Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Male Contraceptive Gel is another step closer Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel 96)
    UK abortion statistics: http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/poli...landwales.html
    It doesn't have 2017 in there, but just to note, it's still on the rise.

    And state propaganda, I was referring to sex education.
    Abortion % seems to have been around 20% for a long time.

    Earlier on it was less. But I don't get how this relates to what you said. Correlation is not causation.

    More people aborting is a result of many things, not pills or condoms not working or people having too much casual sex.

    a) Access, as time went on, more people were able to have an abortion. Many who didn't have one back in 1960's/1970's, would have done so today in the same scenario
    b) Abortions are now more socially acceptable, society is much less religious in general and politics are a lot less pro-life (as compared to say, America).
    c) One could argue statistics from before may have been flawed or incomplete. I am not sure how many off the record abortions may or may not have taken place.

    Lastly, abortions happening isn't necessarily a bad thing. I wonder how many rape victims back then couldn't get an abortion due to access or social reasons. I wonder how many of them ended up having a child that they didn't actually want even in normal/married relationships.

    Point in hand, abortion % isn't a valid argument for your case. You can't say more unwanted babies are happening due to pills/condom introduction, because more abortions are happening.

    Unwanted babies does not equal abortion, it depends on circumstances, time period, social pressures, religion, means etc.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    One which is leeching energy off of the woman it inhabits. It is connected to the woman via a tube, I am not sure where your notion of separate comes from. If you do think it's separate, then great, we can remove it and we can see how it gets along, can't we?
    No, my point is that this argument is the same argument people used for slavery back in the 18th century. "He/she is on my land, I can do what I want with them".

    (Original post by yudothis)
    The parents signed no contract, what the actual **** are you talking about?
    They are under moral obligation to care for that child. They are the sole reason for his/her existence, and you cannot justify the killing of said child based on convenience. That is the nature of evil.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mashbbk)
    Abortion % seems to have been around 20% for a long time.

    Earlier on it was less. But I don't get how this relates to what you said. Correlation is not causation.

    More people aborting is a result of many things, not pills or condoms not working or people having too much casual sex.

    a) Access, as time went on, more people were able to have an abortion. Many who didn't have one back in 1960's/1970's, would have done so today in the same scenario
    b) Abortions are now more socially acceptable, society is much less religious in general and politics are a lot less pro-life (as compared to say, America).
    c) One could argue statistics from before may have been flawed or incomplete. I am not sure how many off the record abortions may or may not have taken place.

    Lastly, abortions happening isn't necessarily a bad thing. I wonder how many rape victims back then couldn't get an abortion due to access or social reasons. I wonder how many of them ended up having a child that they didn't actually want even in normal/married relationships.

    Point in hand, abortion % isn't a valid argument for your case. You can't say more unwanted babies are happening due to pills/condom introduction, due to more abortions happening.

    Unwanted babies does not equal abortion, it depends on circumstances, time period, social pressures, religion, means etc.
    Once you argue that abortion "isn't necessarily a bad thing", then that's where this debate ends.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel 96)
    No, my point is that this argument is the same argument people used for slavery back in the 18th century. "He/she is on my land, I can do what I want with them".



    They are under moral obligation to care for that child. They are the sole reason for his/her existence, and you cannot justify the killing of said child based on convenience. That is the nature of evil.
    That is not the same argument.

    You like to bring up irrelevant other examples, above it was immigration. Is it because you don't actually have any points that are not easily refuted?

    No they are not. Stop pretending your personal opinion is the be all end all. You are not killing something that hasn't even been born.

    Are you at least a vegan or are you a hypocrite, too? In fact, even eating plants - you are killing a living thing. How dare you!
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel 96)
    Once you argue that abortion "isn't necessarily a bad thing", then that's where this debate ends.
    Global population is growing at a rate that is unsustainable. Any kind of voluntary contraception that stops this is an excellent idea in my opinion, up to & including abortion.

    I personally think it's far worse to bring a child into this world with the knowledge you cannot do your best to look after them.

