Republicans: do as I say, not as I do

Look, see? All one big happy conservative family...

Everybody looks like they're watchin McCain to be sure he doesn't eat the daughter... which he looks like he may just do.

Whoa. Is that Patsy on the right? Is it supposed to be Patsy? Did I not get the joke? I should probably eat something.

PeteWW wrote: Now that is a staw man argument. Not having sex (abstinence) is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy and the transmission of STDs. Having sex with a condom is 30%. You're welcome to use a higher number for the condom use, but it will never approach the 100% effectiveness of not having sex.

But you're completely leaving out that sex is 100% awesome.

16vCorey wrote: But you're completely leaving out that sex is 100% awesome.

Sex is like ice cream. When it's good, it's great. But when it's bad...

It's still pretty good.

PeteWW wrote: Now that is a staw man argument. Not having sex (abstinence) is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy and the transmission of STDs. Having sex with a condom is 30%. You're welcome to use a higher number for the condom use, but it will never approach the 100% effectiveness of not having sex.

Mary would disagree... ;)

GameboyRMH wrote:

Salanis wrote: Palin wants to teach us about guns... and sex... [This was just too funny, and this seemed like the best place to post it.]

Is that real or a photoshop?

Can I get her to give me a refresher course?

Jensenman wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote:

Salanis wrote: Palin wants to teach us about guns... and sex... [This was just too funny, and this seemed like the best place to post it.]

Is that real or a photoshop?

Can I get her to give me a refresher course?

Might help if she used something more than a BB gun. Couldn't they have photochopped in an AR-10 or something?

GSmith wrote: Might help if she used something more than a BB gun. Couldn't they have photochopped in an AR-10 or something?

Her head was photoshopped onto this original picture:

Here's a real picture of Sarah Palin with a real gun:

Good lord. The photochop looks a lot hotter.

Eesh.

I love the notion that an overwhelming physical urge can be reasoned with--especially for a hormone-addled teenager.

You can't reason with "raging horniness", people. It topples politicians year in and year out. It's cost the Catholic church $2.4 billion. The genitals overpower the brain with alarming efficiency.

As for alternatives for teens--masturbation or the real thing? Hmm. I wonder what a horny 17 year old is going to pick. (I wonder what an adult is going to pick, for that matter).

David Lee Roth said it best "Everybody Wants Some".

gamby wrote: You can't reason with "raging horniness", people.

Weak people can't.

Respectfully, I don't think it's an issue of weakness.

We're generally sexual beings. To deny that is to deny a big part of the human experience.

I don't consider my desire to have sex as being "weak". I don't consider being turned on by someone (and acting on it) as "weak". It's a very repressive viewpoint.

...but it's all in a "moment of weakness", I suppose.

poopshovel wrote: Whoa. Is that Patsy on the right? Is it supposed to be Patsy? Did I not get the joke? I should probably eat something.

Patsy hasn't eaten anything since 1974 darling.

gamby wrote: Respectfully, I don't think it's an issue of weakness. We're generally sexual beings. To deny that is to deny a big part of the human experience. I don't consider my desire to have sex as being "weak". I don't consider being turned on by someone (and acting on it) as "weak". It's a very repressive viewpoint. ...but it's all in a "moment of weakness", I suppose.

Sorry, my experience says that you are incorrect. I know hundreds of teens who have successfully made the choice to abstain. Some on this board. It is not overwhelming.

I respect the people I know who have made that choice. And yes, most of them are dealing with very strong urges. They are not androids.

SVreX wrote:

gamby wrote: Respectfully, I don't think it's an issue of weakness. We're generally sexual beings. To deny that is to deny a big part of the human experience. I don't consider my desire to have sex as being "weak". I don't consider being turned on by someone (and acting on it) as "weak". It's a very repressive viewpoint. ...but it's all in a "moment of weakness", I suppose.

Sorry, my experience says that you are incorrect. I know hundreds of teens who have successfully made the choice to abstain. Some on this board. It is not overwhelming. I respect the people I know who have made that choice. And yes, most of them are dealing with very strong urges. They are not androids.

