Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 I think that Birth Control should not be used because it is not natural. Who knows what it is doing to peoples bodies Women are supposed to get pregnant Also women are supposed to give milk to thier baby That gives the baby immunities from the mother. That is why people take thier kids to the Dr every day of the week. UnNatural is bad for you Link to comment
Pocket Rocket Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 do you means just the pill? Link to comment
Hope75 Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 So what is your ultimate suggestion? Abstinence? How realistic is that? Link to comment
GTM Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 i believe you are correct freckles. i bet you that 39 years down the road, they will finally figure out that birthcontrol is causing autism in kids nowadays. Link to comment
Kiwi_Sweet Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 If it was bad for you or caused any damage to our bodies, then I don't think it would be around. I understand what you're trying to say, but NOTHING is really natural these days. Link to comment
GTM Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 So what is your ultimate suggestion? Abstinence? How realistic is that? possibly a condom? or other alternatives? Link to comment
Kiwi_Sweet Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 i believe you are correct freckles. i bet you that 39 years down the road, they will finally figure out that birthcontrol is causing autism in kids nowadays. Where do you get that bc causes autism? Is there a correlation? Link to comment
itsallgrand Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 I note the poster is a male. And that he has decreed what is correct for women. And I move on. Ok, doc? Any problems with condoms? Link to comment
Hope75 Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 possibly a condom? or other alternatives? Well, Freckles said birth control- he or she did not say "the pill". Condoms are a form of birth control. Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 So what is your ultimate suggestion? Abstinence? How realistic is that? Just get pregnant and let nature take its course Link to comment
GTM Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 If it was bad for you or caused any damage to our bodies, then I don't think it would be around. I understand what you're trying to say, but NOTHING is really natural these days. you cannot go on that. look at eggs. first they are good, then bad, now good again. what about asprin? bad, good. who decides? just like potatoes and onions, and most all foods, end up with some kind of spray for something on them, so we are ingesting what was sprayed on it.......... Link to comment
Pocket Rocket Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 um there are a lot of things we do that aren't 'natural' as you say, in some cases it has been bad in a lot however it has saved lives and improved the quality of life. HOWEVER, birth control pills and pharmaceuticals are having a far more devastating environmental effect than they are on humans alone. take my generation for example, if it wasn't for chemotherapy, which is wholly unnatural, I would have died 21 years ago, but now they're finding out that the generation of children who survived cancer all those years ago are now growing up and coming up with a whole new set of problems. which way would you have it, kids dying of cancer all those years ago instead of living as long as they have now just because it's 'unnatural'? I'd be careful when you make statements like this, it makes it sound like 'natural' = good and unnatural only = bad Link to comment
alatas Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 Arguably having a baby every year for a decade or two could be considered normal (ie what happens when you have sex regularly and don't use birth control). However, this is not financially viable or socially desired by most people I think. It would increase female and infant mortality though methinks because constant pregnancy/childbirth/breastfeeding takes its toll on the mother's body eventually. Alternatively you could plan on stopping to have sex once you've had an many children as you want, in which case birth control is indeed unnecessary. Pregnancy nonwithstanding though - how would you protect yourself from STDs without birth control? I am assuming you mean ALL forms of birth control here btw, hormonal and barrier. I agree that birth control is not natural. But natural does not always equal best. Along similar lines to Pocket Rocket, imagine a modern world without antibiotics for instance. Link to comment
Crazyaboutdogs Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 I think that Birth Control should not be used because it is not natural. Who knows what it is doing to peoples bodies Women are supposed to get pregnant Also women are supposed to give milk to thier baby That gives the baby immunities from the mother. That is why people take thier kids to the Dr every day of the week. UnNatural is bad for you Says who? Half the things we eat are unnatural. Why not just drink milk straight from the cow...that is more natural....headaches...just deal with it...pain relievers are just not natural...cars....who needs it...human beings have two feet, we were meant to walk....eyeglasses...hey, not natural either...pills to reduce high blood pressure...not natural....pills to reduce high cholesterol...not natural etc. Link to comment
Pocket Rocket Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 Just get pregnant and let nature take its course That's a very wise statement considering the world is overpopulated as it is, consider Ireland as an example here too, birth control is not allowed because of religious reasons and THOUSANDS of women either fly over to the UK to get abortions or choose to use illegal methods, and in some cases die as a result. and you have to look no further than HIV to completely obliterate your statement - again, do you only mean the pill or condoms too? Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 Arguably having a baby every year could be considered normal (ie what happens when you have sex regularly and don't use birth control). However, this is not financially viable or socially desired by most people I think. Alternatively you could plan on stopping to have sex once you've had an many children as you want, in which case birth control is indeed unnecessary. Pregnancy nonwithstanding though - how would you protect yourself from STDs without birth control? I am assuming you mean ALL forms of birth control here btw, hormonal and barrier. I don't think people know what they want So they should have as many kids as they happen to have STDS - are here because of unnatural sex - in Africa they had sex with monkeys and that is what caused aids Link to comment
GTM Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 ok, when he said birth control, i figured "birth control". cause if he was talking about condoms, he would of just said condoms. birth control and autism is probably related. back before the 80's and early 80's there was no autism. (of course the fictitious diesese of ADHT (or whatever the name) wasnt around either. adht means your parents didnt try to keep you in line growing up, and let you do whatever so you cried till you got your way) then early 80-90's birth control was in high demand. now comes "autism".... hmmmm. i wonder........... Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 Arguably having a baby every year for a decade or two could be considered normal (ie what happens when you have sex regularly and don't use birth control). However, this is not financially viable or socially desired by most people I think. QUOTE] Financially no one is ever ready to hve kids All you have to do is * Add water to the gravy. to feed one more kid. Link to comment
Crazyaboutdogs Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 I don't think people know what they want So they should have as many kids as they happen to have STDS - are here because of unnatural sex - in Africa they had sex with monkeys and that is what caused aids Okay, I think this poster is not being serious. Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 ok, when he said birth control, i figured "birth control". cause if he was talking about condoms, he would of just said condoms. birth control and autism is probably related. back before the 80's and early 80's there was no autism. (of course the fictitious diesese of ADHT (or whatever the name) wasnt around either. adht means your parents didnt try to keep you in line growing up, and let you do whatever so you cried till you got your way) then early 80-90's birth control was in high demand. now comes "autism".... hmmmm. i wonder........... ADHD is caused by watching way to much TV Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 Okay, I think this poster is not being serious. Look it up for yourself Link to comment
Finding Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 Freckles, Having baby after baby is unnatural. Having a child actually damages the mother's body, and I am not referring to stretch marks, etc. A pregnancy depletes calcium and nutrients and causes blood sugar levels to change. Having multiple children is a burden on limited recources. There is only so much one family can support and global recources are limited as well. The Pill may be needed for medical reasons, or what about the cases where there is a genetic defect that the parents know about and don't want to bring a child into the world that would have problems? Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 Troll. Or watches too much tv. lol. I get all my information from FOX News channel They are number 1 Link to comment
Pocket Rocket Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 \ birth control and autism is probably related. back before the 80's and early 80's there was no autism I don't know where you're getting your information from but autism DID exist before the 80's, in fact in the 70's the rate was 1 in 2000 births, the only change has bee that the rate has grown but no one is sure why (it could also have to do with the fact the increased knowledge about the disease has resulted in more cases being diagnosed). For a long time people though vaccinations were related to autism, this is incorrect too, if you look at epidemiological data you'll find that these two things are completely unrelated. Link to comment
Freckles Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 Freckles, Having multiple children is a burden on limited resources. There is only so much one family can support and global resources are limited as well. More people = more working people = more resources Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.