Poll: Whom is more ignorant in your eyes?

[Kinguendo]

Abstinence. Sex is easily made safe, if you choose to make it so and its not the worst thing in the world now is it. However, people who have taken that abstinence pledge thing have found to be 2x more likely to do felacio and 4x more likely to do anal because they believe they are saving their virginity... but that isnt going to protect them from STI's. Also I heard a woman say that introducing abstinence to Africa rather than teaching them about safe sex is the perfect idea... Thats just... Doesnt that make you feel a little sick?

 

[RebelRising]

I voted for abstinence, not because I'm a particularly big "sex" guy, but because I generally ascribe to the Freudian theory, which is basically that almost all psychosis and mental conditions have something to do with sex.

I'm not endorsing orgies in the street, but history and personal experiences have largely proved that the more sexually repressed, the more incompatible socially, the more boring, and the more likely to be a serial rapist and murderer. I'm serious on that last point, because sexual repression means you can't get laid in a healthy and in an emotionally and socially beneficial way, which means that that frustration is going to worm its way out in a much less constructive manner. Truth is, sex is central to us, it's what makes us work and live, biologically. You can't suppress that reproductive tendency without damaging something somewhere else.

Besides, abstinence is woefully unsuccessful at stopping sex, as subscribers to that sort of program can't actually be turned off of sex subconsciously, so they find loopholes like anal and oral to get around it, and still fuck.

I think we might want to take Freud with a grain of salt on the subject of sex, considering his theory of Penis Envy

No, seriously, I agree with you. Teaching kids to ignore their urges can only end badly, whereas teaching them to not have their urges be as destructive (or even beneficial) just makes sense. To use an example from a few sweeping, societal generalizations, we can just look at Japan. This is a society that was massively sexually repressed for a long time up until relatively recently. But look at them now. As a society, they had been holding in sex for so long, that it has burst into the...erm, unique sexual practices (used panty machines, all forms of hentai, etc) that we all know and claim not to love. The same thing happens to a kid who's repressed sexually.

Heh, that's a good point you make about Japan. Your father's a psychologist, is he not? I'd imagine you'd have a good idea about these things.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

ohh and for those people here who think abortion is a good idea because we have to many people, i say go get a gun or something and off yourself and make some 'room' for those babys youd rather see murdered. after all if this planet is sooo over crouded we need to start murdering people because we are runing out of room, why not start your population reduction methods with yourself first, im sure you wont be missed. and given the extream ignorance of the very idea of baby murdering as population controll its almost certian that you have nothing of value to add to a society so its no real loss to anyone.

Well, I personally don't think the collection of cells in the first trimester of pregnancy counts as a person. You see, in the anti-abortion ads, they use pictures of a fetuses from late term abortions - at the point where it looks very much like a mutilated baby - and that's simply not what a majority of abortions are like.

I don't think it's really a solution to over population (people having low youth mortality rates and more surviving children than they need isn't going to be solved by abortion) but I don't think it's murder, and people who are in a situation where they need to have an abortion should have that option.

I'm not trying to thin the herd, kill babies, or what have you. I'm trying to protect people's rights from a reactionary, misinformed crowd.

 

[Kinguendo]

I think the most ignorant thing is when people say abortion is evil inhumane.

I don't want to be mean or anything, but really now! Our planet does not need any more people than it has now!

Oh good. So we should just start killing people off? After you, buddy.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Abortion is not murder, and I have never implied that it was. Unless you're an evangelical religious zealot, you would know that the planet is under heavy stress from the population.
Abortion is not murder, it's only a way of preventing the unnecessary excess use of our resources.

The planet is under heavy stress...

Is that why Russia has a density of 20 people per square mile, and Australia has a density of 7/ square mile, the US has 80/sq mile... I love how one can no longer disagree with each other without being called names. Our problem is not too many people, it's too many people concentrated in small locations. Take the central eastern portion of China, which is ridiculously overcrowded.