You know hundreds of teens? Wow, even when I was a teen, I could only say I knew dozens...and teens aren't androids, androids would be more logical

I like how the "You just can't make this E36 M3 up" picture is, in fact, made up.

GregTivo wrote:

SVreX wrote:

gamby wrote: Respectfully, I don't think it's an issue of weakness. We're generally sexual beings. To deny that is to deny a big part of the human experience. I don't consider my desire to have sex as being "weak". I don't consider being turned on by someone (and acting on it) as "weak". It's a very repressive viewpoint. ...but it's all in a "moment of weakness", I suppose.

Sorry, my experience says that you are incorrect. I know hundreds of teens who have successfully made the choice to abstain. Some on this board. It is not overwhelming. I respect the people I know who have made that choice. And yes, most of them are dealing with very strong urges. They are not androids.

You know hundreds of teens? Wow, even when I was a teen, I could only say I knew dozens...and teens aren't androids, androids would be more logical

Are you kidding? He just got back from space camp!

gamby wrote: Respectfully, I don't think it's an issue of weakness. We're generally sexual beings. To deny that is to deny a big part of the human experience. I don't consider my desire to have sex as being "weak". I don't consider being turned on by someone (and acting on it) as "weak". It's a very repressive viewpoint. ...but it's all in a "moment of weakness", I suppose.

If you had no desire to fight the raging hormones, then no - not weakness. If you did and failed, then yeah - weakness. For reference, I also think smokers who want to quit but don't are weak for succumbing to urges - it's not a sex thing.

Of course the weak/not weak hinges upon the unstated but core assumption that sex is bad/wrong. Or at least that pre-marital sex is bad/wrong.

If you do not believe that pre-marital sex is inherently wrong, then people are not "weak" for choosing to have sex. You're only "weak" if you've vowed to do something, and fail to follow-through.

Not everyone in this country follows the exact same moral code. I think that's actually a good thing. Even if you think it's a bad thing, you can't logically expect everyone to think just like you.

Salanis wrote: If you do not believe that pre-marital sex is inherently wrong, then people are not "weak" for choosing to have sex. You're only "weak" if you've vowed to do something, and fail to follow-through.

100% agree. The statement was "you can't reason with raging hormones". People are not weak for succumbing to an urge. They are weak for succumbing to an urge that they don't want to succumb to. If you want to have sex, then there is no weakness in succumbing to the urge to.

Basically, the statement "I can't fight my urges" is a weak one, whether it is related to sex, smoking, shopping, or whatever.

DILYSI Dave wrote:

Salanis wrote: If you do not believe that pre-marital sex is inherently wrong, then people are not "weak" for choosing to have sex. You're only "weak" if you've vowed to do something, and fail to follow-through.

100% agree. The statement was "you can't reason with raging hormones". People are not weak for succumbing to an urge. They are weak for succumbing to an urge that they don't want to succumb to. If you want to have sex, then there is no weakness in succumbing to the urge to. Basically, the statement "I can't fight my urges" is a weak one, whether it is related to sex, smoking, shopping, or whatever.

On top of that, it's REALLY hard to fight Mother Nature. We are designed to make babies- that's why sex is pleasureable. It has to be since humans 1) don't do litters, and 2)take 9 months to have a baby.

Become a teen, and some things are hard to stop- it's one TOUGH urge. And I have to thank God that it is, else humans may not have survived....

Eric

I'm sensing some sexual tension between you two.

http://www.ajc.com/printedition/content/printedition/2008/09/03/tucked.html

Good article on Do as I say.. not as I do..

ignorant wrote: http://www.ajc.com/printedition/content/printedition/2008/09/03/tucked.html Good article on Do as I say.. not as I do..

Ah, this is a better forum for this.

Another sort of dichotomy in conservative thinking came to mind when I read this. Generally the same people who tout abstinence-only sex-ed, bans on abortions, etc, are the same camp who also want to cut social services for people like the single mothers that these policies would result in.

ignorant wrote: http://www.ajc.com/printedition/content/printedition/2008/09/03/tucked.html Good article on Do as I say.. not as I do..

That is pretty damned funny...and that's the first time I've ever said that about a Cynthia Tucker article.