BF wants sex without a protection/condom!

[jayjay30]

wow. this thread has covered alot of ground lol.

my take on Public Assistance:

I myself recieve medicaid/foodstamps. I am also a veteran who is disabled. i served our government and got screwed over. BUT i have worked since i was 18 years old and i continue to try to work despite having an ongoing injury/disability. I dont get cash assistance i refuse to. I work jobs on the book(some people work under the table). I pay my taxes. YES i have 5 children and i work my butt off to provide for them but when you consider rent prices, utility prices and gas prices you have no other choice but to get help with food/medical.

YET i know people who make 800 every 2 weeks and still gets foodstamps and medicaid and public assistance cash assistance. explain that to me. They have 1 kid and can get help.

last time i got any cash assistance was 10 years ago.

[ShellyZ]

Cam, the one argument that you consistently rely on is that other people are idiots, ignorant, and stupid. That's all your position is based on. You don't know how to argue a point, all you know how to do is call people stupid for disagreeing with you.

I pay taxes too. I know what I'm talking about. I don't earn very much, but it's enough to support me and my two cats, and the amount I pay in taxes is a small percentage. It does not affect my ability to pay my bills and live comfortably. I simply live within my means. And no, I do not receive any government aid. I don't need it. But I'm glad it's there for the people who do need it. And don't worry, I don't want kids so I won't be producing any more Democrats for you to contend with. Clearly, you've already got your hands full trying to complete one coherent sentence without the words "idiot" or "stupid." It really weakens your own argument when you resort to that kind of behavior.

Your income is your property, minus what you pay in taxes. That money belongs to the government, whether you like it or not. You don't get to decide how they spend it. You can be selfish with the rest of your money, but everyone has to contribute a little for the society they live in to function. If no one contributes, everyone is screwed, including you. And like I said, the poor pay taxes too. You're not the only one. If you don't want to pay taxes, you can go live in a cave in the mountains by yourself. You won't have to help anyone, and no one will help you.

Of the money it spends, over 70 percent of it is for entitlement programs for you and others. We spend less than 7 percent of gross domestic product on our defense...and that's with the cost of wars built in.

If that's true, that's a good thing. Not only do social programs create jobs, they also help people work their way out of poverty and better their lives. That's what government aid is about. It's not about giving free money to people who don't want to work. It's about getting people the help they need so they can get an education and get better jobs, which results in upward mobility. So their children won't grow up in poverty and be a future drain on society. Without those programs, the cycle of poverty would never end. Future generations wouldn't stand a chance and nothing would ever get better.

And why the hell should we spend more money on wars? I think we've spent quite enough money on that already. And I like how you asked me a question and then answered for me. That doesn't help your argument either. I'm not arguing for communism; taxes and social programs have not reduced this country to a communist state.

Note to self, never say I enjoy sex without condoms again if I don't want to start a socio-economic debate.

And just to try to swing back to the original question, one thing I have discovered throughout this is that Americans seem to be a lot more assertive about the necessity of condoms. Honestly I have discussed this thread with friends and a lot of them agree with me that sex without condoms in a monogamous trusting relationship is not a problem.

Oh and another common comment when I mention that the initial person making a big deal over it all was American....

Maybe it is a cultural thing, I don't know. All I know is that in American sex ed classes, condoms are emphasized. Probably because a lot of teenagers are having sex and they may not have access to the pill, so condoms are cheap and easily available for them. I don't know if it's different in other countries. I have my own reasons for saying that sex without condoms in a monogamous trusting relationship IS a problem. First of all, you can't always be sure that your relationship is monogamous. Plenty of people cheat on their partners without getting caught, unfortunately. Second of all, even if your relationship is monogamous, your partner could have an STD from a previous relationship and not even know it. Some people are born with an STD. Third, the pill is only 99% effective, with perfect use. That's really good, I know, but that still means that 1% of women who use the pill perfectly get pregnant anyway. It would suck to be in that 1%. And a lot of women don't take the pill perfectly. I just wouldn't feel safe relying on only one method of birth control. Besides, I don't think it's fair to put 100% of the responsibility on the woman. I can't get pregnant by myself. My boyfriend and I are both having sex, so I'm not going to be the only one worrying about birth control. We'll both worry about it together.

"Go lecture Octomum!!!"

Don't even get me started. She's crazy, and so are the doctors who let her go ahead with fertility treatment when she already had a million kids.

[CAM]

You are an idiot. Objective statement.

The rest of my argument still applies. And, there is an option when it comes to entitlements: don't spend the money. Period. Entitlement means you have a right to those monies. A right. Can you conceive of what that means? The implications? No, of course not.

You say good...lets spend the money. The Western world is broke. Get it?

As far as veterans go...we owe them everything we can do to help them. They have risked their lives for us. I'm a veteran. I take no benefits because I would rather then go to those who have risked their lives and been injured and whatnot.

[jayjay30]

You are an idiot. Objective statement.

The rest of my argument still applies. And, there is an option when it comes to entitlements: don't spend the money. Period. Entitlement means you have a right to those monies. A right. Can you conceive of what that means? The implications? No, of course not.

You say good...lets spend the money. The Western world is broke. Get it?

As far as veterans go...we owe them everything we can do to help them. They have risked their lives for us. I'm a veteran. I take no benefits because I would rather then go to those who have risked their lives and been injured and whatnot.

i had to fight to get the benefits i do and be able to get to go to the va for my injury. took 2 years to get a decision!!

i think they need stricter rules for those getting public assistance, i see too many with nice cars, new tats, expensive jewelry, cell phones etc...while their kids look like crap!! pissses me off.
we are now in a society where it is okay for teens to have babies and get on the system. im 30 years old when i had my first baby at 19 the county took my mom to court to pay support for me and my child. I told the judge that i was 19 years old i was in the army and that i had made the decision that led to me having a child they emanciapated me(cant spell sorry). I have supported myself and my kids ever since-i get NO support those losers get public assistance dont pay support and make babies!! our system is seriously flawed!!

[ShellyZ]

You are an idiot. Objective statement.

It's like trying to have a debate with a 3rd grader. Your only argument is "yeah well, you're stupid, so there!" You haven't responded to any of the points I've made, and you haven't made any valid points of your own. The rest of your argument is nonexistent. All you've established is that you're selfish to the point of narcissism, and anyone who sees the value in helping others is an idiot. It's hopeless.

[ShellyZ]

I told the judge that i was 19 years old i was in the army and that i had made the decision that led to me having a child they emanciapated me

Why did you need to be emancipated by the courts at 19? That's for children who are under 18. Anyway, if your income at the time was too low to support your baby, you probably could have applied for food stamps or something. And you could have gotten a court order for the father of your baby to pay child support. You didn't have to struggle with no support.

[jayjay30]

Why did you need to be emancipated by the courts at 19? That's for children who are under 18. Anyway, if your income at the time was too low to support your baby, you probably could have applied for food stamps or something. And you could have gotten a court order for the father of your baby to pay child support. You didn't have to struggle with no support.

new york state parents are responsible for you until you are 21 years old. i never knew that either but joining the army had made it so my parents where not responsible for me. i couldnt get foodstamps or anything until then. this was 10 years ago. court orders for support do no good if the losers are on public assistance for themselves!! they can be on PA and not pay their support and make more babies. my oldest children their father is now on baby number 8!!

[roobarb]

You are an idiot. Objective statement.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

I don't agree with the current way a lot of Western countries run their welfare system, but I do agree that their needs to be some type of welfare system. As pointed out, it is a cost benefit in that no welfare will lead to greater crime and criminals in gaol do cost the government more in the long run. Not sure how it works in the USA, but I was watching a show recently on juvenile offenders in Australia. One juvenile offender can cost up to $500,000 a year before they end up inside once you factor in all costs from police to legal services to court time to etc, etc. And you talk about the Western world being broke already. Putting more people into the criminal system will cost you more.

Actually Australia's economy is doing pretty well, perhaps if the USA toned down its already absurd spending in the military, your economy wouldn't be so far up the proverbial creek. Another stat for you, the amount of money the USA spends on the military each year could build 1 training hospital every day for a year. But that is probably a discussion for a different thread

And just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I support open slather on welfare spending either. Just need to reinforce that point.

[doppelgaenger]

I've given a lotta love without the glove, no kids yet. I must be sterile or something...

Back to the OP: if you don't trust your bf enough to pull out, then simply don't take that risk. Personally, I pull out every time, even when using a condom. Maybe if your BF can prove it to you by pulling out with the condom, you will trust him more. FWIW.

Good luck surfin' the orgasmic waves without a life jacket.

[IndiReloaded]

Then again I feel like I am arguing with people that are driven by money rather than compassion.

I'm not the one saying I would take handouts just b/c they are offered. Check your mirror.

@jayjay - its nice to know there are still some ppl with dignity. As for benefits, I agree completely - veterans risk the ultimate for the rest of us and deserve our respect and support.

@ Shelly - I suspect you didn't watch the vid I posted. Also, Cam has made several arguments you haven't addressed. He made his points before yours, btw. Selective reading.

@ Cam - don't feed the beast^. Wait for someone smarter to reply. Have you seen her other threads?

[IndiReloaded]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

I don't agree with the current way a lot of Western countries run their welfare system, but I do agree that their needs to be some type of welfare system. As pointed out, it is a cost benefit in that no welfare will lead to greater crime and criminals in gaol do cost the government more in the long run. Not sure how it works in the USA, but I was watching a show recently on juvenile offenders in Australia. One juvenile offender can cost up to $500,000 a year before they end up inside once you factor in all costs from police to legal services to court time to etc, etc. And you talk about the Western world being broke already. Putting more people into the criminal system will cost you more.

Actually Australia's economy is doing pretty well, perhaps if the USA toned down its already absurd spending in the military, your economy wouldn't be so far up the proverbial creek. Another stat for you, the amount of money the USA spends on the military each year could build 1 training hospital every day for a year. But that is probably a discussion for a different thread

And just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I support open slather on welfare spending either. Just need to reinforce that point.

You just keep repeating the same thing. There's no new idea in this post. Cam gave an explanation for this and you are either not understanding or ignoring his point. You should also watch the vid I posted.

[doppelgaenger]

You guys really need to learn how to pick your battles. Indi, that's ten minutes of your life you will never get back. Was it worth it?

[IndiReloaded]

People besides these twits read the forum. Besides, its quite fun to see how easy they are to manipulate. You know me

[doppelgaenger]

It would be more efficient to have a mod sort this out by providing the necessary info and locking the thread. Not even I would read through eight pages of bickering! But anyway, it's you're (pl.) battle, so I'll let you continue.

[roobarb]

You just keep repeating the same thing. There's no new idea in this post. Cam gave an explanation for this and you are either not understanding or ignoring his point. You should also watch the vid I posted.

Irony in saying I'm not understanding or ignoring the the post? Especially when said person has mistaken who he is speaking to and made unfounded assumptions about them?

It's simple really. I don't disagree with Welfare in principle. You and Cam do. You and Cam belittle anyone who does not come around to your view point. Would you like a graph that shows poverty prior to welfare being introduced and after and see the drop in poverty in every case? It's a sad state of affairs that we are heading back to those pre welfare levels with the rising cost of everyday living thanks to the glory of Capitalism. (I support a true free market, but it does not exist in any western country).

Sure it would be great if everyone had a job and was able to support themselves. Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Even if it was, what would happen in the current economic climate in places all around the world since the GFC? No welfare means a whole lot of people are not going to be able to support their families. I would rather there be a welfare system for people in need than to have vast number of innocent people suffering needlessly. You say welfare should be left for local communities. Why? In times past everything was left to small communities including military. If the government wants to take responsibility for one, it takes responsibility for all.