Abortion is killing, at least, as perhaps you could argue that the fetus is not human, though that gets really shaky, (i.e. at what point does it become a human), but it is still killing. It may be killing something with a good end in mind, but the fetus is a living thing that you are destroying merely because it is inconvenient, in most cases. If the mother's life is in danger, or in certain other cases, fine, it may be unavoidable. Otherwise... yeah.

And hell yes it's inhumane. They suck the kid's brains out, and cut him to pieces, for crying out loud. If there is the least chance that he can feel that, don't you think we should do something about it?

Oh come on! Everyone knows that there are parts (Some really large parts) of all of these countries that you mentioned that are just uninhabitable by humans... Have you heard of a place called Utah? Do you wanna live with Morons? Sorry, Mormons.

 

[Avatar Roku]

I voted for abstinence, not because I'm a particularly big "sex" guy, but because I generally ascribe to the Freudian theory, which is basically that almost all psychosis and mental conditions have something to do with sex.

I'm not endorsing orgies in the street, but history and personal experiences have largely proved that the more sexually repressed, the more incompatible socially, the more boring, and the more likely to be a serial rapist and murderer. I'm serious on that last point, because sexual repression means you can't get laid in a healthy and in an emotionally and socially beneficial way, which means that that frustration is going to worm its way out in a much less constructive manner. Truth is, sex is central to us, it's what makes us work and live, biologically. You can't suppress that reproductive tendency without damaging something somewhere else.

Besides, abstinence is woefully unsuccessful at stopping sex, as subscribers to that sort of program can't actually be turned off of sex subconsciously, so they find loopholes like anal and oral to get around it, and still fuck.

I think we might want to take Freud with a grain of salt on the subject of sex, considering his theory of Penis Envy

No, seriously, I agree with you. Teaching kids to ignore their urges can only end badly, whereas teaching them to not have their urges be as destructive (or even beneficial) just makes sense. To use an example from a few sweeping, societal generalizations, we can just look at Japan. This is a society that was massively sexually repressed for a long time up until relatively recently. But look at them now. As a society, they had been holding in sex for so long, that it has burst into the...erm, unique sexual practices (used panty machines, all forms of hentai, etc) that we all know and claim not to love. The same thing happens to a kid who's repressed sexually.

Heh, that's a good point you make about Japan. Your father's a psychologist, is he not? I'd imagine you'd have a good idea about these things.

That he is, and we talk about psychology often, but we've kind of stayed away from this subject for obvious reasons (although I did hear the Penis Envy thing from him). The Japan thing was just my own observation, although I suppose my Dad honing my mind to look at the psychological reasons for things helps.

 

[m_jim]

And when is the correct time to use the word 'Whom' instead of 'Who'?

'Who' is used for direct object pronouns (he, she) and 'whom' is used for indirect object pronouns (him, her). Protip: Answer the question with he/him ("He is more ignorant in my eyes"). Whichever one sounds right, use the one that goes with that pronoun. So, sizzle used 'whom' incorrectly.

On topic: There are drawbacks to both philosophies. If you teach that sex is super awesome, you'll wind up with a bunch of unwed teenage mothers/teenagers with STD's. Abstinence-only however would keep us in the strange psychological state that we are in now, where we are obsessed with sex as a society but deny it in the media and culture. As one of the earlier posters said, responsible education is the real solution. Tell people the facts so that they can make informed decisions.

 

[TheTygerfire]

Definitely not the people that talk about sex being awesome, because it is.

 

[Snugglebunny]

ABSTINENCE! I mean come on!! STDs run wild through society and cause pain and even death everywhere they go, and can be easily avoided! Sheeeesh. Sex causes so many problems, and if everyone just waited until marriage everything would be better: less heartbreak, less unintended pregnancy, more commitment, controlling STDs...the list goes on and on!

 

[Kpt._Rob]

ABSTINENCE! I mean come on!! STDs run wild through society and cause pain and even death everywhere they go, and can be easily avoided! Sheeeesh. Sex causes so many problems, and if everyone just waited until marriage everything would be better: less heartbreak, less unintended pregnancy, more commitment, controlling STDs...the list goes on and on!

