So I should modify my sexual choices because others might think I'm a dick? That argument doesn't fly with me. If they don't like my choices, they will choose not to associate with me. More power to them. Living how one wants to live is a very efficient way of weeding out people who aren't compatible.



This is a slippery slope argument and therefore suspect. If I don't take more responsibility for the consequences of my choices than my partner does, I might become a deadbeat in other areas? I beg to differ.



I always rejected that inane argument my mother used to make: "I bore you in my womb for 9 months, therefore you owe me such-and-such." And I reject it now coming from you. It's not as though I had any choice in whose womb I was conceived. If a woman is concerned about avoiding pregnancy, she'll take the steps necessary to avoid it, whether that's abstinence or contraception (on her end, her partner's end, or preferably both). If she fails to take those steps, then I can only assume she is secretly hoping to become pregnant for some reason of her own.

It happens all the time. I should know. That's how I became a father.

---

Hey, feel free to freelance your responsibilities. That's cool, and your thing. Don't get pissy, though, when someone may tell you to step up said responsibilities. Nothing bad or wrong comes from taking up more responsibilities.



I'm not saying we owe women such-and-such because they carry for 9 months. I'm saying we respect it by taking up responsibilities. Even ones you feel you don't need to take up. That way, at the end of the day, there's nothing left on the table. Therefore, no excuses. Your method, while very valid, leaves a bigger chance for something to be left up to excuses. I'm one that doesn't take to well to excuses.

BTW, if I seem short, it's because I just watch the hockey game and had a little 'spat' with the wifey. I apologize for any shortness or harshness from me. The apology lasts up to tomorrow. lol

---

I don't understand the quibble you and Cheesey have with my position or why you seem to be trying to hard to delineate your positions from mine. I have said over and over -- in this thread and many others -- that people bear full responsibility for their actions. Specifically, in this case, if a couple gets pregnant together, they need to take responsibility for the child and give it the best life they can.

---

1. I admire people who take a chastity pledge. Especially if they do it out of a desire to please the Lord. Not because I believe that it is what God demands of them -- I have a hard enough job figuring out what God desires of me, than to presume to know what God desires of others. But I do believe that God loves people who live to please him; and so if they do things like being chaste or eating kosher or saying a dozen Hail Mary's each day because they are striving to serve his Will, then I admire them.

1A. I believe God tells each of us in the Bible what he wants of us. But I think the "each of" is critical. I read the Bible for what he wants of me. I don't read the Bible for what he wants of others. My "proselytzing" role starts and ends with trying to convince people that having faith in Him is the coolest thing they could do; it doesn't extend to what they must do to show that faith. That's His job. Not mine.

2. I have no problem with a parent trying to regulate his/her child's sexual practice. It's part of the set of choices parents have to make as parents, and as someone who has never been nor desired to be a parent, I think parents should be able to make such serious choices even if they are choices I would not make.

3. In general, I think it is no one else's business what another human being does with the dangly or hollow bits. It's not my place to judge why people make such pledges or break them. It's not my place to substitute my choice for that of the parent or the child.

4. God knows what he wants us to do. I don't. I do believe he wants me to use the dangly bits in certain ways and only with certain people. But I have no clue what he wants others to do with theirs. And I find it really hard to believe that, apart from the "parental responsibility" thing, he really wants us paying attention and judging what they do or don't do.

---

I agree wholeheartedly. I think chastity and monogamy are beautiful and admirable, even noble, choices. I respect those who make those choices. I just don't think that other choices are somehow inferior.

---

Inferior? Maybe not.
But as i said, if you fool around, then don't piss and moan when you end up with a pregnancy or a STD.
You have the right to make your own choice. But then you may end up having to pay the consequences.
Non, how do you feel that i'm some how attacking you by stating this?
I'm not "quibbling" at all in my view.

---

Er. Um. Well, I'll buy "flawed interpretation" part (at least intellectually). Can't go so far as to say God and Jesus were flawed, though. God can't be flawed.

He might not exist. But if he does, he's, well, er, God.

Pedantically, and fundamentalistically, yours,

Wade

---

Unless you're willing to have the "operation" first, of course.

---

Agreed wholeheartedly. Make the choice -- accept the consequences. I couldn't agree more.



No, I don't feel you're attacking me at all. My point was that I think it's become obvious that you, Formo, and I agree far more than we disagree, so I'm not sure why you two persist in trying to create more distance between our positions than actually exists. That's the "quibble" to which I was referring. I think it has to do with the fact that my belief in personal responsibility stems primarily from a libertarian philosophy, while yours stems from a belief in moral accountability to God (a view to which I'm not averse, by the way), so it seems as if they're more disparate than they really are.

---

My problem with chastity and abstinence is that educators attempt to get away with it as the only sex education you need. A lot of kids are just taught "not to do it" and are not given any formal education on STD's or contraception. So when one of these "retarded teenagers" actually decides to engage in sexual activity they are putting themselves in a more dangerous position than a person who has been taught about it. I have nothing against people who choose abstinence but everyone should be taught how to engage in safe sexual activity, regardless of whether or not they foresee themselves doing so.

The whole Palin situation? I get irked a bit by the man thing to. I don't have many facts on the case but say Levi wanted Bristol to get an abortion or give it up for adoption. Bristol obviously wouldn't go through with it and after giving birth requests child support from Levi. Why should he have to pay for a child he didn't want? I feel like the man is cornered here because of the woman's decision. It was mutual for them to have sex and for one reason or another she got pregnant. It was not mutual for them to have a child but because she wants it he has to pay for it. Imagine the reverse--that Levi wants the child but Bristol doesn't. Bristol can go through with the abortion or adoption because it's her body. Basically, if you as a male impregnate a women during mutual intercourse it's almost completely up to her as to what to do about it and you have to face the consequences regardless.

Now in the case of Bristol and Levi, in my opinion both the kids are pretty naive so I really don't care what happens lol.