POLL: Sex Me Up

Remove all ads!

1: C. Frankly, dont care.

2: C. I'm not sure I can even get a male contraceptive pill here (does it even exist). So thats her choice/decision. But condom wear is necessary for me for either reason. Just one visit to a governmental hospital would make you acutely aware of the social stigma and boycott AIDS carries. At the very time when a patient would need it the most.

3: B. Heck, my dad supports that attitude.

4: Somewhere between A and B. I voted A.
You can hope, you can pray, but you never really know when it going to happen. Even within a marriage it may just happen at a moment (for example right after the nth diaper change ) when you go: "****! Everything and now this." But still the abortion clinic is out of the question unless she wants it and can persuade me.
Outside of a marriage I may have responsibilities but I have no rights which she is not willing to assign to me. So not an issue really.

 

Q1 She was a virgin. I didn't know she was one until it was about to happen. We were both groping (pun not intended).

Q2 I use both pills (not me, of course) and condoms.

Q3 I still intend to use contraceptives when I get married.

Q4 I'm not married but I have a kid. It obviously was unplanned but I don't regret having him. In the future, I would not have any unplanned pregnancies aborted. Aside from this being a Roman Catholic teaching (obviously I have not been following all of them), I am pro-life because my mom chose to have me. My uncle told her that he knew where to have abortions but she said she was keeping me whether my dad married her or not. I'm glad she gave me a chance. I'll do the same for any of my kids. Oh, my mom and dad did get married.

 

There has been some testing performed, but AFAIK, there is no on-the-market, medically approved male birth control pill. However, if SHE used the pill it should work just fine for you not getting her pregnant.

 

Well, I went into marriage a virgin. Once I was married, we used protection against pregnancy, though she

a) wasn't all that careful in her taking of the pill and
b) felt I was being a controlling slimeball if I so much as mentioned the pill ("Did you take your pill yet?" "YOU BAS****, how dare you . . .")

So when she got pregnant by "accident" a second time, my feelings were, sadly, on the level of "another mouth to feed". Funny thing is, I see my daughter now and wonder how I ever lived without her -- she is so blasted funny!

 

Actually if she has failed to take her pill (at least on two occassions), then I feel you have every right to ask her from now on. Obviously she is having some difficulty in remembering, and giving her a reminder is well within your rights. Unfortunately from some of my friends I have discovered that some women "forget" to take their pills with the intent to become pregnant.

Most surprising aspect of this poll: More people had sex for the first time with a non-virgin than a virgin. Also, a significant portion of the population doesn't particularly care whether or not thier first time is with a virgin or not. If this is indicative of the general population (and with a sample size of just 61 we can't determine that it is) it puts to bed the myth of "wait until you're married".

EDIT:

Hugo, you bastard. I'm in my 30s and I do not AT ALL consider myself to be "in the later stages of life". By your estimation, Splunge must already have one foot in the grave.

 

I think it's normal that a woman wants children. It's natural. More so than the other way. It's not like a guy has much of a right here. Sex is not just for procreation, but there's a reason why it exists.

 

If I don't remember all incorrectly I think it's a bit too late now.

 

1. Nope. And to be honest, I don't see why it matters, except possibly from the perspective of how enjoyable the experience will be.

2. Yes. Both forms of contraception initially, the pill after it's established that no-one has any STDs.

3. Contraceptive pill would still be in use, unless the decision is made to have a child... somehow I doubt this will be an issue for me for some time.

4. It isn't really my choice, but I'm guessing my partner would (at this stage, at least) try to abort. We aren't in a position to support a child and would not bring one into the world unless we could, as difficult a decision as that would be.

 

I really have problems with your question #3. As a Catholic, procreation is not the only reason to have sex, but all sexual activity must be open to procreation. The choice you give allow only for those with a contraceptive mentality or a puritanical bent. There is a middle way, the Catholic way, for which you did not provide a choice.

Harbourbuoy,

Not using birth control in marriage will not necessarily mean 20 children. One will probably have more than the standard 2 children, however. My wife and I have been married 20 years, never even used NFP (and certainly no other kinds of contraception), and have 5 children.

Children are a joy and a gift from God, not a burden. There is also a freeness and spontenaity about sex when one does not have to worry about contraception. There is no fear of an unwanted pregnancy since any child that may result will be a welcome addition to the family.

Chevalier:

You keep it up, Chev. You will never regret your decision. It is hard to resist the temptations of the modern world, but it can be done. My wife and I married at age 26 and were both virgins. It is well worth your effort. God bless you.

[ May 24, 2005, 14:39: Message edited by: Khemsa ]

 

When calculated right, NFP is more successful than anything. It probably just takes more "safety margins" in the beginning, like days of which you aren't perfectly sure either way. But with some practice, it's practically 100% successful. Still, a child is not an intruder. NFP can be twisted into some kind of real contraception, but normally it's a way of trying to keep some limits in the size of your family and no child is unwanted.

Thanks, Khemsa. Praying already for the poor girl who's going to end up with me. To be honest, I would feel bad for using a condom on a woman and wouldn't be happy with using pills on me. It wouldn't feel "full and humane" and that's what we're supposed to get. While everyone else seems to see Catholicism as a set of restrictions in the sexual area, I actually believe we're aiming for the max there is to get.

 

Yes, sadly, it's too late for me to remind her, as she has taken off and so far tried to get pregnant by at least 3 different men so far (or at least, she had sex with them)

But she didn't seem to think that I had ANY right to be involved in the pill taking, although I do have RESPONSIBILITIES now that the kids are here. Interesting double standard, but with some people (not just women) logic takes a back seat to crying and accusations of abuse.

 

Of course children can be a burden. Not just on a family, but on the world. If everyone went around having loads of kids, the population of the world would become unsustainable. I repeat my earlier point that an unrestricted policy on fertility was a good thing 1000 years ago when most of your babies were not expected to survive beyond their first year. But in a modern society, most kids will survive, thus requiring a re-think of approaches to fertility rather than blindly clinging to rules that were laid down when the world was very different.

Yeah, and so are condoms. Just different solutions to the same objective - being responsible about bringing children into the world.

 

Children are only a burden when the parents do not properly care for or train them. A child to an unwed mother is a burden when the mother needs support from the state. These two problems can be solved by chastity--no sex outside of legal and lawful marriage, and by responsible parenting.

Not having indiscriminant sex accomplishes the same thing.

 

Agreed. But I was mostly talking about sex within marriage and the issue of contraception within that environment.

Um, even if you care for your kids really well, 14 kids are still more of a burden than 2, no matter how cute or perfect they might be.

 

@Aldeth: I didn't mean offense - but 30s is simply well past the beginning of an adult life. It's after the beginning, ergo: it is a later stage in life. Also, I seem this from the perspective of someone who's 16, cos I *am* 16 .

In any case: children, while I'm sure it's wonderful to have 'em, do form a burden too. They must be taken care of, raised, given attention, they play a major role in your life from the moment you have them, lasting about 2 decades. You can't decide after a couple years "On second thought, I'd rather not have had this kid. Back in the womb, you!". You make the choice (by whatever method) to bring the kid into the world, you're responsible for raising it. It affects every decision you make from then on in a major way.
That might be worth it all, after all, raising children seems to have been, and remain, very popular, but as it is, I'd rather have had plenty of 'wild years' before I do that.

 

Even where birthcontrol within the marriage is not practiced, that big a family is rare. Besides, the older ones can help out arount the home to ease that stress.

 

@ Hugo:

I was joking - I wasn't really angry with you by saying I was in the "later stages of life", especially since now I'm no longer 30 but 31!. My youngest brother is 17, and yeah, he thinks I'm old too.

 

Chev, I know a number of young ladies who are praying to find a man just like you.

 

Naw, condoms serve being able to enjoy some sex without taking the responsibility for it. The accent is on fun without responsibiity. With NFP, the purpose is keeping the family size within a certain limit. The method is fair and there is no trying to get something for nothing. When a child is actually conceived, it hasn't been actively battled against by the parents. Perhaps not exactly brough about on purpose (there are many people who would almost die for the ability to make a given act result in conception rather than lack of it), but not fought against, not seen as an intruder. Born of love rather than sex.

You'd better keep studying hard and find a good woman when you're done.

 

Huh?? The semantics here are very fine. We’re talking about sex within a loving marriage here, not random one night stands. I thought we were allowed to enjoy sex within marriage. Isn’t that what you’ve been saying for years?

Now you’re saying that one form of contraception is acceptable within marriage but another is not. Surely any form of contraception is a method of enjoying sex whilst minimising the chance of having kids? And haven’t you all been quick to point out that condoms aren’t 100% reliable anyway?

The only difference between condoms and NFP is the point in the process where you aim to reduce the chance of fertilisation. To try and say that one method is more morally acceptable seems incomprehensible to me.