Are you REALLY arguing for abstinence as a solution? Really? Also, condoms aren't foolproof.
Discussion
Are you really arguing that not having sex is a not a solution to not getting pregnant?
There is nothing more simultaneously ineffective and effective at prevention pregnancy than abstinence.
Abstinence as an action in the moment is the most effective method of contraception, this is not something anyone argues with.
But abstinence as a policy for long term birth control is the least effective way of preventing pregnancy. People want to have sex, full stop.
All humans are biologically driven to breath, drink water, eat food, and have sex to reproduce.
People are recommended not to eat unhealthy, yet the physical drive to eat that is taken advantage of by all the processed foods give us a society with pandemic levels of obesity and diabetes.
Similarly recommending people to just not have sex, is not effective at preventing it.
The data indicates that abstinence only education causes more unwanted pregnancies and abortions than it prevents.
So your desire to have sex is more important than the life of an unborn human. That's your argument. It falls flat on its face.
My desire? Dude, we live in a world where people are going to have sex whether we think they should or not. Do we want to condemn both those ignorant people and their conceived child to a miserable life?
Stop making this about me "wanting to have sex" my sexual practices are irrelevant to this argument. I do have sex but my partner and I luckily are not in poverty and utilize contraceptives, unlike a significant number of people around the world.
At the end of the day, this is another thing Bitcoin fixes. Because FIAT is why the majority of the world remains in poverty and unable to support themselves or their potential offspring, so they don't practice safe sex as much and they have abortions more. When everyone has a stable financial foundation, and access to knowledge on effective contraceptions, unwanted pregnancies and abortions will both reduce significantly. That's our mutual goal as a society, to reduce suffering caused by unwanted pregnancies and subsequent abortions.
I'm pro reduced suffering, I'm not pro abortion except where it can reduce suffering. Ultimately Bitcoin is the solution again, which is why it's my focus overall.
We loved on a world where people didn't have sex of they didn't want to get pregnant and if they did nearly 100% of people made do less than 100 years ago. But now it's impossible for us animals to suppress our desires. We're nothing but smart monekys with no personal responsibility for our actions. Makes sense when you look at the world in a way that makes that little sense.
youre a neoliberal regurgitation machine.
Nope. Just someone who believes in reducing suffering in the world we live in based on the data we have available.
You don't reduce suffering by ending life. Malthusian bullshit.
Was going to comment, but nostr:npub1zmc6qyqdfnllhnzzxr5wpepfpnzcf8q6m3jdveflmgruqvd3qa9sjv7f60 you were spot on...completely agree with you. Not much more I could add.
Bravo!
I am not a subscriber to Malthusian population theory, the earth has more than enough resources to support many more people than we have today if we use the resources wisely which the FIAT system prevents. You seem to associate with me with beliefs I do not hold, this is a failure on your part to have an honest argument.
I do not believe that anyone has the right to use someone else's body without their consent. I do not care if the person needs the other person's body to survive, they cannot use it without consent. Just as I do not subscribe to the belief that forced organ donation or forced blood transfusions are good even if they would reduce death overall. Removing or not providing consent can sometimes result in death, as it does in the cases of abortion or a lack of available organ donors, but that does not supercede the importance of consent in our dealings with each other.
I do not care if the person dependant is created through the actions of the other person who's body is needed to survive, because no action gives automatic consent to the future usage of their body by another person against their will.
You seem to believe that forcing children to be born to someone who does not want them and cannot support them is preferable to not being born at all. It is not.
Unwanted children are at much higher risks of every type of abuse, physical, mental, emotional, sexual. Unwanted children are at a much higher risk of being human trafficked. I would rather not be born than to be born into those sets of circumstances.
You speak on a subject without compassion for those involved, and crusade on behalf of those who cannot give their opinion otherwise.
You advocate non-consensual forced usage of another person's body against their will. That is slavery. You sir, are in favor of slavery.