• 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
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...

Is it possible for you to make your point without using the word retarded? It speaks volumes of your limited intellect.

Whether you agree with the distribution of condoms or not is frankly irrelevant unless the current social programs are overhauled. That was the point.
 
Top Cat said:
Let's see, the cost of a condom or the cost of a child on social services?


It never ceases to amaze me how such a simple concept is so very difficult for so many to grasp.

You may not want to pay, but the fact is you will if they get pregnant.
Click to expand...
Condoms fail, quite often actually. By not offering condoms, you may discourage sex itself.
 
a351 said:
Unfortunately you and other taxpayers foot the bill for sexual responsibility quite frequently. If the distribution of contraceptives was shown to lower said burden, would that alter your viewpoint?
Click to expand...

Exactamundo.
 
Silly and bad topic
 
shlunka said:
Condoms fail, quite often actually. By not offering condoms, you may discourage sex itself.
Click to expand...

8% is "quite often"? If they work 92% of the time, they save taxpayers money do they not?

As to "discouraging sex? Really? Are you freaking serious? A stiff prick has no conscience

My source

http://www.hli.org/condoms/139
 
Last edited:
Top Cat said:
12% is "quite often"? If they work 88% of the time, they save taxpayers money do they not?

As to "discouraging sex? Really? Are you freaking serious? A stiff prick has no conscience
Click to expand...
Yes, %12 is quite often. Given that most teenagers would be screwing like bunny rabbits if they could legally and freely purchase a limitless supply of condoms. I don't understand your "no conscience" statement, do you really believe that most teenagers willingly have unprotected sex? No, they do not. By giving free access to condoms, you encourage more sexual activity, and with the %12 abysmal failure rate, you may have more pregnancies and/or STDs.
 
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...

Let's look at this just a little closer.


Situation A: condoms used. Most of the time, no unwanted pregnancy. End sequence.

Situation B: no condoms used. Unwanted pregnancy likely.
B1 Abortion... controversial and certainly not ideal.
B2 Has baby, gives up for adoption.... lovely, except adoption in America is a traffic jam and crapshoot...
B3 Has baby, attempts to raise same while going to HS. Likely to drop out and work a menial job and be poor for life. Child likely to be raised under highly sub-optimal conditions with limited parental supervision/interaction. Chances of child growing up to be a burden on society, or a criminal: High.

If you're proposing a scenario where there is NO sort of social safety net, what if the Mama can't get a job? Perhaps mama and baby starve.... or perhaps Mama starts stealing or whoring to keep from starvation, or the Babydaddy turns to burglary or armed robbery.


Y'know.... maybe the whole free condom thing wasn't such a burden after all....
 
Top Cat said:
Is it possible for you to make your point without using the word retarded? It speaks volumes of your limited intellect.
Click to expand...

Why is the word retarded in that context a problem again?

Whether you agree with the distribution of condoms or not is frankly irrelevant unless the current social programs are overhauled. That was the point.
Click to expand...

No, your point was that if I want to lower cost created from the safety net then I must support an extension of that safety net. Why not just remove the damn net if that is my goal?
 
shlunka said:
Yes, %12 is quite often. Given that most teenagers would be screwing like bunny rabbits if they could legally and freely purchase a limitless supply of condoms. I don't understand your "no conscience" statement, do you really believe that most teenagers willingly have unprotected sex? No, they do not. .
Click to expand...

Way more than you think.

My source says 8%. My original quote was incorrect.
 
shlunka said:
Condoms fail, quite often actually. By not offering condoms, you may discourage sex itself.
Click to expand...

Then why does the military offer condoms to sailors and other service members on liberty? Wouldn't it be better to not offer them condoms, thus discouraging sex and potential problems? In fact, military members are much more likely to have the resources to get the condoms on their own than high schoolers, yet the services still make free condoms available to them, particularly in ports known for STDs and women looking to hook up with an American for the chance of making a little American. I know. I was there getting condoms offered to me as we left the ship to go on liberty.

Research shows that condom availability does not increase sexual activity. Nor does making condoms less accessible decrease sexual activity.

School Condom Availability

Condom Availability Programs in U.S. Schools

It seems that pediatricians agree that condoms should be made available in schools.

Condom Use by Adolescents

It makes sense. There is no research showing an increase in sexual activity within those schools that have condoms available/more available than schools that don't.
 
Henrin said:
No, your point was that if I want to lower cost created from the safety net then I must support an extension of that safety net. Why not just remove the damn net if that is my goal?
Click to expand...

Really? You're going to tell me my point? Priceless.
 
Henrin said:
Why is the word retarded in that context a problem again?



No, your point was that if I want to lower cost created from the safety net then I must support an extension of that safety net. Why not just remove the damn net if that is my goal?
Click to expand...



No social safety net = more homeless or starving people = more misery and more beggars and more THIEVES.


And if you're one of the Haves, the beggars and thieves are coming to see YOU.


You can have social safety nets of some sort (I'll grant you our current setup is HORRIFICALLY inefficient and badly applied, needs improvement) or you can have more misery, beggars and thieves.


