Consenting to sex is consenting to the possibility of pregnancy.
Sexual congress, in all living creatures, is explicitly intended to cause pregnancy. The fact that Humans have developed the higher cognitive faculties to enjoy it does not change its original purpose.
To claim otherwise is like saying that consenting to swimming is not consenting to the possibility of drowning.
True.
Side Score: 17
|
 |
False.
Side Score: 15
|
|
|
|
|
In general for heterosexuals , yes, The grand scheme of things is reproduction, Humans are not the only animals that have sex for the enjoyment of it , check out the Chimpanzees, they also engage is sex for other than reproduction, yet they do not have the abilities to slap a condom on it ... or maybe they do ,, they do eat bananas LOL Side: true.
1
point
of course its true. whenever you have sexthere is a possiblity that you can get yourself pregnant, however with the correct protection you can decrease the chances to virtually nothing. however having said this they are not 100% effective. so in my opinion when you do have sex you do have to accept the possibility to getting pregnant however wit the right protection there is no reason for you not to enjoy yourself Side: true.
1
point
Honestly, I think that this is true. I mean, if you think that there is no possibility, what world are you livin in? I don't mean this to sound mean, but I'm bein honest. I know I'll never get pregnant (only because I'm a male), but any girl I have sexual intercourse with has that possibility, with or without a condom. No matter what you do, there is that possibility. Even with birth control, there's a possibility. So I say yes, consentin to one thing is consentin to the other as well. However, I do see the word used as an interestin topic. I would not have chosen the word "consent". I would have used, like Peekaboo, a word such as "accept" or "understand", so as to make things less confusin, and more "acceptable". Another thing. If you "committ" the act of heavily drinkin, you have "accepted" that you will have a hangover the day after, rather you like it or not. You just need to know the "rules" and consequences. Some people don't know them, then complain that somethin bad happened. If they were to either pay attention, or to care to learn somethin, or even to try to learn a little bit more bout what they're bout to do, then they would be less likely to complain. I know that this post may seem like I'm bein a jerk, and I apologize for that. I didn't mean it to, I'm just statin my mind. If I have either offended you or made you upset, I am sorry. Side: true.
Well, you're right but if you think about it, the human brain doesn't go through every step of their consequences once it makes a decision. When you have sex, your first thought isn't "Oh god, There's a great possibility I could get her pregnant." Unless....you actually do. Side: False.
2
points
1
point
I completely agree with your statement. Every time I have had sex (sense I was 16, even though I was on birth control) in the back of my mind I say and have said to myself "if i do this I might get pregnant am I okay with that possibility?" if I can do that at 16 than anyone can. If the answer is "no I will not accept that possibility" but if you really want to have an orgasm then masturbate for christ sake! Side: true.
1
point
Hi buddies, it is great written piece entirely defined, continue the good work constantly. ร้านอาหารอุบล Side: True.
|
(I) Having a particular mindset about x does not entail having that mindset about all consequences (possible or necessary) of x. --(I.1) What if the person who consented to x doesn't know what all the possible consequences of x are? Granted, this argument is hard to make in the general context of sex and pregnancy. But: ----(I.1.a) Think about people who believe that if you use a condom you're guaranteed not to get pregnant. In this case, they incorrectly think that pregnancy is not a possible consequence of the type of sex they're having. ----(I.1.b) Think also about people (say, naive teenagers and inebriated people who aren't thinking rationally) who do know, when they think calmly and rationally, that sex could lead to pregnancy, but who do not think about this at the moment they decide to have sex. During that impulsive moment, irrational bravado takes over and they tell themselves that they won't get pregnant, it's silly to worry about it. It's arguable that such people, at the time of the impulse decision, do not truly realise that sex can result in pregnancy. --(I.2) A mindset towards something is not always transferable to the consequences of that thing. ----(I.2.a) For example, I enjoy reading. But that does not entail that I enjoy headaches, which sometimes happens to me when I read. It also does not entail that I enjoy the possibility of having headaches. ----(I.2.b) Alternatively, if you say that I've cast the scope too wide and your argument only referred to "consent" and not to other mindsets: Consent tends to denote a state of positive approval, agreeing to something because you want it or don't mind it. Again, liking or wanting something, or not minding something, does not entail liking/wanting/not minding all possible consequences of something. I like being alive, I want to stay alive, I don't mind being alive. I realise that, since I am living and I am mortal, one day I will die. That doesn't entail that I like dying, I want to die, or I don't mind dying. If you had used a word like "accept" or, even better, "understand", I wouldn't have had much trouble with it, because those are more neutral words. I don't find it wrong to say that if you have sex, you should accept or understand that you may become pregnant. It's the positive connotation of "consent" that made me raise my eyebrows. It's a fine line, but it's an important distinction, as the wording you use makes your claim quite controversial and probably repulsive to a lot of people, whereas using a more neutral term wouldn't. (II) That the original purpose of x was y doesn't really add anything to your argument, as far as I can tell. --(II.1) All that was required to be stated was that pregnancy is a possible consequence of sex. Whether or not it was the first primary desired consequence of sex makes no difference. --(II.2) It also has no relevance to the example about swimming. (Surely drowning is not the original purpose of swimming.) ----(II.2.a) As a side note, I don't think consenting to swimming is consenting to the possibility of drowning, for the reasons stated above. ---------------- In short, my views on various statements of the sex/pregnancy issue: "You should realise that sex may result in pregnancy." YES "If you are an intelligent and responsible person, you would understand that sex may result in pregnancy, and be prepared in that regard." YES "Accepting sex is accepting the possibility of pregnancy." PROBABLY YES "Consenting to sex is consenting to the possibility of pregnancy." NO Apologies about the extensive bullet-pointing - my argument was a little complex, and I wanted to lay it out in a clear format. Side: False.
3
points
Is the purpose of driving to get in a wreck? Obviously not, your analogy is absurd. The drive, desire, and biological purposes are designed for reproduction. The driving of a car is for transportation. A negative byproduct is an accident. With sex its intended purpose is to procreate. You may want to do it just for fun but this doesn't change the biological purpose of it. The design of sex is reproduction. You can go race cars all day, but its original design is transportation. Side: true.
1
point
0
points
|
