put on the back burner” due to addictive behavior.

You even conceded there are no reports that permanent brain damage is tied to promiscuity, so why make that assertion?

 

[PetraG]

For example, I wonder why some people don’t like to wear a helmet when they ride a motorcycle. I’m not sure if that’s because they’re secularists who are self-centered, lack self-control and don’t want to ruin the experience of riding their motorcycle and feeling the wind in their hair or if they’re just not very smart.

Those aren’t mutually-exclusive possibilities. People who think, “If I get into an accident, I am going to incur more health care costs than I could ever pay back and could be dependent on someone else to take care of me for the rest of my life” don’t continue that thought with “but I don’t care about what this could cost anyone else because I am too concerned with my experience and can’t be bothered to take how my actions could affect others into account. No, I want to feel the wind, and so I’m going to take this serious risk because thinking of someone else would get in the way of my enjoyment.”

No, they just tell themselves that their actions won’t harm anyone else, when they don’t get hurt they tell other people that their actions don’t harm anyone else, and when they are required to take the needs of others into account they often feel very put-upon and stifled. If they can engage in the behavior without immediate harm that can be tied directly to their decision, they deem the behavior safe. What regularly and predictably happens to other people doing the same thing is irrelevant.

 

[Zaccheus]

Zaccheus:

I do not think promiscuity causes brain damage. I was disputing your claim that promiscuity reduces brain function.

You first raised issue of “brain damage”, which is a medical term associated with permanent brain injury, e.g. from motorcycle accident, stroke, etc. Go ahead and quote me using that term if you’re “disputing” it. My post dealt with “rational risks being put on the back burner” due to addictive behavior.

You even conceded there are no reports that permanent brain damage is tied to promiscuity, so why make that assertion?

When you said “reduced brain function” I thought you meant permanently reduced, not temporarily reduced for a specific situation. I apologize for the misunderstanding.

 

[I_trust]

“Condom use reduces the risk of getting an STD”

Amputating your arms reduces the risk of getting carpal tunnel syndrome.

Condom use endangers your eternal soul.

Abstinence stops STDs without sending you to hell.

 

[Thorolfr]

Condoms create a false sense of security. Without condoms, many people will refrain from promiscuous activity due to fear of getting an STD. Availability of condoms thus removes a barier to promiscuity and increases promiscuity. The cruel thing is that condoms are not 100% effective, and therefore their availability may actually be contributing to spread of STD.s

I don’t know why some people in this thread insist that condoms are basically useless unless they’re 100% effective when almost nothing else they do in life is 100% safe or effective.

I think promiscuity is a bad thing and I’m not trying to defend it. In my opinion, it’s much better for people to be in a monogamous relationship. But if I had a son, for example, who was a young adult and insisted on sleeping around despite my advice not to do so, I would advise him to use condoms since, under the circumstances, he would be safer and less likely to get an STD by using condoms than would be the case if he didn’t use any protection at all.

And in my experience, not having any condoms available doesn’t cause most people to refrain from sex or promiscuous activity. People are very good at underestimating or rationalizing away the risk involved in many of their activities or behaviors. And the drive to have sex can be extremely powerful sometimes.

If someone has read somewhere, for example, that there is a 25% risk of getting an STD from unprotected sex, he’ll just say to himself, “Well, that means that there’s a 75% chance I won’t get an STD if I have sex now without a condom and that’s a pretty high percentage and it’s only this one time.” Or he might say to himself, “This person I want to have sex with looks healthy and doesn’t look like the kind of person who would have an STD.” Of course, if he keeps doing this a lot, it doesn’t take long before his chances of having contracted an STD is pretty high.

 

[PetraG]

I think promiscuity is a bad thing and I’m not trying to defend it. In my opinion, it’s much better for people to be in a monogamous relationship. But if I had a son, for example, who was a young adult and insisted on sleeping around despite my advice not to do so, I would advise him to use condoms since, under the circumstances, he would be safer and less likely to get an STD by using condoms than would be the case if he didn’t use any protection at all.

And would be less likely to be the instrument of transmission of a deadly illness.

Pope Benedict made a similar point; that is, he did not say that unchastity was OK if it was done “safely.” He said that showing a concern with whether it was more or less physically safe for your partner(s) or not was at least a start in the right direction. In other words, sex outside of marriage is bad but sex outside of marriage that has no concern for doing physical damage to yourself or your partner(s) is even worse. Taking a concern for your partners would be a start in the right direction, even if becoming chaste is the only real solution in the end:

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.

What Pope Benedict XVI Did and Didn't Say About Condoms

He definitely didn't say we should all become male prostitutes

www.theatlantic.com

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

For example, I wonder why some people don’t like to wear a helmet when they ride a motorcycle. I’m not sure if that’s because they’re secularists who are self-centered, lack self-control and don’t want to ruin the experience of riding their motorcycle and feeling the wind in their hair or if they’re just not very smart.

I think ignorance has something to do with it too.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Yes - they’re unable to see all risks of unprotected promiscuous sex (STD and unwanted pregnancy) due to reduced brain function, which is what I said. Someone engaging in promiscuous sex is like a drug addict - rational risks are put on back burner to getting the fix

That could just because they aren’t accustomed to thinking about things in a deeper way and that stems mostly from ignorance. But I guess there could be chemicals that could influence the brain.

 

[I_trust]

Because using a condom is a serious sin.

 

[adgloriam]

I don’t know why some people in this thread insist that condoms are basically useless unless they’re 100% effective when almost nothing else they do in life is 100% safe or effective.

Folks are giving you a hard time, but the fact is: one day anyone can get tempted, regardless of how faithful, devout, and catholic they are…On that day, they do well to use a condom!!!

 

[QwertyGirl]

Promiscuity is largely caused by unhealthy bonding with a dysfunctional parent, usually dysfunctional single parent.

Unbiased source, please. So false.

 

[Thorolfr]

Aquinas11:

Promiscuity is largely caused by unhealthy bonding with a dysfunctional parent, usually dysfunctional single parent.

Unbiased source, please. So false.

And is he using Nihilo’s definition of someone being “promiscuous” if they’ve had sex with more than one person in their life? If so, that would mean that a large percentage of Americans have experienced unhealthy bonding with a dysfunctional single parent.

 

[I_trust]

We are all tempted.

Should I carry a handgun in case I get angry at someone? After all I might be inclined to anger.

To anticipate and facilitate possible future sin is placing yourself into the near occasion of sin.

Not a good idea.