logo Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
2022-08-19 13:37:48 CoV Wiki
Learn more about the Church of Virus
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Do you want to know where you stand?

  Church of Virus BBS
  Mailing List
  Virus 2006

  Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
previous next
Pages: [1] 2 Reply Notify of replies Send the topic Print 
   Author  Topic: Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.  (Read 7606 times)
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« on: 2006-11-04 11:48:02 »
Reply with quote

Forget about teenage sex and pregnancy, the govt doesnt want unmarried women in their 20s to have sex. The country can do without single mothers, thank you very much.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2619061&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

If you're single and in your 20s, the federal government wants you to steer clear of sex.

That's the new guidance for states under the Department of Health and Human Services' $50 million Abstinence Education Program. HHS officials say it's not a requirement just another option for states to combat what they call an alarming rise in out-of-wedlock births.

A record 1.5 million babies were born to single mothers in 2004, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. More than half of them were born to women in their early 20s.

[..]

"This is a clear signal that they're using these resources taxpayer dollars to promote an ideological agenda," Wagoner says. "It has nothing to do with public health."

[..]

The guidelines let states use federal grants to "identify groups" of people between the ages of 12 to 29 who "are most likely to bear children out of wedlock." After identifying the groups, targeted programs can then "support decisions to delay sexual activity until marriage."

"Those who delay sex until marriage avoid out-of-wedlock births in both their teen and adult years," the guidelines read. "They decrease the likelihood of acquiring a sexually transmitted disease. They reduce the risk of having children who live absent from their fathers or who grow up poor."

"Whatever happened to conservatives that were against big government," Wagoner asks. "If this isn't a waste of taxpayer dollars, what is?"

[end]
Report to moderator   Logged
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4267
Reputation: 8.96
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #1 on: 2006-11-04 12:48:37 »
Reply with quote

[Mermaid cites the HHS] "Those who delay sex until marriage avoid out-of-wedlock births in both their teen and adult years," the guidelines read.

[Hermit] This is true. The likelihood of avoiding sex until marriage is dependent on the age at which we shackle unwilling and mismatched people into marriages. Given that most American children have - according to Government statistics - already experienced the joys of sex by age 16, coupled with the huge success of the HHS campaigns persuading children not to use condoms, confirmed by increasing numbers of offspring from unmarried teen mothers -  suggests we should be marrying them to one another earlier if reducing out-of-wedlock births is to be our new primary goal.

[Mermaid cites the HHS] "They decrease the likelihood of acquiring a sexually transmitted disease."

[Hermit] Seeing as most Americans have already had their first STD before age 25, this seems counter-intuitive. Again, if prophylactics are to be discouraged, early marriage would be a better answer.

[Mermaid cites the HHS] They reduce the risk of having children who live absent from their fathers or who grow up poor."

[Hermit] Given the rapid descent of Americans into poverty, perhaps the best way to reduce these risks might be for Americans to move to more egalitarian societies, where they could build up some little wealth and not have to work more hours than any other nation before breeding.

[Hermit] I would say this is simply a response to the fact that more couples are now unmarried than married and that more babies are born outside wedlock than inside it. The reality is that marriage has far too many disadvantages and not nearly enough advantages to make it worthwhile for the average person - and this has been the case for decades. Previously the disadvantages were buried under the religious disapprobation given to the "sinful" unwed and homosexuals by the Judeo Christians and other paleoreligious groups, which lead to a surfeit of "marriage without evaluation". As the under 50 demographic grew, and the hyper-religious over 50 demographic died off, with the final transfer of numeric superiority in around 2000, the USA finally began to catch up with European social trends, where marriage has been on the decline since the "Great War" of 1914-18.

[Hermit] If this were the end of the story, I would say that at this point, marriage itself is probably doomed as a social institution, except amongst the paleoreligious groups and those gays who see marriage as a desirable mark of social acceptance. Assuming society continues as is (unlikely as that may be), we will likely see purely secular partnership agreements replacing marriage, conferring most of the advantages and few of the disadvantages for a while. Unfortunately, when the current generation, which we have permitted to be more programmed than even the cold war generation finally comes into power, this tendency is likely to be reversed.

