Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ...
3
11
12
13
  1. #241
    Titan Adam Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    14,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Twotonsteak View Post
    Sorry. I didn't realize it was the job of responsible taxpayers in Texas to pay for birth-control so the irresponsible (non)tax-payers can keep on riding the hand-out train.

    Here is a unique and brain-shattering idea. If you're so damn poor you can't even afford a box of condoms, don't practice unsafe sex. Just don't.
    Here's the thing: Telling poor people "to not have sex" is ineffective. Offering them access to birth control is effective. The first goes against human nature to have sex, the other works with it. And in the end, the latter is less expensive because the former leads to more babies in the welfare system.

    It would be nice if people were responsible and just didn't have sex when they couldn't afford it, but the reality is people won't be responsible, so providing safe sex practices is the cheapest and most responsible thing to do.

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-08 at 06:19 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Twotonsteak View Post
    1. Why do we have to fund PP for women while men in the same situation have to use a free clinic? (I thought women fought for, and were still fighting for, equal treatment. Not special treatment.)
    I didn't realize women had equal reproductive organs as men.

    If a video game developer removed tumors from players, they'd whine about nerfing their loss in weight and access to radiation powers. -Cracked.com

  2. #242
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Love it when the government blows money on moral stands against condoms and pap smears.
    You mean like how they blow money on moral stands against petty victimless crime and murder against people who no one will miss?

  3. #243
    Quote Originally Posted by Nilinor View Post
    I think that they shouldn't have done it, but at the same time, I do believe kids need not to be fucking each other the moment they hit 13, sounds like more education for both sides is in order here.
    both sides? it's the same side that cut the funding, and tries to do away with sex ed. on the bright side, they are most likely creating enough voters to turn the state blue forever

  4. #244
    Quote Originally Posted by stumpy View Post
    Southern conservatives also tend to oppose sex education.
    It's not that they oppose it, they just oppose it being taught in schools. Most of them believe it's the parents' jobs to teach their kids about sex. Plus, if the kid's not going to listen to their parents anyway, why would they listen to some random guy? Pretty sure most of them just care about getting out of class for an hour or whatever.

  5. #245
    I am Murloc! SirRobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Counciltucky
    Posts
    5,991
    Quote Originally Posted by orissa View Post
    Here's the thing: Telling poor people "to not have sex" is ineffective. Offering them access to birth control is effective. The first goes against human nature to have sex, the other works with it. And in the end, the latter is less expensive because the former leads to more babies in the welfare system.

    It would be nice if people were responsible and just didn't have sex when they couldn't afford it, but the reality is people won't be responsible, so providing safe sex practices is the cheapest and most responsible thing to do.
    Depends on your point of view I guess. The more poor people there are, the easier it is to find gardeners and maids. Could close the border completely if there were plenty of poor folk who were desperate enough to take whatever scraps you leave them. Can't expect the trophy wives to do it themselves and it would be expensive for their cheap asses to even pay folks minimum wage. Of course there will come a tipping point where the lower castes use their numbers to stick your four hundred dollar haircut in a guillotine. But if you've blinded yourself so much that you care more about children before they're born than after anyways...
    Sir Robin, the Not-Quite-So-Brave-As-Sir-Lancelot.
    Who had nearly fought the Dragon of Angnor.
    Who had almost stood up to the vicious Chicken of Bristol.
    And who had personally wet himself, at the Battle of Badon Hill.

  6. #246
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Bergtau View Post
    It's morality, you can't prove it.
    There's actually a strong case to be made that moral relativism is false, and that science has plenty to say about morality and how we should act.

    If you are interested, Sam Harris- The Moral Landscape.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  7. #247
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    There's actually a strong case to be made that moral relativism is false, and that science has plenty to say about morality and how we should act.

    If you are interested, Sam Harris- The Moral Landscape.
    Morality is about what modern society finds socially acceptable behavior, it is not objective. Iran's morality is religion based because its religious society is in the majority and imposes its religious based morality on the land. America is currently fighting religion based morality and secular humanistic morality, we've yet to see who is the victor. I guess when we start stoning adulterers we'll see who's morality won.


    In short, religion does not own morality and 9 times out of 10 religious morality is immoral.

  8. #248
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by sulfuric View Post
    Morality is about what modern society finds socially acceptable behavior, it is not objective.
    That's certainly the prevailing viewpoint of morality. However, there is another viewpoint, which I briefly stated, based on science, the brain, etc. It can be argued, and persuasively so, that science has the ability to tell humans what is moral, and what is not moral. I don't wan't to derail this thread too much, so this is the last I will be posting on this sub-topic.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  9. #249
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    That's certainly the prevailing viewpoint of morality. However, there is another viewpoint, which I briefly stated, based on science, the brain, etc. It can be argued, and persuasively so, that science has the ability to tell humans what is moral, and what is not moral. I don't wan't to derail this thread too much, so this is the last I will be posting on this sub-topic.
    I know exactly what you mean, and I read all of Sam Harris's work. That is the socially acceptable behavior I was speaking of

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •