HAHA....no...and if i was to call my gal my old lady ar my momma, she wold slap the poop outta me she is kinda iffy on it when I call her my 'gal

regardless Waxy's analogy would not work.

 

You two guys are the twisted ones here, that thought NEVER crossed my mind. I can see how that one didn't work too good now.

I do think it works rather effectively in the second post though.

Waxy

 

BTW Waxy, the ONE time that I cheated on my gal, itw as not worth it, I told her we split up for over a year. I was lucky enough and blessed enough to have her take me back...nd since then...I ain't even looked at another girl the same way.

 

Regardless of whether or not it was worth it, you still did it.

I'm glad things worked out for you in the end though.

Waxy

 

Yes, and immediately after I did it I regretted such, I admitted it to her.....I consider that one of the biggest mistakes in my life, cause I have no idea where I would be now if she had not been willing to take me back, then again, on the other side of the fence is if I had not done it wold we have as strong a relationship now as we currently have? Would my not doing that have caused something more drastic to happen later down the road? would my leaving while we were together going into the military have casued us to permanently grow apart?

 

I refuse to answer, on the grounds it may incriminate me.

Theo

 

smart man

 

The 5th amendment doesn't apply in the Pig Pen.

Waxy

 

Absolutely not. You can't have it both ways. Either you were a virgin before the date of your first marriage, or you weren't. Using your argument, an 80-year old Keith Richards could say that he's a serious life-long advocate of abstinence because he hasn't had any in a couple of years.

If teenagers practiced abstinence by your definition, then they would have unintentional babies while they're young and frisky, and none when they are older and more thoughtful. This does NOT solve the problem.

(To be clear, this is not an attack on your lifestyle, past or present. I respect both decisions that you made for yourself. This is about the logic you've chosen for this argument.)

 

Actually Zonk, I see what he is saying, I mean, the latter part of his life is a second life altogether....It is after a MAJOR change in his life and beliefs.

 

I'm going with Zonkola on this one, it's black and white, no ifs, ands or buts.

Religious experience aside (it's really not the issue here), your responsible for everything you've done in this life regardless.

A fresh start/second chance doesn't erase all that came before.

Waxy

 

So
We have some mild hypocrisy here? "I did it, but I'm not glad". Well, I grew up in a one parent house. My mama (made lousy chicken) recommended I sample the wares before settling on one brand. She also made sure I was fully aware of consequences, being wise to the ways of the world. "Just say no" is a really nice concept and is the only way to avoid entanglements. The problem is that it doesn't work! As a young Marine, fixin' to go carry out my duties as a hitman for Uncle Sam, I wanted to know what I was fightin' for.

Napolean observed that his sexually-sated troops were faster, more efficient, stronger, and braver than the troops who did not partake. Sex is a natural act, we are mammals, there is a reason we are capable swordsmen at nearly every opportunity. Using some of the religious rights' logic, God meant us to have sex, or else he would not have made us capable.

That being said, and with all respect for stronger and more moral brothers, extramarital sex happens. We cannot stop it without wholesale neutering (who is our first volunteer?), so we need to concentrate on making it safe. Puritanical beliefs and actions ain't goin' to cut it. Kids, and some adults, need education about safety, and like it or not, there needs to be a safety net for mistakes.

Parting thought: "People cause accidents, and accidents cause people"

 

Zonkola,
Back to you original question, and later inferences that abstinence is a legislative rouse (conspiracy if you will) supporting a right-wing agenda. One of the things that give away Bush bashers and other liberals is a consistent effort to re-direct questions into a statement of some sort, and (try to) create the impression that Conservatives are backwards and unimformed. But to the main issue, abstinence is the ONLY form of birth control that is one hundred percent effective. The ONLY one. Thus, support from all who see a method of reducing unwanted pregnancies, disease, heart-ache, depression, school drop outs, etc.

 

SDLOE
I took that as a personal shot, and you are absolutely correct. Keeping zippers up and legs crossed is the only truly effective method of controlling VD, and unplanned pregnancy, but I don't see it as practical. I think it should be pushed, HARD, it works.

How did you vote?

 

There are many EFFECTIVE ways of controlling the spead of STD's and unplanned pregnancies.

Birth control is very effective. My wife and I had 2 planned pregnancies and 0 unplanned, through the use of birth control. As sdloe said, birth control is not 100% effective, but it is close.

Condoms are also very effective in controlling the spread of STD's. Not 100%, but still close. Monogamy, either within the marriage or outside of the marriage, is also 100% effective.

Education is a more realistic approach to these problems, given the times, than all or nothing approaches like abstinence.