Some reasonable sort of social safety net seems much preferable to me. Now personally I'd like to ****can the entire current system and rebuild it from the ground up in a way that makes sense, operates efficiently and more cheaply, and is chiefly focused on the Hand-UP: getting the person retrained for a decent job and back into the "self-supporting" category again quickly, if at all possible, but that's another discussion....
 
shlunka said:
Yes, %12 is quite often. Given that most teenagers would be screwing like bunny rabbits if they could legally and freely purchase a limitless supply of condoms. I don't understand your "no conscience" statement, do you really believe that most teenagers willingly have unprotected sex? No, they do not. By giving free access to condoms, you encourage more sexual activity, and with the %12 abysmal failure rate, you may have more pregnancies and/or STDs.
Click to expand...

Do you seriously believe this? That is simply not true. Many teens are afraid of sex. Even if they do it once or more, they still don't want to "screw like bunny rabbits" just because of their being teenagers. This truly is a myth.
 
Top Cat said:
Really? You're going to tell me my point? Priceless.
Click to expand...

Why yes, I am. Regardless, I have no interest in helping your programs. The sooner they drown the better.
 
roguenuke said:
Do you seriously believe this? That is simply not true. Many teens are afraid of sex. Even if they do it once or more, they still don't want to "screw like bunny rabbits" just because of their being teenagers. This truly is a myth.
Click to expand...

A lot of kids do it simply because of peer pressure. :shrug: Whether that be pressure from a boyfriend/girlfriend or because they just want to fit in with their friends who have already done it. Other reasons as well of course, but I would place this one high up on the list, along with plain old curiosity.
 
ChrisL said:
A lot of kids do it simply because of peer pressure. :shrug: Whether that be pressure from a boyfriend/girlfriend or because they just want to fit in with their friends who have already done it. Other reasons as well of course, but I would place this one high up on the list, along with plain old curiosity.
Click to expand...

Despite being about twice removed from my teens, I do remember how I felt back then. Sex scared me. And I had a mother who was very good at talking to me about sex and assuring me that she would put me on birth control if I ever needed it. She was really open about sex. She always emphasized abstinence, but she also said that she understood that sometimes teen pressure could be hard to resist so if there was ever a chance of me having sex, I was to make sure that he used a condom and that she would prefer I asked her to put me on BC. I had a lot of friends who felt like this or who simply didn't believe the risk of becoming a teen parent was worth that little bit of fun time. (I think teens may care more about STDs and HIV now than we did in the 90s. It seems like that always felt like more of an "adult" thing as compared to unwanted pregnancies. Now, I doubt as many teens see it that way.)
 
Know what else discourages teen pregnancies? Telling teenagers that if they get knocked up, the government won't support them and they're SOL.

That also has the benefit of being cheaper to the taxpayers, and beneficial to society overall if we decide to employ Soylent Green.
 
Henrin said:
No, they can get their ass down to the store and pay for their own condoms.
Click to expand...

Many kids fear, often legitimately, that if they go to the store they will be spotted by an adult who will rat them out. That is why they should be available to high school kids in school attached to a pamphlet on how to use them properly and and an explanation the risks of breakage and diseases that condom do not necessarily prevent.
 
Mathematician said:
Society should make people improve themselves by letting them suffer for their own poor decisions. Doing such either improves the individual, and thus society as a whole, or at least doesn't make others take any burden they don't deserve.

This also goes back to people saying what haexperiments ppens in their bedroom is only their business, hence it is only their responsibility if they want/need condoms.
Click to expand...

That sounds all nice and libertarian on a shallow level, but when a teenager gets pregnant it affects the child, the grandparents and society, not just the teen parents. Pregnant teens have a hard time finishing high school and suffer economically for much of their lives.
Kids ****, we have the means to make it safer, we should make it available, just like we make other safety devices available for other activities with risk.
 
Henrin said:
Why is it the government job to give people what they need or want? I don't happen to find that welfare in this form or any other form is an improvement. In this example, all it appears to do is shift responsibility from the target, to the people around the target. I have no responsibility to make sure these children use condoms or have condoms in their possession. I have no reason to consider what they want or need something that I must concern myself with. If the kids need condoms they can either get down to the store and buy themselves some or get mommy and daddy to give them some. I have no reason to be involved in it.
Click to expand...

I suppose you are against public schools and "slow children" signs and public parks also.
 
Hard Truth said:
I suppose you are against public schools and "slow children" signs and public parks also.
Click to expand...

Just because a kid is slow doesn't mean you have to put up a sign. That's mean!
 
Hard Truth said:
Many kids fear, often legitimately, that if they go to the store they will be spotted by an adult who will rat them out. That is why they should be available to high school kids in school attached to a pamphlet on how to use them properly and and an explanation the risks of breakage and diseases that condom do not necessarily prevent.
Click to expand...

That is why we have more than one town. :D
 
Gipper said:
Know what else discourages teen pregnancies? Telling teenagers that if they get knocked up, the government won't support them and they're SOL.

That also has the benefit of being cheaper to the taxpayers, and beneficial to society overall if we decide to employ Soylent Green.
Click to expand...

My mother discouraged it by saying that if we got a girl pregnant then we'd lose the college money she saved for us.

Here's an idea. Similar to the leave bank at work, those who want the condoms for their kids without the responsibility of directly providing them can pool their money together and only their kids qualify to withdraw from the condom bank. Seems like a win/win to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom