L
LotusCarsLtd
Guest
In the most recent edition of my school’s newspaper there were four articles about abortion in the Opinion section: one speaking out against it, two taking the middle ground, and one other speaking in favor of it.
I decided to counter the last three articles and to provide a statement against contraception. The article is posted below.
**To those reading, I ask the following of you:
The Underlying Problems in the Abortion Debate
Many today are rightly worried about the issues of abortion and STD infection. Many want to ensure that girls avoid having unintended pregnancies and that both sexes avoid catching an STD. The most commonly proposed solution to this problem is contraception or, by extension, increased access to contraception. Many claim that this will reduce instances of unintended pregnancies and STD infection and will allow individuals to enjoy sex “safely”. But what this mindset fails to realize is that the underlying problem is not a lack of contraception but a lack of self-control. It also fails to truly recognize the powerful and inherently risky nature of sex itself (I say “truly recognize” because the use of contraception implies an individual’s acceptance of the risk involved in sex, but a refusal to completely mitigate that risk by avoiding sexual activity).
It is vital, then, that society once again views sex as it truly is: a powerful and risky act that requires control. It is something that must be controlled and contained, not ever allowed to run rampant as it has in modern Western society. It is very much akin to a person in control of a crazed stallion. That stallion must be tamed and controlled for the safety of the rider themselves and those around them. If this is not done, the person becomes “tamed” by the stallion itself and the animal runs rampant. If it remains out of control long enough, then the rider and those around them will inevitably get hurt. Thus, it is vital that sexual activity, like a wild animal, be viewed as the powerful thing it is and be contained and controlled before it is too late.
But society has largely ignored this, sometimes even angrily opposing anyone who even attempts to promote the ideals of self-control. It is this rejection of self-control that has led to the current problem of unintended pregnancies and STD infection, not a lack of contraception. The popular mantra “if it feels good, do it”—born out of the sexual excesses of the late 1960’s—has done great harm to society and led to the creation of a culture that refuses to tame itself. It is this mantra that has devalued and downplayed the critical need for self-control in society.
But despite the harm the “free love” philosophy has done to society, our culture continues to reject any notion of self-control regarding sexual matters. Instead of fighting and correcting the underlying problem itself, we instead seek to promote and continue its practice by making poor excuses for ourselves and others, but most importantly by promoting the use of contraception. It must be noted that contraception does not solve the underlying problem but only seeks to deal with the results of that problem. I will now cite an example that—although it doesn’t deal with sex—does highlight the logic behind the promotion of contraception and the problems with that logic.
Atlantic City and the State of New Jersey, starting in November 2007, introduced a controversial program to prevent and reduce HIV and hepatitis infection amongst intravenous drug users: they started a needle-exchange program to encourage drug users to avoid sharing needles and to use a fresh needle every time they sought a fix. Similar programs were also established in Camden, Paterson, and Newark.
What’s shocking about this program is that instead of solving the underlying problem (intravenous drug abuse) these cities sought to cure the symptoms; namely, HIV and hepatitis infection due to the sharing of unclean needles. Instead of trying to help free addicts of their addictions once and for all—removing their risk for HIV/hepatitis infection completely—it simply encourages these individuals, albeit unconsciously, to continue in their destructive habit. A news article on the subject(1) shows that while the Atlantic City program has successfully distributed tens of thousands of clean needles to addicts, it has done a poor job of getting those addicts to quit.
And understandably so: as long as addicts are given the tools with which to continue their addictions—and as long as such a program exists to give even unconscious support for their habits—Atlantic City and its other New Jersey sister cities cannot expect to see a reduction in intravenous drug abuse. And they won’t.
While this is not meant to imply that those who lack self-control are sex addicts (although there are sex addicts out there, who should seek therapy to free them from their devastating addiction), the logic used to promote contraception is the same as that used to promote the needle-exchange program: instead of addressing the underlying problems we simply seek to treat the outcomes of this activity. By increasing our use and promotion of contraception we are only working to promote the very activity that is causing all these problems to begin with (rather than working to control and tame our sex drives).
