Play Sports

Believe me, I was thinking of the exact same thing you were and I was almost going to post about it. It certainly is a subject that deserves to be covered.

It's just not very logical.

Firstly, one could say that the harms which can come from sex are induced by social standards and politics. Most of the other harms come from STDs, most of which are fairly new to the world... especially the biggest one. I fail to see why the human needs of people should be denied just because of some tragic goings-on from recent human history. We really are failing as a species to adapt to a situation, and instead of finding solutions and ways around problems, we resort to flat-out prohibition, which as we see from modern times doesn't do much, if any, good in preventing the said atrocity. Take school shootings, for example. See the recent "War on Kids" post. We resort to banning all "weapons" in schools, even though that doesn't seem to stop school shootings when a determined student wants to commit one. We're resorting to irrational solutions that don't prevent anything, instead of solving the real issues, like "why is that some students *want* to do a school shooting*? Why not make their environment happier so they won't want to do this?

Similarly, Antis resort to banning all child sex instead of working to create a safer environment where children can have sex with reduced harms involved. This is just lazy planning, and these evil Neo-Christians would rather just prohibit a basic human instinct instead of putting any effort into solving a problem.

I am also strongly convinced that a little girl who gets pregnant is probably not in severe danger. Yes, she will be in more danger than a woman, but any "negative child pregnancies" are clearly propaganda used or created by Antis to further their Police State A-Sexual religion. No, I'm not saying no harm can come to a little girl who is pregnant. I'm just saying those harms are way over exaggerated. There's even a famous case (I don't have the link) from about 50 years ago of a FIVE YEAR OLD GIRL who became pregnant and gave birth just fine to a healthy baby. If the harms were so obvious and inevitable, why in this one known rare case did everything work out? That sounds like a HUGE coincidence when Antis would claim it's like 85% sure a pregnant little girl will suffer horrible consequences. And this was a *5* year old girl, at that.

Now... the main point I was going to make. Many, or event most things in life can have very bad consequences if not handled responsibly. What if a child plays sports? Does gymnastics? They could fall and break their leg, or worse. What if they take too much cough medicine for their cold? Or what if their parent accidentally gives them too much Ridilan for their A.D.D.? The consequences could be astronomical. Same with driving in a car, or bike riding. Or what if a child goes over to a friend's house, and something bad happens to them? What if you're a student in China and some psycho comes into your school and shoots all the kids dead? This type of list just goes on and on.

In this case, we're talking about banning one of the most basic and important human instincts: The sex drive. Research shows that certain mammals, including the ones closest to us, will go insane if they don't get sex, and the truth is we humans are probably the most sensitive of the mammal species.

The harms which can come from sex are overly distorted to fit political agendas. Usually these harms come from having too many partners, or not using protection.

Baldur also covered it well.

However, Christian Extremists will continue to believe what they want just because they believe a retard named St. Paul said it's true.