|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:55 am
A question for everyone here:
Which is cheaper, easier and in some cases even safer in the long run?
A $100-$1000 surgery that actually removes something?
Or a $5 piece of rubber that prevents that very thing from existing in the first place?
Because apparently I am an 'idiot' and 'mentally retarded' because I don't want to waste my money on a full blown surgery when I don't find a little rubber thing you stick on the end of it TOOOOOOO HAAAARRRRRD to use.
I mean they have the instructions on the box now, don't they?
What instructions do you have for an abortion? None, the doctor does it. Because lets face it, unlike the condom we are not smart enough to do it ourselves. How safe is a do-it-yourself abortion compared to a do-it-yourself condom? I am going to be completely honest: If you can't do it yourself at home with a condom, you should not be having sex.
What happens when you put on a condom? No baby. Please don't tell me this is breaking news for pro-choicers.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2011 12:25 am
Obviously a condom is much cheaper and safer than an abortion procedure.
True that nothing is going to be 100% but when used right and get new condoms every so often (yes, they can expire) and store them properly, it shouldn't tear. Most of the time failures are caused by human errors.
If you can't practice safe sex and don't want a baby or STD, then you probably shouldn't be having sex at all as you clearly aren't ready for it nor prepared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:52 pm
...who can't put on a condom?
Beyond the pregnancy issue, it can be a huge safety issue. A condom won't protect you from everything, but it'll protect you from a lot of things.
But yeah, it's a little disturbing that AGI reports that something like 48% of abortions done were a first line birth control; no condoms, no birth control pills, etc. The failure rate on a new, properly applied condom is low. That's frustrating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 6:39 pm
lymelady ...who can't put on a condom? Beyond the pregnancy issue, it can be a huge safety issue. A condom won't protect you from everything, but it'll protect you from a lot of things. But yeah, it's a little disturbing that AGI reports that something like 48% of abortions done were a first line birth control; no condoms, no birth control pills, etc. The failure rate on a new, properly applied condom is low. That's frustrating. That is just sick and stupid. Who would waste $100 of dollars over just paying $5 or so? How will it protect them from diseases? Seriously, abortion is not birth control. I'm sorry, but 48% of people are idiots and just plan disgusting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 11:55 am
Condoms are actually about 10-25 cents each, unless you get something like Trojan that are ribbed or somehow fancier. You can even get them at the 99 cent store because all condoms are approved by the FDA, all that matters is the temperature they're kept at, expiration date and proper use. Not to mention with programs like Family PACT (at least here in Cali), they dish them out like crazy and include free birth control if you're low income. I'm not saying people who get abortions (or have unplanned babies) didn't use protection, but for anyone that doesn't, there's no excuse.
Even pregnancy's not the worst of it. I'd rather pop out a baby than get HIV, but apparently it's too difficult to protect your life or keep blisters off your parts. Because you know, it would make too much sense to keep a meat-wrap in your purse or backpack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