End of Part I, see Part II next
I decided to counter the last three articles and to provide a statement against contraception. The article is posted below.
**To those reading, I ask the following of you:
- Please check for any moral errors that may be present, especially any statements that are judgmental, and
- Look for errors in my logic. I don’t want to write an article only to find out that my logic had holes in it.**
The Underlying Problems in the Abortion Debate
Many today are rightly worried about the issues of abortion and STD infection. Many want to ensure that girls avoid having unintended pregnancies and that both sexes avoid catching an STD. The most commonly proposed solution to this problem is contraception or, by extension, increased access to contraception. Many claim that this will reduce instances of unintended pregnancies and STD infection and will allow individuals to enjoy sex “safely”. But what this mindset fails to realize is that the underlying problem is not a lack of contraception but a lack of self-control. It also fails to truly recognize the powerful and inherently risky nature of sex itself (I say “truly recognize” because the use of contraception implies an individual’s acceptance of the risk involved in sex, but a refusal to completely mitigate that risk by avoiding sexual activity).
It is vital, then, that society once again views sex as it truly is: a powerful and risky act that requires control. It is something that must be controlled and contained, not ever allowed to run rampant as it has in modern Western society. It is very much akin to a person in control of a crazed stallion. That stallion must be tamed and controlled for the safety of the rider themselves and those around them. If this is not done, the person becomes “tamed” by the stallion itself and the animal runs rampant. If it remains out of control long enough, then the rider and those around them will inevitably get hurt. Thus, it is vital that sexual activity, like a wild animal, be viewed as the powerful thing it is and be contained and controlled before it is too late.
But society has largely ignored this, sometimes even angrily opposing anyone who even attempts to promote the ideals of self-control. It is this rejection of self-control that has led to the current problem of unintended pregnancies and STD infection, not a lack of contraception. The popular mantra “if it feels good, do it”—born out of the sexual excesses of the late 1960’s—has done great harm to society and led to the creation of a culture that refuses to tame itself. It is this mantra that has devalued and downplayed the critical need for self-control in society.
But despite the harm the “free love” philosophy has done to society, our culture continues to reject any notion of self-control regarding sexual matters. Instead of fighting and correcting the underlying problem itself, we instead seek to promote and continue its practice by making poor excuses for ourselves and others, but most importantly by promoting the use of contraception. It must be noted that contraception does not solve the underlying problem but only seeks to deal with the results of that problem. I will now cite an example that—although it doesn’t deal with sex—does highlight the logic behind the promotion of contraception and the problems with that logic.
Atlantic City and the State of New Jersey, starting in November 2007, introduced a controversial program to prevent and reduce HIV and hepatitis infection amongst intravenous drug users: they started a needle-exchange program to encourage drug users to avoid sharing needles and to use a fresh needle every time they sought a fix. Similar programs were also established in Camden, Paterson, and Newark.
What’s shocking about this program is that instead of solving the underlying problem (intravenous drug abuse) these cities sought to cure the symptoms; namely, HIV and hepatitis infection due to the sharing of unclean needles. Instead of trying to help free addicts of their addictions once and for all—removing their risk for HIV/hepatitis infection completely—it simply encourages these individuals, albeit unconsciously, to continue in their destructive habit. A news article on the subject(1) shows that while the Atlantic City program has successfully distributed tens of thousands of clean needles to addicts, it has done a poor job of getting those addicts to quit.
And understandably so: as long as addicts are given the tools with which to continue their addictions—and as long as such a program exists to give even unconscious support for their habits—Atlantic City and its other New Jersey sister cities cannot expect to see a reduction in intravenous drug abuse. And they won’t.
While this is not meant to imply that those who lack self-control are sex addicts (although there are sex addicts out there, who should seek therapy to free them from their devastating addiction), the logic used to promote contraception is the same as that used to promote the needle-exchange program: instead of addressing the underlying problems we simply seek to treat the outcomes of this activity. By increasing our use and promotion of contraception we are only working to promote the very activity that is causing all these problems to begin with (rather than working to control and tame our sex drives).
End of Part I, see Part II next
