Both males and females KNOW that a males sperm and a females ova, when coming together, create a child.
Duh.
Birth control pills. Condoms. IUDs. Spermicidal jelly. Hysterectomies.
ALL of the above have been defeated by LIFE.
(Yes, even women who have had hysterectomies have had children who have attached themselves to other parts of females bodies and grown to the stage of birth.)
The only way to ABSOLUTELY GUARENTEE no pregnancy is…ABSTINENCE.
OH! HORROR OF HORRORS! NO…SEX …!!!
No…let us ALL have SEX. And as much as possible.
But only in the context of a male and female who look forward to a child - and are commited to both each other and any child who would be born of their love and committment.
OH. MY. GOD. !!
That sounds like RELIGIOUS FUNDUMENTALISM!!
We must run from it.
Fine.
Run from it.
Just, PLEASE, be ready to commit to any child you may create for the next twenty-one years before you f**k.
It just may happen.
And the rest of the world must take up the slack for the contingencies you fail to provide for.
I can’t help but wonder if this is a tangental comment directed towards many of the “male abortion” threads. There’s one going on right now in GD. Some think that because the woman can have an abortion, the man ought to be off the hook for any child support. And if she doesn’t abort, that’s her problem, and he doesn’t want any responsibility for the resulting child.
As someone else put it on the current thread on this topic, it’s kinda like they think that “the desicion to have an abortion or not is the act which creates the child”, (instead of sex and the sperm and egg and all that).
I second the request for a cite on this; I’ve certainly heard of cases where a fertilised ovum attaches to something other than the lining of the uterus (often the inside of the fallopian tube, but I believe I’ve heard of cases where it was actually outside the reproductive organs) - AFAIK it’s always a life-threatening problem for the female when this happens.
So what’s with these drive-by posters who won’t give us cites for stuff?
OK, according to this page, there is a vanishingly small chance of an ectopic pregnancy after a hysterectomy (usually if there’s already a fertilized egg in the fallopian tubes at the time of the surgery).
And according to this page, a baby boy named Ronan was successfully delivered by Caesaran section after an abdominal ectopic pregnancy. This was not after a hysterectomy–in fact, Ronan was one of triplets, and his sisters formed normally in the womb; also, Ronan apparently attached to the outside of the uterus–but I think abdominal ectopic pregnancies could occur that don’t involve the uterus at all, in which the placenta attaches to some other area of the abdomen.
So whaddaya know. You learn something new every day. I guess it could be theoretically possible. But I don’t think this is a good thing; the baby couldn’t possibly be born without major medical intervention, and by far the most likely outcome of such a case would be a doomed fetus, and quite possibly a dead woman as well.
In fact, all this reading about ectopic pregnancies and stuff is making me woozy (and I’m a guy). Clearly, this whole pregnancy thing is icky and dangerous, and the consensus of this thread is correct; we need to stick to good, clean, safe, all-American oral sex, the way God intended for us to.
And if we combine Mangetout’s post with ethicsrcritical’s we have sex in automobiles!; now the question remains, is oral and anal sex in automobiles safe?
