segajon said: Bladeneo said:
EHSTEVE said:
Bladeneo said:
segajon said:
Bladeneo said: Pro choice; circumstances are sometime unavoidable. If a person doesnt want the child they shouldnt be forced to have it. |
If a person does not want the child the person should not have sex. Don't give me the lame excuse well the condom broke or the birth control didn't work. We all know those are not 100% effective at preventing a pregnancy and never will be. |
What? Since when is sex purely for the purpose of creating a child? Sorry, Im not going to be restricted in my sexual activities because contraception isnt effective enough to ensure i wont get someone pregnant. If someone takes all precautions necessary to prevent the pregnancy, then they shouldnt be forced to endure it. |
I'm pretty sure that sex has always been mainly to reproduce :P(pleasure is a byproduct?) |
But it isnt PURELY for the purpose of a child. I'm not going to abstain from sex until I want a child. What about people who dont want children? They can never have sex? Its ridiculous to suggest that. 2000 years ago maybe, but nowadays sex is pleasure first, reproduction second. | Their are operations out there that could prevent you are your partner from having a baby. Most of those operations are cheaper than having an abortion.
|
So, I have a choice between having a child or permenantly disabling my chance for a child? Sure, the operations are reversable but the complications that comewith it are worrying; not to mention the price of a second operation. Ill stick with condoms thanks.