• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should teenagers be given free condoms?

Should teenagers be given free condoms?

  • Of course! They need to have sex safely

    Votes: 47 50.5%

  • No, it only encourages them

    Votes: 23 24.7%

  • Other(Please elaborate)

    Votes: 23 24.7%
  • Total voters
    93
Anagram said:
I agree. And if I could change the culture I would but I can't, and I don't believe expecting it to be changed is realistic. Therefore, I think we should make decisions that actually work in this world, not what they should be if everything was perfect.
Click to expand...

You need to realize that you're contributing to the problem. If you agree then saying "they're soft, so I'll be soft too" is settling for lower standards than you believe in which are perfectly reasonable. Jumping straight to the 10th floor is unrealistic, but getting there one step at a time isn't. We need to get back in the right direction.
 
ChrisL said:
That might be true, but there are always going to be those teens that are more risque. It's the age, the hormones, the whole maturing process. It's completely normal for teens to pull away from their parents and experiment with things. Unfortunately, sometimes those things lead to bad outcomes.
Click to expand...

Then those teens can experience the consequences and hopefully learn their lessons. If they get pregnant then they can be held to their responsibilities as a parent, just like my mother was.
 
Mathematician said:
You need to realize that you're contributing to the problem. If you agree then saying "they're soft, so I'll be soft too" is settling for lower standards than you believe in which are perfectly reasonable. Jumping straight to the 10th floor is unrealistic, but getting there one step at a time isn't. We need to get back in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But I don't think we have enough people like that to get back to the 10th floor. I'll take what I can get, rather than fighting a losing battle and ending up worse off.
 
Henrin said:
I love how liberals are using the downside of liberal programs to promote more liberal programs. It never ceases to amaze me that liberals don't find that logic flat out retarded.
Click to expand...

I knew an old lady who swallowed a fly

But I don't know why she swallowed the fly

Perhaps she'll die​

 
Mathematician said:
Then those teens can experience the consequences and hopefully learn their lessons. If they get pregnant then they can be held to their responsibilities as a parent, just like my mother was.
Click to expand...

Then you have more people collecting benefits, which is very expensive. Much more expensive to pay to raise a child.

Let's face it a 15 or 16-year-old mom doesn't have very many options.
 
ChrisL said:
Then you have more people collecting benefits, which is very expensive. Much more expensive to pay to raise a child.

Let's face it a 15 or 16-year-old mom doesn't have very many options.
Click to expand...

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....Chris, don't tell people that. That freaks em out.
 
ChrisL said:
Then you have more people collecting benefits, which is very expensive. Much more expensive to pay to raise a child.

Let's face it a 15 or 16-year-old mom doesn't have very many options.
Click to expand...

I guess my opinion is biased by the fact that I came from a teen mother and ended up where I am, without government handouts. Dr. Carson is another good example.
 
Mathematician said:
I guess my opinion is biased by the fact that I came from a teen mother and ended up where I am, without government handouts. Dr. Carson is another good example.
Click to expand...

Some folks are special or lucky. Many others aren't. I think looking at the greater reality might help unbias some of your opinions....or not.
 
Mathematician said:
I guess my opinion is biased by the fact that I came from a teen mother and ended up where I am, without government handouts. Dr. Carson is another good example.
Click to expand...

Times are always changing. I think that things are harder and more complicated now than they were a generation ago. They're aren't many jobs that would pay enough for a young single mom to provide for herself and her baby without help from the state. They would probably at the very least need food stamps and medical help.

I don't mind if young moms use the welfare program, that is what it is for. However, I feel that some type of education or training program is a must for these girls so that they can eventually be independent.

I have my own experiences as a teen mom, but I prefer not to get too personal online.
 
ChrisL said:
Times are always changing. I think that things are harder and more complicated now than they were a generation ago. They're aren't many jobs that would pay enough for a young single mom to provide for herself and her baby without help from the state. They would probably at the very least need food stamps and medical help.

I don't mind if young moms use the welfare program, that is what it is for. However, I feel that some type of education or training program is a must for these girls so that they can eventually be independent.

I have my own experiences as a teen mom, but I prefer not to get too personal online.
Click to expand...

Chris...you've raised one of the problems that pro-life can't seem to hurdle. If a baby is born...and the mom is a kid too. Chances are she'll require help...and if that help comes from the taxpayers...she's viewed by the PL'ers as a parasite. If she gets an abortion...she's viewed by the PL'ers as an irresponsible non-respecter of life.
 
Removable Mind said:
Chris...you've raised one of the problems that pro-life can't seem to huddle. If a baby is born...and the mom is a kid too. Chances are she'll require help...and if that help comes from the taxpayers...she's viewed by the PL'ers as a parasite. If she gets an abortion...she's viewed by the PL'ers as an irresponsible non-respecter of life.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to get me into an abortion debate? ;)

Honestly, I would rather my tax money go to support the child than to pay to abort the child, or even to put the child up for adoption. I'm pro-life but try to be realistic and I could understand the decision of a teen mom to abort a child, so I'm not for banning it, but I'd like to see a lot less of it. Thinking about it still makes me cringe though.
 