    Surely, if you're against abortion then you should be in favour of contraception as something like this would reduce the likelihood of getting pregnant: if the girl is on the poll, the man on this gel & a condom is also used for then the chances of a pregnancy occurring is ridiculously tiny.

    Or are you one of these religious fundamentalists who believes sex should only be there for creation? If so, that's where this debate ends.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel 96)
    Once you argue that abortion "isn't necessarily a bad thing", then that's where this debate ends.
    Care to elaborate on that?

    How is having a baby you don't want actually a good thing?

    Anyway the debate was over when you couldn't provide evidence that more unwanted babies has become prominent due to contraception not working 0.x% of the time. A world without contraception would have a lot more unwanted babies (scientifically/mathematically speaking) period, whether they abort them or not. Besides, if we banned all contraception today, I can guarantee you there would be a lot more abortions (and you seem anti-abortion, so you should be for contraception).

    But scarily enough, it seems you want a world where no one has sex unless for procreation reasons.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tempest II)
    Global population is growing at a rate that is unsustainable. Any kind of voluntary contraception that stops this is an excellent idea in my opinion, up to & including abortion.
    "Abortion is the only event that modern liberals think too violent and obscene to portray on TV. This is not because they are squeamish or prudish. It is because if people knew what Abortion really looked like, it would destroy their pretence that it is a civilized answer to the problem of what to do about unwanted babies."

    As I said before, we've gone past the point of no return. Contraceptive pills is now a necessary thing, but abortion isn't. You state that you wish to control population numbers to a sustainable level, and your first thought is abortion? Of course, humans will always try to justify killing when it suits them, and it should always be the last solution to any problem.

    The British Hong Kong period in the 1970's showed that encouraging people to have two children as a limit, rather than an actual law, works as a deterrent against irresponsible sex. Hong Kong currently has a fertility rate of 1.04 children per woman, which is one of the lowest in the world.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Injected into your sack... INJECTED.

    **** that.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mashbbk)
    Care to elaborate on that?

    How is having a baby you don't want actually a good thing?
    Look, I appreciate that you're at least trying to refute what I say in an amicable manner, but I find it increasingly difficult to debate someone who makes room for the killing of human babies in society. I have given you statistics, which you acknowledged, but made the common "correlation/causation" response, which was pretty irresponsible.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mashbbk)
    But scarily enough, it seems you want a world where no one has sex unless for procreation reasons.
    Jeepers! Almost as if the purpose of sexual intercourse wasn't for exactly that - procreation.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel 96)
    Look, I appreciate that you're at least trying to refute what I say in an amicable manner, but I find it increasingly difficult to debate someone who makes room for the killing of human babies in society. I have given you statistics, which you acknowledged, but made the common "correlation/causation" response, which was pretty irresponsible.
    How was it irresponsible? You didn't even attempt to refute my argument about why that correlation was perfectly explainable for other reasons.

    The actual statistics you need is to show a population who don't use contraception vs a population who do use contraception - and see how many unwanted babies happen. I know what my bet would be on.

    (Original post by Joel 96)
    Jeepers! Almost as if the purpose of sexual intercourse wasn't for exactly that - procreation.
    Okay you would prefer that the world only had sex for procreation reasons and to be honest that is your opinion and I am not going to judge you for it.

    What I will say though is, contraception is not the reason more people are having sex for non-procreation reasons.

    I hope you agree with me that, hundreds of years ago, people having sex for pleasure wasn't a rarity. It happened a lot, as it does today.

    Let's even make it easier and say that it is happening more now - how can you be certain it is due to contraception? There could be many reasons why more people have sex for pleasure - infact similar reasons come to mind as to why more people have abortions. Access, social norms, religion (lack of). Agree/disagree?

    Now, that we do live in an age like this, do you not believe the removal of said contraception, would lead to inevitably more unwanted babies?

    Or perhaps, you thought, if we suddenly removed contraception, every woman would just put a "closed for business" sign between her legs?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Injected into your sack... INJECTED.

    **** that.
    hopefully they'd be anaesthetised
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopelessMedic)
    How is killing the baby the better choice?
    Because having a child you can't care for or can't afford, isn't nice. There are babies/children dying due to starvation and/or abuse all around the world.

    What do you believe in the case where you become pregnant due to rape? Would you be against abortion in this case?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel 96)
    Jeepers! Almost as if the purpose of sexual intercourse wasn't for exactly that - procreation.
    By all means, abstain; hopefully forever.

    But don't shove your opinion down other's throats.

    If I want an abortion, I will have an abortion.
    If I want sex, I will have sex.
    If I want contraception, I will have contraception.

    Your opinion does not change mine, or anyone else's.

    All you do is p*ss us off.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Injected into your sack... INJECTED.

    **** that.
    Mate, us girls have plastic tubes fitted in their arms and injections every few weeks. Some even have copper installed through their vaginas. A bit of gel sounds pretty good to me. At least themale version seems to have no lasting effect on fertility, whereas for women we aren't so lucky :yep:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mashbbk)
    Because having a child you can't care for or can't afford, isn't nice. There are babies/children dying due to starvation and/or abuse all around the world.

    What do you believe in the case where you become pregnant due to rape? Would you be against abortion in this case?
    Can't rep you enough.

    Abortion is a sensitive topic but is necessary sometimes.

    I knew a Reverend who aborted their seventh child. They were told that the baby was severely disabled and would die soon after birth. Every minute it was in the womb, it was in pain. After the procedure, it was clear to see how disabled the child was.

    I know someone who lives in Ireland. They have a genetic condition which meant that any child they had would 100% be severely disabled. Growing up where they were meant abortion wasn't an option. Two decades on, two children died in immense pain before puberty. The other children do not know what a normal life is, can't walk and spend their days in agony.

    I have a genetic condition too. Currently, I will not have my own children as I do not want them suffering like I did.Therefore I am a great advocator of contraception.

    There are people who cannot afford to raise another child and got pregnant accidentally. For the sake of their other children and themselves, abortion is the best option. As you said above.

    What about the mental health of the mother? Or, in that matter the physical health? Why should their mental health plummet if there is a solution? From my own perspective, carrying a child could negatively affect my physical health. Why should I have to spend nine months in acute pain if there is a way to avoid this?

    Onto contraceptive, the pill helps millions of women world wide with PCOS, endometriosis, etc. Therefore it is medically necessary for people's quality of life.

    Why should people be forced to abstain from sex because of a minority's hard-line pro-life doctrine?

    I believe that the arguer's point of view would rapidly change if they were raising ten children on a meagre salary as a single parent, whilst several of the children were special needs.

    Abortion and contraceptives are a medical must and save lives around the globe.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chelseadagg3r)
    Mate, us girls have plastic tubes fitted in their arms and injections every few weeks. Some even have copper installed through their vaginas. A bit of gel sounds pretty good to me. At least themale version seems to have no lasting effect on fertility, whereas for women we aren't so lucky :yep:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Exactly what I was thinking, you know they have to dilate the cervix of a childless woman at least a bit to get an IUD in...

    But aww, an injection. Boo hoo.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fadel)
    I don't think any guy would do it. It hurts having that injection put through you, unlike swallowing a pill.
    Or an injection, or an implant, or an IUD...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chelseadagg3r)
    Mate, us girls have plastic tubes fitted in their arms and injections every few weeks. Some even have copper installed through their vaginas. A bit of gel sounds pretty good to me. At least themale version seems to have no lasting effect on fertility, whereas for women we aren't so lucky :yep:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm not the biggest fan of needles at the best of times. Needles even vaguely close to my crown jewels is a no.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chelseadagg3r)
    Mate, us girls have plastic tubes fitted in their arms and injections every few weeks. Some even have copper installed through their vaginas. A bit of gel sounds pretty good to me. At least themale version seems to have no lasting effect on fertility, whereas for women we aren't so lucky :yep:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Just the sound of the word 'coil' makes my uterus shrivel up and scream 'NOOO'. The pill it is for me.
    Ugh even now the idea of a IUD makes me feel queasy.
    It's like THEY PUT WHAT WHERE?

    And yh, if men get no side effects, unlike us, that's so much better. We can switch!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.