[Hermit] With the changes I think are coming in the form of climatic, cheap fuel shortages and health emergencies, we could probably still avoid a miserable future with an almost certain revival of extremism and Theocracy, were we to adopt a rational preemptive approach, but I currently consider the likelihood of avoiding this as being somewhere between slight and highly unlikely. Which means that "marriage", the institution formalizing the need for a man and a woman living together to ensure the misery of their partners, will likely play some role in our future and we have one.

[Hermit] For a collection of wonderful quotations about marriage, see http://www.unmarried.org/quotes.php.
Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #2 on: 2006-11-05 00:20:09 »
Reply with quote

i am wondering what will happen in 20-30 years. there is going to be enormous pressure on social security/medicare etc as people age and retire. if (and i think it will happen) there is a depression/recession type situation around that time period, after the retired folks try to overextend(here again, i'd say that they will be drawing less than they hope to...the 401ks and retirement funds arent going to ensure the expected quality of life) their govt promised 'benefits', what will happen to the schools, medical care and other social expenses. put that aside, unless there are young adults(who will be born right about NOW) who will bear the social costs, i'd predict that the economic situation gleams with a dull bleakness. maybe immigrants will be the lifeline that will save the country. already, it is the immigrants from down south that has california humming smoothly atm. and we are not even factoring in the wars and the spillover from terrorism related issues...and i am not even going to go into the 'energy crisis' or 'global warming'. they are non issues for this economic crystal ball. no solid predictions here...just wondering how much more interesting its all going to get...oh..shudder.

« Last Edit: 2006-11-05 00:22:11 by Mermaid » Report to moderator   Logged
Bass
Magister
***

Posts: 196
Reputation: 6.03
Rate Bass



I'm a llama!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #3 on: 2006-11-05 20:24:02 »
Reply with quote

Your title is really misleading. It gives away your opinion before you even began to state it.

What is wrong with the government promoting something that is safe? It isnt like the government is going to write you a ticket, like if you were caught not using a seat belt.

It sounds like a waste of money, but there are a lot of things that are a bigger waste, like NASA.
Report to moderator   Logged
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #4 on: 2006-11-05 22:10:37 »
Reply with quote

it is not my title. it is the title of the newsarticle.
Report to moderator   Logged
Blunderov
Archon
*****

Gender: Male
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.93
Rate Blunderov



"We think in generalities, we live in details"

View Profile WWW E-Mail
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #5 on: 2006-11-06 02:24:02 »
Reply with quote


Quote from: Hermit on 2006-11-04 12:48:37   


The likelihood of avoiding sex until marriage is dependent on the age at which we shackle unwilling and mismatched people into marriages.

[Blunderov] A typically candid and penertrating Hermit posting!

:)

The "Department of Health and Human Services' $50 million Abstinence Education Program"is, ISTM, a covert operation designed to support organised religion without actually saying so.

Just about the only tangible product the church has to offer the punters is the marriage ceremony and it's little wonder that they are so jealous of their franchise. I wonder how many people would ever see the inside of a church if it was not for the marriage ceremony? A great many fewer would be my guess. If the passing trade cannot be lured in the door with the promise of the only available "moral" sex then the whole enterprise might very quickly go bottoms up. So to speak.

It sometimes surprises me to see how very many magazines there are that cater to the white wedding industry. A Martian sociologist might well conclude from magazine rack demographics that marriage is a regular weekend hobby similar to fishing, hunting or home electronics projects. 

"They reduce the risk of having children who live absent from their fathers or who grow up poor."

The submerged log here is the assumption that growing up poor, (as opposed to poverty stricken of course), is necessarily a bad thing. In a reasonably egalitarian society love, food, shelter and education are perfectly attainable without wealth. Under the circumstances it seems a little odd that the Dept. should have chosen to spend it's $50,000,000 promoting abstinence rather than economic justice. ISTM that the objective of producing happy, healthy, well adjusted children might well have been better served by the latter approach.

With regard to absentee fathers; is this always so bad? It's a wise child that knows it's own they say and seemingly this knowledge is not essential to the survival of the organism. In many instances it is in fact inimicable to it. It is well known that in many societies boys are seperated from female society in order to make it all the easier to indoctrinate them into an ethos of violence. Certainly this serves a useful purpose in some circumstances but one has to wonder how appropriate it is to 21st Century urban living in which one of the most ubiquitous complaints is that of too much violence in homes and on the streets. It seems possible to make the argument that modern boys OUGHT to be seperated from their fathers in the interests of the broader community.

(Which is not to say of course that men have no obligations towards their offspring but there are perfectly adequate legal instruments for ensuring that they are met, given the political will to do so. A big "given" that, admittedly.)

A great waste of money. The Dept might just as well have spent it attempting to persuade people never to leave home in the interests of reducing road accidents.

Perhaps not entirely wasted though; I'm sure somebody somewhere got some votes for the money - the joke being that it was not his/her money to begin with. Who says there are no free lunches?

Best regards.





Report to moderator   Logged
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #6 on: 2006-11-06 13:21:38 »
Reply with quote


Quote from: Blunderov on 2006-11-06 02:24:02   


Just about the only tangible product the church has to offer the punters is the marriage ceremony and it's little wonder that they are so jealous of their franchise.

the church or any place of worship offers a social outlet for people. it brings in a sense of community. think of it as a social club with a pretense of prayer. i think the social glue aspect of religion is often underestimated..esp by atheists. there is something to learn there.

Report to moderator   Logged
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4267
Reputation: 8.96
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #7 on: 2006-11-06 14:10:39 »
Reply with quote

[Mermaid] the church or any place of worship offers a social outlet for people. it brings in a sense of community. think of it as a social club with a pretense of prayer. i think the social glue aspect of religion is often underestimated..esp by atheists. there is something to learn there.

[Hermit] This is an American phenomenon. Americans don't go out to socialize, they go out to do something. If they are not going out to do something they sit at home and watch TV. With one exception. About 40% of them socialize at their churches. The rest don't seem to socialize at all.

[Hermit] People from the rest of the world don't comprehend this and tend to exaggerate its importance. But I think that Blunderov has the right of it. That 40% datum shows that churches are not as significant as Mermaid seems to think. Except perhaps, in one area. The social movers and shakers tend to be part of the 40%. This may be a small contributing factor to why Atheists don't tend to be elected.
Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #8 on: 2006-11-06 14:20:30 »
Reply with quote

what is the difference between meeting a group of people every sunday every week of the year and attending a party with like minded people? church activities include music, networking, dating services, charity events, support groups, counselling..other than... of course, prayers and sermons. there is entertainment, ego/morale boosting and most importantly, networking. it is no accident that most rich people in america are church goers or affliated to some kind of religion. religion and church is not always about god. i think atheists miss this...they refuse to acknowledge this and are reluctant to embrace the harmless aspect of religion... and they are poorer for it.


Quote from: Hermit on 2006-11-06 14:10:39   

[Mermaid] the church or any place of worship offers a social outlet for people. it brings in a sense of community. think of it as a social club with a pretense of prayer. i think the social glue aspect of religion is often underestimated..esp by atheists. there is something to learn there.

[Hermit] This is an American phenomenon. Americans don't go out to socialize, they go out to do something. If they are not going out to do something they sit at home and watch TV. With one exception. About 40% of them socialize at their churches. The rest don't seem to socialize at all.

[Hermit] People from the rest of the world don't comprehend this and tend to exaggerate its importance. But I think that Blunderov has the right of it. That 40% datum shows that churches are not as significant as Mermaid seems to think. Except perhaps, in one area. The social movers and shakers tend to be part of the 40%. This may be a small contributing factor to why Atheists don't tend to be elected.

Report to moderator   Logged
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4267
Reputation: 8.96
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #9 on: 2006-11-06 14:58:01 »
Reply with quote

In most of the rest of the world, one can socialize without the religion. In America, even the social networks seem to be all about religion, for example, a friend of mine took me to a Lions meeting (in ZA the Lions were the working man's equivalent of Rotary, but here it seems that even professionals belong to Lions) and I had to stand cringing in the corner as these "flair" covered* imbeciles degraded themselves by going through the pledge of allegience,  flag waving, prayers and hymns that would have made a Nazi blush.

Gentle mauve shudder. There is nothing harmless about such group-think stimulating activities no matter what the Mermaid might think of them.

* Office Space :

    Peter Gibbons: Doesn't it bother you that you have to get up in the morning and you have to put on a bunch of pieces of flair?
    Joanna: Yeah, but I'm not about to go in and start taking money from the register.
    Peter Gibbons: Well, maybe you should. You know, the Nazis had pieces of flair that they made the Jews wear.

PS I read "Office Space" as being essentially a remake of "Working 9 to 5". IMO "Working 9 to 5" is far funnier and has a much better storyline.
« Last Edit: 2006-11-06 15:14:06 by Hermit » Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #10 on: 2006-11-06 18:17:11 »
Reply with quote


Quote from: Hermit on 2006-11-06 14:58:01   

In most of the rest of the world, one can socialize without the religion. In America, even the social networks seem to be all about religion, for example, a friend of mine took me to a Lions meeting (in ZA the Lions were the working man's equivalent of Rotary, but here it seems that even professionals belong to Lions) and I had to stand cringing in the corner as these "flair" covered* imbeciles degraded themselves by going through the pledge of allegience,  flag waving, prayers and hymns that would have made a Nazi blush.

Gentle mauve shudder. There is nothing harmless about such group-think stimulating activities no matter what the Mermaid might think of them.

why are you talking about lions club and rotary when i am speaking of church and church related activities? this is why i cannot have a decent discussion with you without going all over the place.

i am done.
Report to moderator   Logged
Bass
Magister
***

Posts: 196
Reputation: 6.03
Rate Bass



I'm a llama!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #11 on: 2006-11-07 09:00:18 »
Reply with quote

I think logically speaking, from the governments point of view, programs designed to reduce the amount of people that are likely to require government aid sound good. If you like it or not, most people that the government ends up supporting are children...be it the children of a single parent, a ward of the state, or simpley the children of a familiy that doesn;t have enough money to get by. Saying they should 'wait until marriage' is the biggest falicy really...just because you're married does not mean you're always going to have a stable job or home to raise children in...you may yet need government support.

But, of course, we see that duality in our government of optimistic pessamisem. Programs to advise women to wait until their 18 to have sex barely work...programs to advice women to avoid having sex until 30 are doomed to failure, safe or otherwise. Our society, our media, is geared towards mindless self gratification...it's what causes us to spend money and causes growth in the economy. Sex sells...it sells just about everything...you can't expect people to wait for marraige for idiot pleasure when in the next sentence you try to get them to buy the newest 'insert item here' because its sexy and sure to get you noticed by 'insert gender of preference here'.

It's all silly, but I don't blame the government, I blame the people. Humanity is retarded.
Report to moderator   Logged
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4267
Reputation: 8.96
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #12 on: 2006-11-07 11:22:55 »
Reply with quote

[Mermaid 6] the church or any place of worship offers a social outlet1 for people. it brings in a sense of community2. think of it as a social club3 with a pretense of prayer. i think the social glue4 aspect of religion5 is often underestimated..esp by atheists. there is something to learn there.

[Hermit 11] Notice the four references  to social groupings and functions [ 1,2,3,4 ], one reference to religion [5], which I shall interpret as a reference to a church activity, and no references to churches at all. I omitted a reference to "a pretense of prayer" because while a pretense to something is not the thing, which would make such activity social, rather than religious in nature, I felt that Mermaid would possibly be annoyed had I included it under the social activity column as I intuit that perhaps she meant us to understand from her words something other than what she actually said.

[Hermit 11] I replied discussing social issues and national characteristics, and discounting the general importance of religious socialization based on statistical data. Mermaid then replied:

[Mermaid 8] what is the difference between meeting a group of people every sunday6 every week of the year and attending a party with like minded people7? church activities8 include music9, networking10, dating services11, charity events12, support groups13, counselling14..other than... of course, prayers15 and sermons16.

[Hermit 11] She then repeats herself:

[Mermaid 8] there is entertainment17, ego/morale boosting18 and most importantly, networking19.

[Hermit 11] And continues:

[Mermaid 8] it is no accident that most rich people in america are church goers20 or affliated to some kind of religion21. religion22 and church23 is not always about god24. i think atheists miss this25...they refuse to acknowledge this26 and are reluctant to embrace the harmless aspect of religion27... and they are poorer for it28.

[Hermit 11] So let us try to count the mentions.
    [Church Meetings]
      [6] Meeting on Sundays - Our chess club used to meet on Sundays (Not church, Not religious). Our local Virians used to have gettogethers on Sundays (Arguably religious, Possibly a church). Many Christian groups meet on Sundays (Some Churches, Some Religious). Many other Christian groups meet on other days of the week (Some Churches, Some Religious). So this doesn't actually say, or even imply "church", but trying to "read charitably*," I'll understand what Mermaid probably meant instead of what she actually said and take this as a church reference.
      [8] This is a portmanteaux introduction to six non religious activities and two religious activities which are counted separately. It does, however, use the word church, so I will include it as a "church" reference.
      [20] Unambiguous reference to church.
      [21] I am affiliated with some kind of a religion, the Church of Virus. I'm not sure that this qualifies as a church reference but I'll count it as one anyway, on the basis of [22] and [23].
      [23] Another unambiguous reference to church
    [Church Activities e.g. weddings, funerals, services, etc.]
      [Not Mentioned]
    [Religious Activities e.g. prayer, sermons]
      [ 15 16 22 ]
    [Social Meetings]
      [7]
    [Social Activities]
      [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 ] I am eliminating the duplicates.
[Hermit 11] So in summary we have on the one hand, two unambiguous references to church, three references which can be charitably inferred as references to church, no references to church activities, three references to religious activities which we will charitably call "church activities". On the other hand, we also have one reference to social meetings (or more if we had viewed the ambiguous "church" references as social) and nine references to social activities of which two are duplicates and one is a portmanteau, leaving six unambiguous references to social activities.

[Hermit 11] Let me try to summarize this in a table reflecting Mermaid's statements by category as determined above:

SocialChurch
Reference to Meeting
5
5
Reference to Activity
5
4


[Hermit 11] In [Hermit 9] I responded discussing the fact that in the rest of the world, one can socialize without religious activities, and contrasted that with the USA where even meetings (Social Meetings even!) of the Lions Club and Rotary, purely social in the rest of the world, are often dominated by religiously (and jingoistically) oriented activities in the USA. I did not discuss "Church" related issues, but observed on the activities, noting that religious activities, irrespective of location, are harmful to effective thinking.

[Hermit 11] And then, out of the blue, the Mermaid complains that she does not comprehend:

[Mermaid 10] why are you talking about lions club and rotary when i am speaking of church and church related activities?

[Hermit 11] Now I spoke about social meetings and religious activities, both, as we have seen here, originally raised by the Mermaid, so I wonder why she is apparently upset. Hopefully this analysis will resolve this question to her complete satisfaction.

[Mermaid 10] this is why i cannot have a decent discussion with you without going all over the place.

[Hermit 11] I'm sorry, I thought I had followed you in a reasonably direct fashion. Feel free to explain how I misunderstood what you wrote. If what you wrote wasn't what you meant, and I failed to understand that properly, please feel free to try to articulate your thoughts a little more carefully for those, like me, insufficiently mentally endowed to determine via ESP what you really thought that you had meant to say.

[Mermaid 10] i am done.

[Hermit 11] Already? How, err, unusual.

[Hermit 11] I saved this last, possibly infuriating aside (which is really a reversion to the main thread) for last ,so as not to risk further confusing of the Mermaid who, given her existing state of confusion, probably won't be able to understand why I am talking about gay clubs or science museums either.

[Hermit 11] I don't think atheists "miss" the [25] socialization aspects of church attendance, as such, I doubt that they [26] refuse to acknowledge it, in fact I suggest that the assertion in [26] is a straw man being puffed in the wind. As I previously noted, I doubt that there is a [27] harmless aspect of religion, thus socialization which happens to occur at a church, even though it may not be religious, still exposes the attendee to an environment redolent of harmful religious memes, and as such I'm fairly sure that atheists are not [28] poorer for it. It is possible to socialize elsewhere. One suggestion is that gay clubs tend to have full agendas of non-religious socialization activities, even here in the Religious States of America. For another, visiting and socializing with people at science museums has netted me a lot of new friends who engage in fun activities and even those who are not atheists tend not to be preachy religious. Which means one can socialize with either group without having to discuss or even think about religion unless it comes up as a component of some other discussion.

*The "Why and how to debate charitably" document, first noticed by David Lucifer at http://pdf23ds.net/implications-and-debate/1/ is strongly recommended.

« Last Edit: 2006-11-07 11:33:26 by Hermit » Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Hermit
Archon
*****

Posts: 4267
Reputation: 8.96
Rate Hermit



Prime example of a practically perfect person

View Profile WWW
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #13 on: 2006-11-07 13:24:11 »
Reply with quote

Dear Bass

The evidence is that the gubbermint programs here are an utter disaster. The US has third world teen pregnancy and STD rates. Kids are fucking (and sucking) more and earlier than ever, but without any protection at all.

The reason is that this country is incapable of deciding what they want. On the one hand the laudable statements about the intent to reduce STD transmission and teen pregnancy. On the other, the hidden agendas, unspoken but known if not acknowledged, to eliminate access to abortion, prevent access to birth control aids (including condoms) as part of a "morality" drive, an ever escalating "age of consent" trying to drag women back into the Victorian age, and ever more censorship of sexuality "for the children" all as part of trying to advocate abstinence against nature and sense. The statistics clearly show that the hidden agendas have succeeded. The reason that the real agendas are hidden is because they originate in, are permeated with and are indistinguishable from the perversion which is JudeoChristian "morality."

If the US were serious about reducing the incidence of pregnancy and STDs, then there would be free condom dispensers in every bathroom (including school bathrooms), readily available, not just free, but mandatory,  genital-urinary-reproductive-genetic clinics, free abortions, decent sex education (relating to the reality of what children know and do and not the watered down claptrap that happens in American schools), decent child-rearing education - including actually looking after babies in child-care programs (for boys and girls before age 12) and encouragement to engage in safe, non-reproductive sex in safe environments until they are capable of making an educated decision that they are ready and competent to reproduce. In other words, a European approach which the statistics show works. As opposed to the American system which just as clearly does not.

And all of the above would cost far less than the social cost of the disaster of third world reproductive characteristics in a post-industrial country. In an ideal world, should such a program be implemented? If so why? If not, why not? In the far from ideal world which is America, would your answer change? Why? If it should be implemented, first consider the likelihood of such a program being implemented. Establish the obstacles. Determine what could be done to make it possible? Determine what you could do to help implement it. If anything.

Regards

Hermit
Report to moderator   Logged

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Mermaid
Archon
****

Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Mermaid



Bite me!

View Profile
Re:Govt tells singles No Sex Till You are 30.
« Reply #14 on: 2006-11-07 14:51:46 »
Reply with quote


Quote from: Mermaid on 2006-11-06 18:17:11   


Quote from: Hermit on 2006-11-06 14:58:01   

In most of the rest of the world, one can socialize without the religion. In America, even the social networks seem to be all about religion, for example, a friend of mine took me to a Lions meeting (in ZA the Lions were the working man's equivalent of Rotary, but here it seems that even professionals belong to Lions) and I had to stand cringing in the corner as these "flair" covered* imbeciles degraded themselves by going through the pledge of allegience,  flag waving, prayers and hymns that would have made a Nazi blush.

Gentle mauve shudder. There is nothing harmless about such group-think stimulating activities no matter what the Mermaid might think of them.

why are you talking about lions club and rotary when i am speaking of church and church related activities? this is why i cannot have a decent discussion with you without going all over the place.

i am done.

after hermit's exercise in counting, i have to point out that everything 'social' is used to characterise/describe the function of church/religion. chess clubs, rotarty, lions or gay clubs do not have protected freedoms under the constitution. religion does. so it makes logical sense to affiliate oneself with like minded people in order to gain strength in numbers. rotary, lions, cheese or gay fun does not include/welcome an entire family...addressing each single member of the family and providing services/activities to make everyone subscribe to the club. logic. straight line. no diversions. thank you.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Reply Notify of replies Send the topic Print 
Jump to:


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Church of Virus BBS | Powered by YaBB SE
© 2001-2002, YaBB SE Dev Team. All Rights Reserved.

Please support the CoV.
Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS! RSS feed