NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/talk/abortion/29252

Text File | 1992-07-27 | 3.4 KB | 77 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx!kcochran
From: [e-mail] (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: Celibate marriages? (was Re: Well, I lost that article...)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
    of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
    control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews admin account)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 03:02:19 GMT
Lines: 62

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>:::
>:::[Me and Bill Overpeck were talking.  I said that state schools should teach
>:::children that their bodies are their own, and that nobody has the right to
>:::use them against their wills.]
>:::
>:::[Bill asked, something along the lines of, so do you think the schools should
>:::teach about abstinance?]
>:::
>:::If they're going to teach it in terms of being the only 100% guaranteed,
>:::foolproof method of avoiding pregnancy, and all STD's, yes.
>::
>::    And will it also be taught that the safest marriage is a
>::celibate one?
>::
>::    I may add that the ideal of celibate marriage was actually
>::taught by the medieval Church; they called it the "Josephite marriage"
>::on the ground that Joseph and Mary had supposedly never had sex with
>::each other. See Ute Ranke-Heinemann's _Eunuchs for the Kingdom of
>::Heaven_ for more fun info of this sort.
>::
>::    And if marriage is conceded safe, will "living together" also
>::be conceded safe?
>:
>:Loren, I'm not making any sort of comment about marriage, I'm talking about
>:abstinence.
>
>    And to call abstinence "safe sex" is misleading, because it is
>no sex at all.
>
>    And if one wishes to present any sexual activity at all, then
>why not present the absolute safety of masturbation instead, and
>recommend it for people of all ages?
>
>    And if masturbation is not a safe sex act, then why is it not
>a sex act? I will accept reasoned argument, and ONLY reasoned
>arguments.
>
>



Maybe I'm speaking in tounges and not realizing it?

Abstinance (i.e. *NO SEX*) is the only 100% guaranteed method of ensuring that
you don't get pregnant, and that you will not get any sort of STD's.

Masturbation (By yourself - with no partners, no toys, etc etc etc) is also
guaranteed to do this.

Masturbation with a partner is pretty much guaranteed to not get you pregnant
(assuming it's a male/female situation), but there is a slight risk of
transmission of HIV or other diseases.

--
=[e-mail] | B(0-4) c- d- e++ f- g++ k(+) m r(-) s++(+) t | TSAKC=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  OK???=
="I want a man, who will, lay down beside me.  I want a man, who will stand up=
=to me too.  That's what I like about you." -Trisha Yearwood, talking about me=