There’s always the Fundamentalist Evangelical Church for the Unattractive of Boringistan.
And nursing homes.
Can’t think of an example of a country where this is the case though.
There’s this thing called a Tivo. Get one, and you never have to watch commercials again.
Or you could try watching some different TV shows. I don’t see “girls gone wild” commercials on the shows I watch (mostly things like History, Food, and Discovery channels).
So don’t go where those sorority girls hang out.
Don’t watch those sitcoms.
Thing is, the places with the highest abortion rates now aren’t the same places where the sexual revolution happened. It didn’t happen in the Soviet Union. Russia now has one of the highest abortion rates in the world. The sexual revolution certainly didn’t happen in China in the 1960s and 70s. China now has a high rate of abortions.
I think we can at least agree that you have no problem at all with gay sex, huh, Alx? No chance of conception there.
I want you to take a close look at what you’ve typed here and compare it with what you started this thread with. Here, let me help you in case you forgot and can’t look up to the top link next to Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Great Debates >
So it’s taken 4 pages but we finally have your solution to solving the unwanted pregnancy problem: force more pregnancies to term as punishment.
Population control: ur doin it wrong.
“The beatings will continue until morale improves!”
That seems like a really bad idea. You’re essentially taking people who are, pretty much guaranteed, to not want to have a child, and forcing them to have it. You don’t think that they’ll simply go out drinking or the like, since they aren’t going to have any good thoughts - and, probably, considerable spite - about the pregnancy? And beyond that, when they actually give birth, you’re either going to have a child brought up by parents who actively have reason to dislike it, or be put into an adoption system which already has way more kids in it than there are adopters. It’s practically a guarantee of some form of child abuse. I don’t think it’s worth enforcing a punishment that will end up with a generation of abused, rightfully angry kids at the end of it.
It’s certainly a solution. But if it’s the best solution, I’m lost for words as to what solutions would be worse. It’s worse than enforced sterilization in my eyes.
Let me add to this: I’m disappointed at how many people here are being cheerleaders for abortion to the extent that the issue of adoption has been completely ignored. There’s a good number of worthy parents out there who simply can’t have children on their own, and depend on the selflessness of others to provide them with a child.
If SmartAlx’s plan to reduce unplanned pregnancies to zero, then we’re left with a couple options: these parents would never have a chance to raise a child; they would have to rely on expensive medical means, which aren’t a guarantee; or people would start having planned pregnancies to give up the child, which is just f-ed up.
Also, I love how on the list of countries by birth rates, we have countries like France, Italy, Spain, Japan, Sweden, and Czech Republic as being in the lower quartile. If I know anything about the French, Italians, Spanish, Japanese, and Czechs, it’s that the are totally uptight and hate fornication.
Like, those French maids are totally all about cleaning, Spaniards are far too busy at work to think about sex, Italians spend too much time fixing their lousy cars to put any moves on the ladies, the Japanese are totally indoctrinated by abstinence education materials bought at vending machines, and so far as I can tell, Czechs have managed to keep pornography and prostitution completely out of their country.
So forcing women to keep babies they don’t want will help prevent the number of unwanted children in the world? :dubious:
When I was in middle school and high school I was given the exact sexual education class you are promoting here, where they advised that abstinence was the only sure way not to get pregnant or a disease but that there were several birht control options if you felt like you couldn’t or wouldn’t wait. That was pretty standard for people graduating around the same time I did from what I’ve been told by my friends who graduated from other schools in different cities and states.
Also, according to the book The Welfare of Children by Duncan Lindsey the out of wedlock births in this nation jumped from 1950 to 1998. However the percentage of women who were married dropped from 66% to 55% and for African American women the number was an even more drastic drop from 62% to 36%. A lot of the babies being born out of wedlock today would have been born to a married couple 50 years ago only because the presence of that child would have forced a wedding then and it doesn’t now. This leads me to believe that the behavior hasn’t changed at all, only the acceptance that a baby shouldn’t force you to spend your life with someone who isn’t right for you.
Translation there are a lot of selfish, greedy jerks that want someone else to provide free gestation and labor for them. All of these rabid would-be adopters could hire a surrogate mother to gestate a baby for them, but they have refused that option. “Oh, that’s so expensive,” the want-to-adopters flutter, “a surrogacy fee costs almost as much as a new SUV!” I have no sympathy. It’ is one of the hallowed tenets of the free enterprise system that if you can’t afford something you just have to do without it. You don’t have the right to force someone else to work for you without compensation or give up their time and property because you want something.
The question was about unwanted pregnancies. Adoption is not a solution to an unwanted pregnancy because it doesn’t stop the pregnancy. It may be a solution to an unwanted child, but technically speaking, the only solution to an unwanted pregnancy is termination.
“Contraceptive mainly” is taught nowhere. The options are either AO or what you call “abstinence highlighted.” Abstinence is pounded as the “only 100% safe” option even in the most comprehensive, “liberal” programs.
I’d say that if someone wants the pregnancy to continue, even if it was “unplanned,” then it is not, by definition, an “unwanted” pregnancy.
And if they don’t want the pregnancy to continue, then it’s an unwanted pregnancy, and termination is the only solution.
And I think both of those points have been discussed in this thread (but not by the OP).
No, it isn’t the only solution. Someone is perfectly capable of saying, I wish I wasn’t pregnant, I don’t want to be pregnant, I don’t want to raise a child, but I don’t want an abortion so I’m going to put the kid up for adoption.
That’s the idea of why most people say they’re pro-choice, as in, abortion isn’t the only option for an unwanted pregnancy.
It seems like the OP’s real problem is that he is a prude. And he’s welcome to be one, but that is not something the world at large needs to deal with. SmartAlx, you’ve ignored a lot of factual information whenever it conflicts with your view that people need to be scared of sex. If you are concerned that the world population is going to explode, it makes no sense to oppose abortion. If you hope to make a cogent argument about this you need to organize your ideas.
Agreed. In fact, overpopulation is only a current and projected problem in less developed countries which are arguably more prudish in their attitude to sex than western democracies. In the developed world, low birth rates are the projected problem, requiring us to go forth and multiply.
My only problem with current TV is that, even on the supposed ‘safe channels’ or ‘kids programming’ you have to be super careful what exactly is on the TV.
That sucks.
Or resort to the simple and obvious solution of letting some of the people from the countries with high birth rates move to countries with low birth rates.
The flashing blinking sign that’s telling you that is that he had to be pushed and prodded into mentioning that, by the way, women don’t have babies all by themselves by parthenogenesis.