Hi, there.
I know it's been early a month. The holiday season has been busy, sure, but it's no excuse.
And it's not as if there hasn't been stuff to talk about, either. Mary Cheney's pregnancy, New Jersey legalizing gay unions, Mitt Romney's dancing around being pro-gay before he was anti-gay, and the news that soy makes you gay.
It's just that I've found myself turning this blog into a "sex news" blog, only posting stuff I get from news sources. That's not what I'd intended, but I honestly can't tell you what I'd intended when I started this project, either. It's been so long. It started out as a "Hey, this is something fun," but I didn't plan for anything beyond that.
So I've been taking something of a sabbatical, here. I'd like to get a clear handle on how to proceed and where I want this to go. It's been tons of fun so far, so much fun that I don't want to proceed further without a clear idea of what to do next, and how to make it as good a blog as possible.
Stay tuned. I'll have a handle on things after the new year starts.
J.T.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Friday, December 01, 2006
Now the Serious Stuff...
I'm not going to link to these knuckleheads. Why encourage them? They're called "Respect Life Tulsa" and they're posting billboards all over Oklahoma that say, "Birth Control Is Harmful." Go to their website, and you're introduced to a long intricate list of lies.
"Birth Control Is Harmful..." (Some of them are repetitive--My responses are in plain text.)
"It creates a sex on demand attitude." And what's wrong with that? Oh, yeah. Answer below.
"It does not protect against sexually transmitted diseases." Actually, Respect Life Tulsa admits that condoms reduce the risk of STDs. However, the website adds that birth control doesn't prevent STDs, it only reduces the risk. It doesn't add that the effectiveness of condoms against most STDs is greater than 95%.
In addition, Respect Life Tulsa barely mentions condoms at all. Most of their hot air is spent talking about the pill and other hormonal forms of birth control. You'd think if RLT was so anti-birth control, they'd spend a little more time talking about the least expensive, most effective birth control available.
"It contributes to sexual addiction." Not one shred of scientific evidence that this so-called addiction even exists, let alone that it's made worse by birth control.
"It causes abortions." Here's the logic. The pill and other hormonal controls prevent a fertilized egg from settling in the uterus and thus this constitutes an abortion. Never mind that no responsible medical authority agrees with them. Also, never mind that most forms of birth control (condoms, sponges, diaphragms, spermicides) actually prevent fertilization in the first place.
"It degrades women and makes them simply a sexual object." Hmm. From what I remember of the history of feminism, birth control gave women the opportunity to obtain educations, enter the workforce, and make greater contributions to society without necessarily being baby machines. If expanding womens' opportunities is degrading them, how are they being exalted by having as many babies as possible?"
"It allows people to bond without a commitment." Without a commitment to having a baby, that is. Or is having a baby the only valid form of commitment two people can make?
"It gives a false sense of safety in having promiscuous sex." Joke response: No, it gives a legitimate sense of safety in having promiscuous sex. Serious response: According to Planned Parenthood, (Providing the full link below) 53% of married couples in the U.S. used birth control on a regular basis in 2002. RLT seems to be operating under the belief that married couples don't need birth control.
"It negates the wedding vows." When I married my lovely wife, we promised to "love, honor, and obey," just like every other married couple we ever knew. I don't remember promising to knock up my wife at every chance, nor did she agree to breed like a bunny at the drop of a hat. And what about couples who just end up childless? Should their marriages be annulled? Call me nut, call me crazy dreamer, (Go ahead. "J.T., you nut! You crazy dreamer, you!") I'd thought marriage vows were about love, and not necessarily about making babies. But I could be wrong.
"It does not honor the purpose of sex." You got me there, RLT. I'd always thought the purpose of sex was to bond with another human being, give someone else pleasure and make her feel good and beautiful and sexy, and have a little fun, myself. Obviously, I was all wrong. The only purpose of sex is to make babies.
"It decreases the natural consequence of a child from extra marital affairs, which has for a long time been a deterrent." Let me get this straight. Reducing illegitimate births is a bad thing? This world needs more bastards?
"It treats the body like an object, not a person-something just to be used for sexual pleasure." Whereas RLT is interested in using the body only to breed, to reproduce, to propagate, to be fruitful and multiply. The woman's body, that is.
"It creates a sex on demand attitude, which can lead to sexual assaults and rape." More problems with having sex when you want to, not just when your partner's ovulating. And I fail to see how sex when you want to negates consent. After all, I can only assume she wants to have sex on demand just as much as he does.
"It has caused social chaos." Not a clue. Not a fucking clue what they're talking about. When did this chaos start? At the turn of the last century, when the early feminists started advocating birth control? 1962 when the Pill came out? '66 when the Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v. CT? What chaos was this that came out of birth control? The Super Bowl? The Beatles? Watergate? Britney Spears? Oh, never mind.
"It treats children like accidents or mistakes and creates an anti-child mentality in society." Wait a minute. I thought accidental children (like bastards) are a good thing. Seems to me that if we give couples more options when it comes to having kids, the kids will be more wanted than if they were simply "oops" babies.
"It treats the woman's body and her fertility like some kind of disease. It treats the body like it is just a machine-something to be used just for sexual pleasure." Whereas they ought to be considered a finely honed baby machine.
"It allows people to bond without a commitment."
"It degrades women and makes them simply a sexual object."
"It does not respect the Creator's purpose for our bodies and our sexuality."
"It does not honor the purpose of sex."
"It negates the wedding vows."
"It treats the body like some kind of machine-something just to be used for sexual pleasure."
We're repeating ourselves, RLT.
The website elaborates on some of these, without providing any sort of study or proof to back up their claims. However, if you want a little verification, Planned Parenthood is kind enough to provide.
A while back, I posted a story about how the Feds are trying to push consenting adults into abstaining from sex until they're thirty. Dubya's new head of family planning is anti-family planning. There's a movement among Evangelicals to produce as many children as possible to be "arrows" in God's army. The campaign between the Holy Terrors and their whores in the government is coordinated and obvious.
"Birth Control Is Harmful..." (Some of them are repetitive--My responses are in plain text.)
"It creates a sex on demand attitude." And what's wrong with that? Oh, yeah. Answer below.
"It does not protect against sexually transmitted diseases." Actually, Respect Life Tulsa admits that condoms reduce the risk of STDs. However, the website adds that birth control doesn't prevent STDs, it only reduces the risk. It doesn't add that the effectiveness of condoms against most STDs is greater than 95%.
In addition, Respect Life Tulsa barely mentions condoms at all. Most of their hot air is spent talking about the pill and other hormonal forms of birth control. You'd think if RLT was so anti-birth control, they'd spend a little more time talking about the least expensive, most effective birth control available.
"It contributes to sexual addiction." Not one shred of scientific evidence that this so-called addiction even exists, let alone that it's made worse by birth control.
"It causes abortions." Here's the logic. The pill and other hormonal controls prevent a fertilized egg from settling in the uterus and thus this constitutes an abortion. Never mind that no responsible medical authority agrees with them. Also, never mind that most forms of birth control (condoms, sponges, diaphragms, spermicides) actually prevent fertilization in the first place.
"It degrades women and makes them simply a sexual object." Hmm. From what I remember of the history of feminism, birth control gave women the opportunity to obtain educations, enter the workforce, and make greater contributions to society without necessarily being baby machines. If expanding womens' opportunities is degrading them, how are they being exalted by having as many babies as possible?"
"It allows people to bond without a commitment." Without a commitment to having a baby, that is. Or is having a baby the only valid form of commitment two people can make?
"It gives a false sense of safety in having promiscuous sex." Joke response: No, it gives a legitimate sense of safety in having promiscuous sex. Serious response: According to Planned Parenthood, (Providing the full link below) 53% of married couples in the U.S. used birth control on a regular basis in 2002. RLT seems to be operating under the belief that married couples don't need birth control.
"It negates the wedding vows." When I married my lovely wife, we promised to "love, honor, and obey," just like every other married couple we ever knew. I don't remember promising to knock up my wife at every chance, nor did she agree to breed like a bunny at the drop of a hat. And what about couples who just end up childless? Should their marriages be annulled? Call me nut, call me crazy dreamer, (Go ahead. "J.T., you nut! You crazy dreamer, you!") I'd thought marriage vows were about love, and not necessarily about making babies. But I could be wrong.
"It does not honor the purpose of sex." You got me there, RLT. I'd always thought the purpose of sex was to bond with another human being, give someone else pleasure and make her feel good and beautiful and sexy, and have a little fun, myself. Obviously, I was all wrong. The only purpose of sex is to make babies.
"It decreases the natural consequence of a child from extra marital affairs, which has for a long time been a deterrent." Let me get this straight. Reducing illegitimate births is a bad thing? This world needs more bastards?
"It treats the body like an object, not a person-something just to be used for sexual pleasure." Whereas RLT is interested in using the body only to breed, to reproduce, to propagate, to be fruitful and multiply. The woman's body, that is.
"It creates a sex on demand attitude, which can lead to sexual assaults and rape." More problems with having sex when you want to, not just when your partner's ovulating. And I fail to see how sex when you want to negates consent. After all, I can only assume she wants to have sex on demand just as much as he does.
"It has caused social chaos." Not a clue. Not a fucking clue what they're talking about. When did this chaos start? At the turn of the last century, when the early feminists started advocating birth control? 1962 when the Pill came out? '66 when the Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v. CT? What chaos was this that came out of birth control? The Super Bowl? The Beatles? Watergate? Britney Spears? Oh, never mind.
"It treats children like accidents or mistakes and creates an anti-child mentality in society." Wait a minute. I thought accidental children (like bastards) are a good thing. Seems to me that if we give couples more options when it comes to having kids, the kids will be more wanted than if they were simply "oops" babies.
"It treats the woman's body and her fertility like some kind of disease. It treats the body like it is just a machine-something to be used just for sexual pleasure." Whereas they ought to be considered a finely honed baby machine.
"It allows people to bond without a commitment."
"It degrades women and makes them simply a sexual object."
"It does not respect the Creator's purpose for our bodies and our sexuality."
"It does not honor the purpose of sex."
"It negates the wedding vows."
"It treats the body like some kind of machine-something just to be used for sexual pleasure."
We're repeating ourselves, RLT.
The website elaborates on some of these, without providing any sort of study or proof to back up their claims. However, if you want a little verification, Planned Parenthood is kind enough to provide.
A while back, I posted a story about how the Feds are trying to push consenting adults into abstaining from sex until they're thirty. Dubya's new head of family planning is anti-family planning. There's a movement among Evangelicals to produce as many children as possible to be "arrows" in God's army. The campaign between the Holy Terrors and their whores in the government is coordinated and obvious.
I know, I know. A whole week away. Sorry.
Something to make up for all the time away.
Serious stuff a little later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
