Obama on being "PUNISHED with a baby..."

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by squeeks, Apr 2, 2008.

  1. squeeks macrumors 68040

    squeeks

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
    #1
    cant believe no one has posted this yet

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=LQt8QGIMo4U

    i understand he is talking about sex ed but still, ranking babies up there with STDs? This man is WRONG for our country...
     
  2. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #2
    What is wrong about that? Kids are pure torture! Besides, is this a funny way for Obama saying sex is bad?
     
  3. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    I'd say that a 16 year old being forced to go through with a pregnancy is punishment. Pregnancy can be hard enough for adults; imagine going through it while still practically a child.

    I'd like to see the rest of that speech in context. As atszyman said below, I think Obama was talking more about teaching proper sex-education, rather than the poor excuse of one that is taught now.

    EDITED: Deleted part of my post. I don't want to turn this into a pro-choice/pro-life debate.
     
  4. arkitect macrumors 601

    arkitect

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Location:
    Bath, United Kingdom
    #4
    If I was a US voter he'd have my vote on that issue alone.
     
  5. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #5
    He may be wrong for your country, but he's right.
     
  6. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #6
    This isn't even a pro-choice pro-life debate. His point was that we need to educate kids on the consequences and dangers of having sex.

    If they are given proper sexual education, they should be able to make good decisions on whether or not to have sex and what protections to use. Simply telling kids "Don't have sex" without informing them about it, will only make them try it in rebellion and increases the likelihood that they will either end up pregnant or with an STD, both of which can wreck havoc on a teenagers life.
     
  7. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #7
    The youtube video appears to have been taken without context. We don't know what the question was.

    Why do you think he was "ranking babies with STDs"?

    My best guess at the point he was making is that he doesn't think that babies or STDs should be "punishment" for having sex. I agree with him. People should have babies because they want to have babies, not because they don't understand how babies are made.

    For a 16-year-old, having a baby could seem an awful lot like a "punishment." Maybe when she gets older she will learn to value the child, but for nearly all 16-year-olds, having a baby is not something that is going to improve their lives. For most babies, having a 16-year-old mother is not ideal either.

    Where Obama and the religious right disagree is on what the most effective way to prevent teenage pregnancy and STDs is. Obama bases his opinion on science; the religious right bases theirs on faith.
     
  8. Aranince macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #8
    Its quite sad that everyone goes around having sex before they are married...why don't you want to save that special experience with the one you are married to?

    Society is messed up, honestly. My opinion is to teach abstinence. Guaranteed to prevent STDs and pregnancy, unlike protection that does not protect from STDs and does not always prevent pregnancy
     
  9. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #9
    True. Especially considering that 16-year-old mother will likely drop out of highschool or put graduation on hold. Then she likely wouldn't continue her education either because her grades in HS suffered because of the baby, but more likely because she doesn't have the money or time to do it.

    Having a baby at that age can destroy someone's life. Not to mention the baby will be put at an extreme disadvantage in life, too. Children of poor, uneducated parents tend to be poor and uneducated themselves when they grow up.

    Maybe because some of us recognize sex for what it is; a natural bodily need. Sex isn't a mystical experience; it's biological.

    True, abstinence is is guaranteed to prevent STDs and pregnancy. Here's the big problem though; teaching abstinence as sex-education is ineffective.

    Abstinence-only education ineffective

    People are going to have sex regardless. How about this approach? People who want to abstain from sex are free to do so. You don't need a class to be told that. But maybe we should be teaching kids the safe way to have sex; since they are already doing it.

    Doctors oppose abstinence-only education

    And another link:

    Abstinence Programs Not Effective, Study Finds

    The actual study itself:

    Impact of Abstinence Education Programs
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    What on earth is sad about it? I wanted to have that special experience with lots of people. It's not a one-time-only deal, you know. It didn't make it any less special later on.

    Unfortunately, your argument appears to fall apart on contact with "facts".
     
  11. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #11
    Abstinence should be part of every sexual education curriculum, however if it is the only aspect taught, those reckless teenagers who do have sex, will not know of the possible consequences and protections that they can take to avoid them and are likely to fall prey to the thousands of myths out there like "you can't get pregnant your first time."

    Well I would love for my daughters (3 and almost 1) to wait until they are married (to a good man or woman) before having sex, I'm not naive enough to believe that just because I want it, it will be true. I'd rather have them informed and save then simply tell them "don't do it" and turn a blind eye.
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    Why would you even want it?
     
  13. faintember macrumors 65816

    faintember

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    the ruins of the Cherokee nation
    #13
    Why not rank them together? Both can be negatively life altering, can have immense financial ramifications and are long term products of a short term action. To a young, single person I can see how both STDs and babies can be destructive, and would even argue that a baby can be more destructive than a STD (aside from HIV).

    People are going to have sex, married or not. Let the schools teach about contraceptive devices, then as a parent you can, if you wish, teach abstinence as a means of birth control to your child. This way if parents don't teach abstinence then the children of those parents at least get an alternative method of preventing birth presented to them. Why not cover all of the bases?

    edit: it5five beat me with much better info/links. Damn you phone calls!
     
  14. TheQuestion macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Location:
    Location is relative, no?
    #14
    Shouldn't you reword this to say "some of your argument falls apart on contact with "facts" "?

    Is there are any form of contraception that is 100% effective? Is not part of his argument sound then? Is not part of it flawed in that it possible to contract STDs even while practicing abstinence (however slight the odds)?
     
  15. Prof. macrumors 601

    Prof.

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago
    #15
    My parents said the same thing. There was nothing wrong with Obama's statement.

    The point Obama was making, I think, is that having a baby at the age of 16 or contracting an STD would ruin the rest of the childs (the 16 year old) life. No 16 year old wants to care for a baby full time or get an STD.

    People (the Obama haters) are throwing this way out of proportion.
     
  16. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #16
    Poor wording on my part. I'd like for my daughters to not feel pressured into sex before they are ready with the right partner. I don't want them doing it because someone pressured them into it, I don't want them doing it because "everyone else is doing it". But knowing that those pressures will be there, I'd rather have them informed than falling prey to an unscrupulous partner spouting falsehoods.
     
  17. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #17
    How do you teach abstinance? That's a contradiction in terms.

    You can't teach someone to abstain from sex. You need to teach them everything about sex so they make the decision to abstain.
     
  18. BaronvdB macrumors 6502

    BaronvdB

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    #18
     
  19. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #19
    True but if you're not taught about the actions and potential consequences then the probability of the consequences increases if the action is taken. Teaching kids about the actions, consequences and precautions they can and should take should they choose to do the action, is something we shouldn't even have to debate.
     
  20. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #20
    Isn't that pretty irrelevant? Better education about sex and relationships will lead to fewer unwanted teenage pregnancies. Isn't that better than just saying "It's your fault" after the fact?
     
  21. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #21
    Sorry to rain on your parade but you can catch STDs from other activities other than sexual intercourse. Abstinence guarantees nothing. Besides sanctimony.

    It's not a baby it's a foetus. Nature regards them with flagrant disregard.
     
  22. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #22
    It's sad that we even have to debate it, absolutely. Even sadder still that we have a "religious right" that constantly wishes to pawn itself off as science and fact.
     
  23. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #23
    Actually, abstinence guarantees nothing. Any idea how many women each year are impregnated by rape?
     
  24. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #24
    Are you telling me that kids don't know that sex leads to pregnancy?
     
  25. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #25
    There's plenty of misconceptions about sex and getting pregnant. Even amongst adults.
     

Share This Page