ChrisL said:
Are you trying to get me into an abortion debate? ;)

Honestly, I would rather my tax money go to support the child than to pay to abort the child, or even to put the child up for adoption. I'm pro-life but try to be realistic and I could understand the decision of a teen mom to abort a child, so I'm not for banning it, but I'd like to see a lot less of it. Thinking about it still makes me cringe though.
Click to expand...

No dear....don't want to get ya into an abortion debate, but it is a genuine issue.
 
the_recruit said:
We don't live in the world of "should". We live in the world of "do" or "do not". Often, among teenagers personal responsibility "does not" trump fun or pleasure. Cry about it all you want, that doesn't change reality.
Click to expand...

It should also be noted that many times people that are adults fun or pleasure trumps personal responsibility. The fact is some people are just stupid and plenty of people make mistakes. Does it really matter in the end? No, my responsibility is still not for them.
 
the_recruit said:
Maybe. But you can't change that.

In the meantime we are facing real world problems that we need to address as best we can.
Click to expand...

Why does the government need to face these problems exactly?
 
the_recruit said:
This is a straightforward issue of money. Which option costs taxpayers less. Ideology shouldn't even enter into the discussion.

Like it or not, unwanted teen pregnancies cost taxpayers money. Unless you're in favor of letting babies starve, someone has to pay to feed and support those children. When the parent is unable to support the child financially (as is often the case with teens), SOMEONE has to foot the bill. Often that means taxpayers. Like it or not, them's the brakes. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

We have stupid policies, so support this other stupid policy. Nice argument. Nope, not going to play ball with that. The more your stupid policies cost the sooner they die. Sorry, but that works in my favor.

Furthermore, why in the hell would I be interested in even more social programs? What benefit is that to me? All it does is grow the government, increase their influence in peoples lives, create more dependence, and what do I get in return? A chance that it will lower cost of your other stupid programs?
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Why does the government need to face these problems exactly?
Click to expand...

....because the outcomes of the problems are bad. :doh

I don't like paying to support babies that don't have adequate support from their parents. And I don't like letting babies that don't have adequate support from their parents to starve. So I want to fix the problem as best we can.
 
Henrin said:
We have stupid policies, so support this other stupid policy. Nice argument. Nope, not going to play ball with that. The more your stupid policies cost the sooner they die. Sorry, but that works in my favor.

Furthermore, why in the hell would I be interested in even more social programs? What benefit is that to me? All it does is grow the government, increase their influence in peoples lives, create more dependence, and what do I get in return? A chance that it will lower cost of your other stupid programs?
Click to expand...

I don't consider taxpayer money helping to support babies that don't have adequate support from their parents a stupid policy.
 
the_recruit said:
....because the outcomes of the problems are bad. :doh

I don't like paying to support babies that don't have adequate support from their parents. And I don't like letting babies that don't have adequate support from their parents to starve. So I want to fix the problem as best we can.
Click to expand...

So why do you feel the need to drag me along for the ride? What if I didn't want to take part in this scheme of yours?
 
the_recruit said:
I don't consider taxpayer money helping to support babies that don't have adequate support from their parents a stupid policy.
Click to expand...

Economically it's a very stupid policy.
 
Henrin said:
So why do you feel the need to drag me along for the ride? What if I didn't want to take part in this scheme of yours?
Click to expand...

Because we live in a society where we tax citizens. I care more about feeding the babies and less about how upset you are that a tiny fraction of your income was taken to do so.
 
Henrin said:
Economically it's a very stupid policy.
Click to expand...

No it's not. If all one cares about is saving as much money for themselves as possible, then it's a stupid policy. That is not all I care about, therefore I do not consider it a stupid policy.
 
the_recruit said:
No it's not. If all one cares about is saving as much money for themselves as possible, then it's a stupid policy. That is not all I care about, therefore I do not consider it a stupid policy.
Click to expand...

I would rather help people out in real marketable ways that move them forward in life than provide them access to the market or give them certain services. I see no benefit what so ever in providing business free profits by the use of government, but apparently you do.

The only thing that welfare can ever offer is market activity, but to pretend for a moment that creating market activity is really the best way forward economically is ignorant nonsense.
 
the_recruit said:
Because we live in a society where we tax citizens. I care more about feeding the babies and less about how upset you are that a tiny fraction of your income was taken to do so.
Click to expand...

The only reason I even agree to taxation is to fund for my own protection. I have no interest in your protection at all and I have no reason to pay for it.
 
Henrin said:
I would rather help people out in real marketable ways that move them forward in life than provide them access to the market or give them certain services. I see no benefit what so ever in providing business free profits by the use of government, but apparently you do.

The only thing that welfare can ever offer is market activity, but to pretend for a moment that create market activity is really the best way forward economically is ignorant nonsense.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that only having private charities will be able to produce the same level of aid as a mandatory aid program via taxation does. Besides, people are already free to donate to private charities as they see fit.
 
Sig said:
No, female teenagers, particularly those who are socially identifiable as a high-risk for teenage pregnancy, should be encouraged to take a shot of Depo, or some other long-acting birth control agent, at scheduled intervals.
Click to expand...

I totally agree....I know someone who had a very promiscuis young daughter and she did this---ten years later and no babies....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom