Would they actually figure this out with only fertile days? I assumed it was the average percentage of large groups of people... percentage of couples that get pregnant over a certain number of months, for example.
Some women have very different cycles, and are fertile for varying lengths of time each month...
Thanks, I wasn't about to Google my way through pages and pages of for/against webpages after typing 'condom effectiveness'.
To save me further time:
Could someone please point me towards a study which shows the increase in sexual activity in a Third-World country which has been provided condoms in a widespread manner by a health organisation?
Could I also be pointed towards a study which shows the percentage increase in AIDS infections in those areas?
A study which combines the two would be fantastic. (Preferably, this study would not be sponsored by the Catholic Church.)
Even with a 1, 5, whatever "leak rate" if you want to call it that... are you actually going to agree with the Vatican's statements that condoms should never be used?
They know damn well that if they make people in these third world countries believe this load of shit, they're not going to magically stop having sex. Take away the condoms, and the HIV infection rate is going to explode.
Even with a 1, 5, whatever "leak rate" if you want to call it that... are you actually going to agree with the Vatican's statements that condoms should never be used?
They know damn well that if they make people in these third world countries believe this load of shit, they're not going to magically stop having sex. Take away the condoms, and the HIV infection rate is going to explode.
Its a terrible situation. But what your saying is to put man above God and I just don't buy into that whole theory. Thats what got us into this mess to begin with.
Its a terrible situation. But what your saying is to put man above God and I just don't buy into that whole theory. Thats what got us into this mess to begin with.
No, what got us into this mess to begin with was people unable to handle uncertainty and clinging to fictitious stories and letting themselves be controlled by the clergy for millenia.
Could someone please point me towards a study which shows the increase in sexual activity in a Third-World country which has been provided condoms in a widespread manner by a health organisation?
Could I also be pointed towards a study which shows the percentage increase in AIDS infections in those areas?
A study which combines the two would be fantastic. (Preferably, this study would not be sponsored by the Catholic Church.)
What you're asking for isn't that clear cut. There are lots of factors to consider. But I think theres a reasonably strong correlation between divorce rates and the de-valuing of sexual intimacy.
Then I must be misreading you. Last time around you seemed to write about 4 days, not 11. Actually, you first claimed 2 days. Now, you admit, you were 550% off? Quite a difference, I would say.
Quote:
There are many different forms of natural family planning. The method you are most likely thinking of is called the rhythm method. The Catholic church does not support that method. I forget the name of it,but it is 99.9% effective. This makes it the most effective form of birth control currently available.
Please, be so kind to back up this statement with a little link or two, else I'll have to laugh to hard, I am going to have a coronary.
It is the *most* effective method, but you forgot the name? Lemme help you out: it's either the pill or a sterilisation
Quote:
Leakage doesn't guarantee pregnancy, but pregnancy does guarantee that leakage occurred. So this means that, throwing out all of my calculations, best case is there is still a 5% leakage rate. What is wrong with you people? This isn't hard shit. Use your heads.
Best case is still 100%, 5% is the *average*. You seem to be at odds with the most fundamental principles of statistics. As I wrote some posts back: the most determining factor for the success or failure of condoms (actually any method of contraception) is if you do it right or wrong.
In 20 sexually active years and a couple of different sex partners, I have *never* broke a condom, *none* ever slipped, *none* of my partners ever got pregnant or contracted a STD. Not too shabby, and certainly better than 99.9%. You lube up with sunmilk, you'll get a 50% failure rate.
No, what got us into this mess to begin with was people unable to handle uncertainty and clinging to fictitious stories and letting themselves be controlled by the clergy for millenia.
Care to offer any supporting evidence?
I see it the other way around. People that are unable to logically reason truth from fiction assume everything is fiction.
What you're asking for isn't that clear cut. There are lots of factors to consider. But I think theres a reasonably strong correlation between divorce rates and the de-valuing of sexual intimacy.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Care to offer any supporting evidence?
I think it has more to do with how easy it is to get a divorce and how easy it is for a woman to take monetarily fvck the man in the ass without lube.
Then I must be misreading you. Last time around you seemed to write about 4 days, not 11. Actually, you first claimed 2 days. Now, you admit, you were 550% off? Quite a difference, I would say.
What I actually said is its not that simple. But if you factor in the number of menstrual cycles a women goes through while having unprotected sex with a fertile man, you will find that, on average, the number works out to be about 2 days out of the month.
Quote:
Please, be so kind to back up this statement with a little link or two, else I'll have to laugh to hard, I am going to have a coronary.
It is the *most* effective method, but you forgot the name? Lemme help you out: it's either the pill or a sterilisation
Best case is still 100%, 5% is the *average*. You seem to be at odds with the most fundamental principles of statistics. As I wrote some posts back: the most determining factor for the success or failure of condoms (actually any method of contraception) is if you do it right or wrong.
In 20 sexually active years and a couple of different sex partners, I have *never* broke a condom, *none* ever slipped, *none* of my partners ever got pregnant or contracted a STD. Not too shabby, and certainly better than 99.9%. You lube up with sunmilk, you'll get a 50% failure rate.
Somehow I doubt that condom manufacturers include the users who got pregnant due to user error in their statistic. As for the 20 sexually active years, perhaps you have a medical problem.
The ease of getting a divorce today is directly proportional to the number of people who think that it is an acceptable solution.
No, the ease of getting a divorce is directly proportional to the number of divorce lawyers that stand to make big bucks whenever they get a good settlement for the witch that guts the man's life savings.
Funny how the only reply he could muster to your incredibly poignant statement was a spelling correction and nothing else. Wait, it's not funny. It's sad.
Somehow I doubt that condom manufacturers include the users who got pregnant due to user error in their statistic. As for the 20 sexually active years, perhaps you have a medical problem.
Perhaps he just knows how to use a condom?
Obviously if you think having sperm riding up the sides of your condom and getting into your pubic hair during sex is normal, this knowledge escapes you.
You really think they differentiate between HOW people get pregnant?
"I got pregnant using condoms, but we really didn't know what the hell we were doing with it. I mean, there were instructions, but how are you supposed to figure those out? We had sex for hours with the same condom, and I guess all the sperm ended up working its way out of the condom."
Comments
Originally posted by murbot
Would they actually figure this out with only fertile days? I assumed it was the average percentage of large groups of people... percentage of couples that get pregnant over a certain number of months, for example.
Some women have very different cycles, and are fertile for varying lengths of time each month...
Thanks, I wasn't about to Google my way through pages and pages of for/against webpages after typing 'condom effectiveness'.
To save me further time:
Could someone please point me towards a study which shows the increase in sexual activity in a Third-World country which has been provided condoms in a widespread manner by a health organisation?
Could I also be pointed towards a study which shows the percentage increase in AIDS infections in those areas?
A study which combines the two would be fantastic. (Preferably, this study would not be sponsored by the Catholic Church.)
They know damn well that if they make people in these third world countries believe this load of shit, they're not going to magically stop having sex. Take away the condoms, and the HIV infection rate is going to explode.
Originally posted by keyboardf12
and you remember, churches that don't make a stand against birth control have fewer chruchgoers the following generation.
A church that changes its values based on the current moral climate is obviously a fake.
Originally posted by murbot
Even with a 1, 5, whatever "leak rate" if you want to call it that... are you actually going to agree with the Vatican's statements that condoms should never be used?
They know damn well that if they make people in these third world countries believe this load of shit, they're not going to magically stop having sex. Take away the condoms, and the HIV infection rate is going to explode.
Its a terrible situation. But what your saying is to put man above God and I just don't buy into that whole theory. Thats what got us into this mess to begin with.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Its a terrible situation. But what your saying is to put man above God and I just don't buy into that whole theory. Thats what got us into this mess to begin with.
No, what got us into this mess to begin with was people unable to handle uncertainty and clinging to fictitious stories and letting themselves be controlled by the clergy for millenia.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Could someone please point me towards a study which shows the increase in sexual activity in a Third-World country which has been provided condoms in a widespread manner by a health organisation?
Could I also be pointed towards a study which shows the percentage increase in AIDS infections in those areas?
A study which combines the two would be fantastic. (Preferably, this study would not be sponsored by the Catholic Church.)
What you're asking for isn't that clear cut. There are lots of factors to consider. But I think theres a reasonably strong correlation between divorce rates and the de-valuing of sexual intimacy.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
I believe this was the point that I made to you.
Then I must be misreading you. Last time around you seemed to write about 4 days, not 11. Actually, you first claimed 2 days. Now, you admit, you were 550% off? Quite a difference, I would say.
There are many different forms of natural family planning. The method you are most likely thinking of is called the rhythm method. The Catholic church does not support that method. I forget the name of it,but it is 99.9% effective. This makes it the most effective form of birth control currently available.
Please, be so kind to back up this statement with a little link or two, else I'll have to laugh to hard, I am going to have a coronary.
It is the *most* effective method, but you forgot the name? Lemme help you out: it's either the pill or a sterilisation
Leakage doesn't guarantee pregnancy, but pregnancy does guarantee that leakage occurred. So this means that, throwing out all of my calculations, best case is there is still a 5% leakage rate. What is wrong with you people? This isn't hard shit. Use your heads.
Best case is still 100%, 5% is the *average*. You seem to be at odds with the most fundamental principles of statistics. As I wrote some posts back: the most determining factor for the success or failure of condoms (actually any method of contraception) is if you do it right or wrong.
In 20 sexually active years and a couple of different sex partners, I have *never* broke a condom, *none* ever slipped, *none* of my partners ever got pregnant or contracted a STD. Not too shabby, and certainly better than 99.9%. You lube up with sunmilk, you'll get a 50% failure rate.
Originally posted by BR
No, what got us into this mess to begin with was people unable to handle uncertainty and clinging to fictitious stories and letting themselves be controlled by the clergy for millenia.
Care to offer any supporting evidence?
I see it the other way around. People that are unable to logically reason truth from fiction assume everything is fiction.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Care to offer any supporting evidence?
I see it the other way around. People that are unable to logically reason truth from fiction assume everything is fiction.
I'm not afraid to say I don't know. You are. Sorry that bothers you.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
What you're asking for isn't that clear cut. There are lots of factors to consider. But I think theres a reasonably strong correlation between divorce rates and the de-valuing of sexual intimacy.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Care to offer any supporting evidence?
I think it has more to do with how easy it is to get a divorce and how easy it is for a woman to take monetarily fvck the man in the ass without lube.
Originally posted by Smircle
Then I must be misreading you. Last time around you seemed to write about 4 days, not 11. Actually, you first claimed 2 days. Now, you admit, you were 550% off? Quite a difference, I would say.
What I actually said is its not that simple. But if you factor in the number of menstrual cycles a women goes through while having unprotected sex with a fertile man, you will find that, on average, the number works out to be about 2 days out of the month.
Please, be so kind to back up this statement with a little link or two, else I'll have to laugh to hard, I am going to have a coronary.
It is the *most* effective method, but you forgot the name? Lemme help you out: it's either the pill or a sterilisation
Nothing new or revolutionary here. Heres a link,
http://www.ccli.org/nfp/effect2.shtml
Best case is still 100%, 5% is the *average*. You seem to be at odds with the most fundamental principles of statistics. As I wrote some posts back: the most determining factor for the success or failure of condoms (actually any method of contraception) is if you do it right or wrong.
In 20 sexually active years and a couple of different sex partners, I have *never* broke a condom, *none* ever slipped, *none* of my partners ever got pregnant or contracted a STD. Not too shabby, and certainly better than 99.9%. You lube up with sunmilk, you'll get a 50% failure rate.
Somehow I doubt that condom manufacturers include the users who got pregnant due to user error in their statistic. As for the 20 sexually active years, perhaps you have a medical problem.
Originally posted by BR
I'm not afraid to say I don't know. You are. Sorry that bothers you.
Assumption
Originally posted by BR
I think it has more to do with how easy it is to get a divorce and how easy it is for a woman to take monetarily fvck the man in the ass without lube.
The ease of getting a divorce today is directly proportional to the number of people who think that it is an acceptable solution.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Assumption
Correct one at that.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
defense
aluminium
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
The ease of getting a divorce today is directly proportional to the number of people who think that it is an acceptable solution.
No, the ease of getting a divorce is directly proportional to the number of divorce lawyers that stand to make big bucks whenever they get a good settlement for the witch that guts the man's life savings.
Originally posted by BR
Correct one at that.
Uninformed one
Originally posted by Harald
aluminium
Funny how the only reply he could muster to your incredibly poignant statement was a spelling correction and nothing else. Wait, it's not funny. It's sad.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Somehow I doubt that condom manufacturers include the users who got pregnant due to user error in their statistic. As for the 20 sexually active years, perhaps you have a medical problem.
Perhaps he just knows how to use a condom?
Obviously if you think having sperm riding up the sides of your condom and getting into your pubic hair during sex is normal, this knowledge escapes you.
You really think they differentiate between HOW people get pregnant?
"I got pregnant using condoms, but we really didn't know what the hell we were doing with it. I mean, there were instructions, but how are you supposed to figure those out? We had sex for hours with the same condom, and I guess all the sperm ended up working its way out of the condom."
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Uninformed one
Clairvoyant.