• 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
DA60 said:
Good points.

And you are right, this does not even begin to fit the requirement.

We are talking about $1 condoms so that teenagers can have safer sex. One lousy buck.

Not emergency food so that people won't starve.


Any First World nation teenager who is too lazy to go and buy a $1 condom to have safer sex deserves everything they get.

Now in poorest Africa where STD's and skyrocketing birth rates are the norm...this sounds like a very good idea.

But in places where teenagers can VERY easily afford them already?

Come on now.

This smells of people who just blindly support ANY government assistance.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I mean jesus, working at McDonalds for an hour you could probably buy at least 10 condoms. There's no reason someone can't afford that.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Indeed, I mean jesus, working at McDonalds for an hour you could probably buy at least 10 condoms. There's no reason someone can't afford that.
Click to expand...

And on that note;

Trojan Premium Lubricant Condoms - Walmart.com

That's 75 cents (plus tax) per name brand condom.


Or if the teen in question is REALLY active (or wants to split the cost with his/her friends):

Get LifeStyles Ultra Sensitive Condoms at Walmart.com. Save money. Live better.

That's about 25 cents (plus tax) per condom.


Come on people - this argument is pretty silly (imo).


(note: I am not knocking the person who started the thread though - all questions are good questions, imo).
 
Last edited:
My tax dollars shouldn't be going toward promoting immoral behavior.
 
John Liberty said:
Should teenagers be given free condoms?
Click to expand...

Yes preventing accidental pregnancy is vital however i believe again education is key to preventing pregnancy which may not be wanted if more wisdom was present
 
Juanita said:
I totally agree....I know someone who had a very promiscuis young daughter and she did this---ten years later and no babies....
Click to expand...

It only makes sense. If a parent knows, or even suspects their daughter of being sexually active, then they should get them a shot of Depo (or some other long-acting birth control) at a free clinic or even at school.
 
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.

Now, that being the case, providing teens with condoms will cost the taxpayers money. On the other hand, there is reason to believe that providing those condoms will reduce the number of unwanted teen pregnancies and, therefore, the amount of money taxpayers have to fork over to support babies that don't have financially-able parents. It's a simple question of which option costs the taxpayers less overall.

I've never seen any data on that, probably there are some studies out there. If I had to guess, I would guess the free condoms are cheaper overall. If that's the case, then anybody who votes against free condoms is, effectively, voting to trade in $1 and get back $0.75 in return. Keep that in mind.
Click to expand...

Many here are simply incapable of discerning the fact that eliminating condom distribution is walking over long dollars to pick up short dimes.
 
DA60 said:
And on that note;

Trojan Premium Lubricant Condoms - Walmart.com

That's 75 cents (plus tax) per name brand condom.


Or if the teen in question is REALLY active (or wants to split the cost with his/her friends):

Get LifeStyles Ultra Sensitive Condoms at Walmart.com. Save money. Live better.

That's about 25 cents (plus tax) per condom.


Come on people - this argument is pretty silly (imo).


(note: I am not knocking the person who started the thread though - all questions are good questions, imo).
Click to expand...

Back before I was married I used that brand, the Lifestyles Ultra Sensitive condoms. For condoms they're pretty stellar, and anyone who says they can't afford it is lying. You'll find enough change on the ground after a few minutes of looking around to buy one.
 
Mathematician said:
Let me teach you some math and logic by example:

0.02 * 1000 > 0.50 * 20 > 0.02 * 100

The point of this lesson is that for any two probabilities strictly between 0 and 1, the numbers of respective trials are still free variables. The example demonstrates that they can be chosen such that either results in a greater expected value of successes.

Applied to the issue at hand, if the number of kids screwing greatly increases because they have an increase in security then the number of teen pregnancies can still rise.
Click to expand...

"Condom Availability Programs Do Not Promote Sexual Activity.

* A study of New York City's school condom availability program found a significant increase in condom use among sexually active students but no increase in sexual activity.1
* A World Health Organization review of studies on sexuality education found that access to counseling and contraceptive services did not encourage earlier or increased sexual activity.3
* In Europe and Canada where comprehensive sexuality education and convenient, confidential access to condoms are more common, the rates of adolescent sexual intercourse are no higher than in the United States.4"

More stats, footnotes and a link in post #187
 
Cephus said:
Why allow your kids to ruin their own lives when you could just raise them right in the first place? If your kids are ignoring you, maybe it's not them that's doing something wrong.
Click to expand...

Here's some late breaking news: even good kids have sex. Almost everybody who can, does. Don't you?

May I suggest people look at the statistics before staking out positions on such matters. I see a lot of wrong assumptions on this thread. Thee are life and death issues that should not be determined by fear, religion/superstition and wrong assumptions.

"Age at First Intercourse

* By their late teenage years, at least 3/4 of all men and women have had intercourse, and more than 2/3 of all sexually experienced teens have had 2 or more partners (AGI, 2002).