I think what you meant to say is that "unprotected sex causes so many problems". Safe sex between consenting partners who know what they are doing does not lead to these problems. I bet we'd have a higher rate of divorce if people waited until marriage to have sex, because if they did then they wouldn't know if they were sexually compatible. Even further, a big part of the debate here is over Abstinence only education, and we know for a FACT that abstinence only education increases the number of teen pregnancies and the rate of STD transmission in the areas in which it is taught. Inversely, comprehensive sex ed has been proven to decrease the number of teen pregnancies and the rate of STD transmission.

 

[teisjm]

Both, generelly all people who doesn't know how to STFU about what others by in their private life. This goes both for the people looking down at you for having sex, who call "loose" girls sluts, or frowns at other people having untraditional sex (3-somes, S/M, homosexual etc.)
And for the people (usually about 14-18 years old) who make an extremely huge deal out of who had sex first, who has had most sex, who has had most sex partners etc.

If it doesn't hurt anyone, and it doesn't involve you then don't try to tell people what they should or should not do in their bedroom.

I guess i'll voote for the "sex is the greatest thing ever" option in lack of a "both" option, cause i've never really met anyone who preached abstinence, but i'e met my fair share of people who thought everyone was 1-dimensional and couyld be judged based solely on how many times they've had sex. I do love sex, but i honestly don't give a fuck about if or how often other people have it.

 

[Trivun]

Abstinence isn't a problem. Saying sex is the best thing ever and making it sound like being a virgin is uncool, is a problem. Therefore I think you can tell what my answer is.

 

[griffinz]

People who don't know when to use "whom" and "who" are more ignorant.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

abstinance nazis. I say let people have their fun, just encourage safe sex. Seriously, if there's two things in this world i don't want it's AIDS and a baby

 

[Spektre41]

The latter, if only because I'm a bitter virgin.

Don't be bitter about it, you are something that most of this world is not.

Yay, I'm a virgin.

 

[achilleas.k]

Abstinence isn't a problem. Saying sex is the best thing ever and making it sound like being a virgin is uncool, is a problem. Therefore I think you can tell what my answer is.

Isn't that sort of answering the wrong question though? I realised now that we've all been talking about which group causes the most damage, while the topic asks which group is the most ignorant. While preaching under ignorance is a recipe for disaster in itself, saying which side of the argument is worse or more damaging doesn't answer the question.

I've quoted Trivun here, but a lot more people here are making the same mistake. However, if it's the OP's intention to discuss who causes the most damage as an inherent effect of ignorance, then please disregard my post.

 

[Thanatos34]

I think the most ignorant thing is when people say abortion is evil inhumane.

I don't want to be mean or anything, but really now! Our planet does not need any more people than it has now!

Oh good. So we should just start killing people off? After you, buddy.

Way to miss the point. Some people need to stay alive to preach the message not to make TOO MANY more people. He isn't calling for mass extinctions hes asking for moderation of population growth. Those that want to lower the pop should go last to make sure the others go first lol.

Again, after you. You want to not have kids, because you think Mother Earth is getting a bit too crowded, go ahead. We'll be more than glad to have you out of the pool, as it were.

Just think about what you are suggesting. Something like what China has? How exactly do you plan to enforce this "population control?"

Again you miss the point. If we went first it would just be like Idiocracy with the stupid and inconsiderate having more kids proportionately. Let those that are responsible go last to make sure it goes right. Disliking high populations does not mean you deserve to die.

We could easily offer economic incentives to those with less kids-not necessarily an authoritarian imposition of pop maxes but incentives to have smaller families with better educated children. What China did was a socially responsible action for their country.

Whomever said abortion is murder is full of crap. Its not alive yet its not murder its not inhumane - I don't feel like escalating into a flamewar on abortion here so I'll nip it now but I have to say the truth at least once- abortion is not murder anymore than eating eggs is. Yes I've taken bio so i don't need gestation explanations. Is meat murder even though its a convenient source of protein?

What China did was an atrocity. I have a Chinese friend who was forced to have an abortion. That is not a "socially responsible action," that is a fucked-up government that deserves to be disobeyed in that matter, if not overthrown entirely.

Of course meat is not murder. Are you suggesting we eat the fetus?

You miss my point. What you are suggesting is an aristocracy. "Oh, well, we think you guys should stop having kids because it's going to mess up the planet. We are going to keep having kids just so we can make sure that you guys continue to not have kids."

...

Yeah, like I said, you gonna hold that position, you go right ahead. If you don't follow through on your beliefs, I feel free to label you a hypocrite. (If you have kids- not if you don't kill yourself. After all, why have kids when there are plenty of orphans in the world to adopt, right? Please don't take this out of context and say I'm against adoption, btw. I'd be most displeased.)

I'm not a hypocrite (at least int his context)- I don't advocate an aristocracy and I find it a bit hypocritical of you to think abortion is murder and meat isn't. I didn't say people shouldn't have kids I said they shouldn't have MANY kids. China did some socially responsible population engineering in their country to save themselves say what you will about their human rights record- their population control is great. It would be better if they could enforce it voluntarily instead of forcing people to take tough actions. My issue was having many kids i.e. over REPLACEMENT rate. We as individuals have the right to procreate its how much procreation that is the issue imo. So no hypocrisy there at all. If I'd rather pass on my genes than adopt someone with different genes i have that right. Its when I want to pump out a bunch of kids that it becomes an issue. If we all just gave up and died no one would be around to regulate the future populations of the world.

Also - all my objections to high population and big families will go away if we begin space colonization- then we need to shore up our numbers to populate the cosmos.

i first heard of the vagina dentata in a mythology class when we were reading some Native American myths - supposedly there was a special berry that would get rid of the teeth.

Forcibly enforcing a law that makes people have an abortion is not a socially responsible action, it is an atrocity. China has plenty of room, they simply need to spread out. They are all concentrated in an area of about 200 square miles. Rural China? I'd be surprised if they had a population density of over 20/square mile.

Considering that I think a fetus is a human being almost from the get-go, I fail to see why it's hypocritical of me to say meat is not murder and abortion is. Meat is not from humans, (if yours is, we have a bigger problem ), thus it is not murder, as murder is killing another human. Also, meat from a cow is used, and the fetus' resources are not. We simply toss them out. (And if you think we should use them the same way as we use meat- well, again, we have a bigger problem. )

In any case, we have plenty of room left on good old earth, certainly enough to not stoop to such levels as forced population control. I tell you what, if that ever happened here in America, that would be my sign to leave. Or start a revolution, not sure which. Get back to me if it happens.

 

[Thanatos34]

This is kind of black-and-white choices on a grey subject. I DON'T think sex is the greatest thing ever (that would be breathing). I would say the religous abstinance preachers are more ignorant, but I am athiest and disagree with the "sex is the best thing EVAR" option.

P.S.

ohh and for those people here who think abortion is a good idea because we have to many people, i say go get a gun or something and off yourself and make some 'room' for those babys youd rather see murdered. after all if this planet is sooo over crouded we need to start murdering people because we are runing out of room, why not start your population reduction methods with yourself first, im sure you wont be missed. and given the extream ignorance of the very idea of baby murdering as population controll its almost certian that you have nothing of value to add to a society so its no real loss to anyone.

Oh really? Well I hate to tell you buddy, but if you have ever used a condom, then you're a dreaded baby-killer as well by that logic. Fetuses are not alive and if they were taken out of their mothers, they'd die instantly. Your sperm is not alive either, but by your logic, each time you jack off or use a birth control, you just killed a baby. Or maybe even a few thousand, depending on the extent of your religious "logic".

Right now the world is too crowded, denying it is stupid and ignorant. That doesn't mean we should kill living people who WOULD be missed. We should move farther back in the cycle and stop it at the source (sex). If we can't do that, then we should do it before logical people term it murder (abortion). Who knows, maybe one day it'll be mandatory to lose your ability to reproduce due to overcrowding. Lets see you spout your bullshit when the world is home to 25 billion people, all starving to death and killing the enviroment.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather be "killed" before I was alive rather than get shot in the head now. If you were never alive, then you aren't losing anything and nobody is hurt by your passing. I'd also rather "die" as a fetus then grow up in an orphanage, on the streets or dying of hunger. I don't have anything against religion, except when it makes absolutly zero sense. It's good for comforting people, but people can take it too far.

You cannot say

Fetuses are not alive and if they were taken out of their mothers, they'd die instantly.

Fetuses are not alive and... they'd die.

What? How can something die if it's not alive? The argument is over whether or not they are human, not whether or not they are alive.

I'd have to disagree with you about rather being killed as a fetus. I'm with Miguel Unamuno on this one, nothingness frightens me more than anything, even hell, if there is such a place. Having never existed, never experienced living? Hell, I'd take any life whatsoever over having never existed. There is always some good, no matter what life you lead or where you lead it.

And again, we can stop with this overpopulated crap. Plenty of room in many areas, we just don't "want" to live there.

 

[Thanatos34]

ABSTINENCE! I mean come on!! STDs run wild through society and cause pain and even death everywhere they go, and can be easily avoided! Sheeeesh. Sex causes so many problems, and if everyone just waited until marriage everything would be better: less heartbreak, less unintended pregnancy, more commitment, controlling STDs...the list goes on and on!

I think what you meant to say is that "unprotected sex causes so many problems". Safe sex between consenting partners who know what they are doing does not lead to these problems. I bet we'd have a higher rate of divorce if people waited until marriage to have sex, because if they did then they wouldn't know if they were sexually compatible. Even further, a big part of the debate here is over Abstinence only education, and we know for a FACT that abstinence only education increases the number of teen pregnancies and the rate of STD transmission in the areas in which it is taught. Inversely, comprehensive sex ed has been proven to decrease the number of teen pregnancies and the rate of STD transmission.

The facts don't back you up here on your second point. People who live together before marriage have a far higher rate of divorce than those who do not.

 

[Thanatos34]

I think the most ignorant thing is when people say abortion is evil inhumane.

I don't want to be mean or anything, but really now! Our planet does not need any more people than it has now!

Oh good. So we should just start killing people off? After you, buddy.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Abortion is not murder, and I have never implied that it was. Unless you're an evangelical religious zealot, you would know that the planet is under heavy stress from the population.
Abortion is not murder, it's only a way of preventing the unnecessary excess use of our resources.

The planet is under heavy stress...

Is that why Russia has a density of 20 people per square mile, and Australia has a density of 7/ square mile, the US has 80/sq mile... I love how one can no longer disagree with each other without being called names. Our problem is not too many people, it's too many people concentrated in small locations. Take the central eastern portion of China, which is ridiculously overcrowded.

Abortion is killing, at least, as perhaps you could argue that the fetus is not human, though that gets really shaky, (i.e. at what point does it become a human), but it is still killing. It may be killing something with a good end in mind, but the fetus is a living thing that you are destroying merely because it is inconvenient, in most cases. If the mother's life is in danger, or in certain other cases, fine, it may be unavoidable. Otherwise... yeah.

And hell yes it's inhumane. They suck the kid's brains out, and cut him to pieces, for crying out loud. If there is the least chance that he can feel that, don't you think we should do something about it?

Oh come on! Everyone knows that there are parts (Some really large parts) of all of these countries that you mentioned that are just uninhabitable by humans... Have you heard of a place called Utah? Do you wanna live with Morons? Sorry, Mormons.

If we can live in Antarctica, we can handle Russia and the Outback in Australia. We just need to develop technologies that would allow us to live there more comfortably, in order to make people actually "want" to live there. Or just make it really, really, cheap.