* A 2007 evaluation of Abstinence (only) Sex Education programs by Mathmatica Policy Research did not find that they had any effects on rates of abstinence among youth, nor on the average age of first intecourse. Government funded abstinence based programs, compared to previous sex education programs, show little significant difference in rates of teen sex. http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/PDFs/impactabstinence.pdf

Percent of population having had first intercourse, by age
Males
25% by age 15
37% by age 16
46% by age 17
62% by age 18
69% by age 19
77% by age 19
85% by age 20-21
89% by age 22-24

Females
26% by age 15
40% by age 16
49% by age 17
70% by age 18
81% by age 20-21
92% by age 22-24
(Mosher, Chandra, & Jones, 2005)

Average age of first intercourse, by gender
Males 16.9

Females 17.4

(AGI, 2002).

The Kinsey Institute - Sexuality Information Links - FAQ [Related Resources]
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
You just blew your own argument out of the water. Your parents steered you in the right direction, you restrained yourself. My parents did the same thing and so did I. So who should we blame for kids that didn't get the same kind of direction? Not the kids...
Click to expand...
I'm telling you parents can do all the right things and kids not listen. It's common.
 
Mathematician said:
Let me make sure I've got this straight. You don't think expecting the parents to provide the condoms is realistic???
Click to expand...

It is not realistic, far too many parents are in denial or are oblivious about their kids lives.

True story from a girl I went to High School with. She was from a "nice" normal, strict religious family, but living in the city she was a heroin user by the time she was 14. Moving to the suburbs (and perhaps through other measures I don't know about) got her to stop using heroin by age 15. She had a steady boyfriend for a year, was having sex, drinking and smoking pot, but wasn't out of control and got good grades, and didn't act up much (she went to an Ivy League college later). Her mother takes her to get a gynecology exam. In front of her mother* the doctor ask her is she was a virgin. Before the girl could say a thing her mother answered "Of course she is!"

*outrageously clueless and irresponsible
 
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...

Exceptional situations only prove what is possible, not what is most likely to happen.
 
Sig said:
It only makes sense. If a parent knows, or even suspects their daughter of being sexually active, then they should get them a shot of Depo (or some other long-acting birth control) at a free clinic or even at school.
Click to expand...

And if the child refuses (for whatever reason)?
 
CanadaJohn said:
Never underestimate the catastrophes a left winger can dream up if there's a prospect of removing the government teat from easy reach.
Click to expand...

You don't need to go far to see what a country without an effective safety net looks like-Mexico, Brazil, India... Children, disabled and old people begging in the streets, malnutrition, rampant disease etc.
 
DA60 said:
Good points.

And you are right, this does not even begin to fit the requirement.

We are talking about $1 condoms so that teenagers can have safer sex. One lousy buck.

Not emergency food so that people won't starve.


Any First World nation teenager who is too lazy to go and buy a $1 condom to have safer sex deserves everything they get.

Now in poorest Africa where STD's and skyrocketing birth rates are the norm...this sounds like a very good idea.

But in places where teenagers can VERY easily afford them already?

Come on now.

This smells of people who just blindly support ANY government assistance.
Click to expand...

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The statistics show that these programs work.
 
John Liberty said:
Should teenagers be given free condoms?
Click to expand...

I replied no, because the idea that condoms = safety is seriously over stated. Even if you use condoms correctly, the chances of getting pregnant are pretty high. Even the chances of getting an STD are greater than most would care to take.
 
DA60 said:
And on that note;

Trojan Premium Lubricant Condoms - Walmart.com

That's 75 cents (plus tax) per name brand condom.


Or if the teen in question is REALLY active (or wants to split the cost with his/her friends):

Get LifeStyles Ultra Sensitive Condoms at Walmart.com. Save money. Live better.

That's about 25 cents (plus tax) per condom.


Come on people - this argument is pretty silly (imo).


(note: I am not knocking the person who started the thread though - all questions are good questions, imo).
Click to expand...

The cost isn't the issue, it is about making them readily available to kids so they can get them without risking being caught and/or embarrassed and so they to develop good habits. I don't care if they give them out free or have a vending machine, as long as the kids can access them without being watched.
 
Hard Truth said:
You don't need to go far to see what a country without an effective safety net looks like-Mexico, Brazil, India... Children, disabled and old people begging in the streets, malnutrition, rampant disease etc.
Click to expand...

Who knew condoms were such a powerful tool.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
My tax dollars shouldn't be going toward promoting immoral behavior.
Click to expand...

Most people don't support and/or actually practice the type of morality that says sex without marriage is immoral. Chances are, you didn't either.
 
Sig said:
It only makes sense. If a parent knows, or even suspects their daughter of being sexually active, then they should get them a shot of Depo (or some other long-acting birth control) at a free clinic or even at school.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but condoms are needed to prevent disease transmission.
 
Juanita said:
They used to call us bleeding heart liberals--for a good reason...We know how to walk in our brother''s shoes, we are caring and compassionate...That doesn't seem horrible to me....
Click to expand...

It's one thing to be compassionate, it's another to be totally consumed by one's emotions. Liberals are way over that line. It's cool if you want to feel, just don't forget to think.
 
ksu_aviator said:
I replied no, because the idea that condoms = safety is seriously over stated. Even if you use condoms correctly, the chances of getting pregnant are pretty high. Even the chances of getting an STD are greater than most would care to take.
Click to expand...

Roughly 40% of teenagers have had sex by age 16. Providing condoms is proven to not increase sexual activity. Condoms are highly effective when used properly. Combined with birth control pills the chance of pregnancy is virtually zero.

Are you a victim of abstinence education? You seem to believe inaccurate information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom