Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

There's a difference between helping prevent STIs and pregnancy and and encouraging sex.

sex classes should promote ejaculating on the females face, none of this letting loose in the goose shit

Yay! Now my children can get protected sex!

Hooray for Teenage mothers! :D

At 9/18/10 03:04 PM, iateamexican wrote: Good thing you took into account the religious and ethical beliefs of millions of people in western culture.

You'd look as if you put about 3 minutes of thought into this and every thread you make if you hadn't.

It is entirely voluntary so nobody is forcing the people who have a problem with such a thing to take them. Peoples religious and ethical beliefs should not be taken into concern over things such as this as they are a choice. The ones who have a problem with it could forbid their kids to get the condoms and spank the hell out of the child if he disobeys.

Do you not agree?

The problem is lack of education.

At 9/18/10 03:11 PM, TheGrim wrote: Well, you have to think about this: anyone on the NG forums who has more than 200 posts has not had sex. Anyone over 5,000 posts will NOT have sex. I'm gonna abstain...

Tell me my sexual fate!!

i didn't use protection

and now i have this baby i need to take care of

TAKE NOTE, KIDS.

I think there are plenty enough condoms.

At 9/18/10 02:53 PM, GiantDouche wrote:

At 9/18/10 02:48 PM, Cootie wrote: Nearly every teen has sex. Nearly every fucking one if them.

95% of this website's community begs to differ.

I lol'd.

Hell yeah. Less pregnancies and STD's for all!

At 9/18/10 04:50 PM, EpicFail wrote: I think there are plenty enough condoms.

They aren't easy enough to get is the problem. Some teens are embarrassed to buy them and some just don't have the means to get them weather that be funds or the ability to get to the store without their mother driving them. It is about ease of getting them.

At 9/18/10 04:52 PM, Cootie wrote:
They aren't easy enough to get is the problem. Some teens are embarrassed to buy them and some just don't have the means to get them weather that be funds or the ability to get to the store without their mother driving them. It is about ease of getting them.

If you're too scared to buy them, you're not ready to have sex yet.

But, I don't.

The thought of being exposed to someone disgusts me. I'd be completely defenseless, unable to protect myself.

No thanks.

I agree, plus we can fill them up with water and chuck them at each other.

At 9/18/10 02:48 PM, Cootie wrote: So, why shouldn't we make it easier for them to get condoms.

Maybe it's different in other places, but it's plenty easy to get condoms right now. Most Walgreens and other larger drug stores have like an entire isle devoted to them, and there's not an age limit or anything.

They are cheap to make, and the condom companies will still make money off of those who want special condoms (ribbed and whatnot).

Special condoms make my willy feel fancy.
But I'm all for getting them for free. :3

At 9/18/10 04:45 PM, Cootie wrote: Peoples religious and ethical beliefs should not be taken into concern over things such as this as they are a choice.

People beliefs should be taken into concern in any action you take, even if that action is hypothetical, you wouldn't get an accurate idea of what would happen if you didn't take them into concern - it's simply impossible not to.
If you force children to take the condoms, their parents will be outraged, if you suggest the children use condoms, the parents will be outraged, if you stare at one of the parents long enough to transport your thoughts via telepathy into their mind, they will be outraged. You can't get around that, attempting to not take such things in concern is the best way to get an idea shot down as fast as possible.

At 9/18/10 04:54 PM, RubberTrucky wrote:

At 9/18/10 04:52 PM, Cootie wrote:
They aren't easy enough to get is the problem. Some teens are embarrassed to buy them and some just don't have the means to get them weather that be funds or the ability to get to the store without their mother driving them. It is about ease of getting them.

If you're too scared to buy them, you're not ready to have sex yet.

I agree. But some people have sex before they are ready.

At 9/18/10 04:55 PM, ZOMGALIENS wrote: I agree, plus we can fill them up with water and chuck them at each other.

Better yet, fill it up with a little yogurt and leave it someone so others may see and think it is full of jizzle. Preferably places somewhere old people tend to hang out.

At 9/18/10 04:56 PM, iateamexican wrote:

At 9/18/10 04:45 PM, Cootie wrote: Peoples religious and ethical beliefs should not be taken into concern over things such as this as they are a choice.

People beliefs should be taken into concern in any action you take, even if that action is hypothetical, you wouldn't get an accurate idea of what would happen if you didn't take them into concern - it's simply impossible not to.
If you force children to take the condoms, their parents will be outraged, if you suggest the children use condoms, the parents will be outraged, if you stare at one of the parents long enough to transport your thoughts via telepathy into their mind, they will be outraged. You can't get around that, attempting to not take such things in concern is the best way to get an idea shot down as fast as possible.

Then I guess the parents will just be outraged. It is kind of silly if you ask me since someone isn't forcing the child to take the damn things. It is like being pissed off that a show you do not like is on TV when you could just not watch it. Stupidity. The beliefs of some should not be taken into account when something is optional. Because it is a choice and those who don't believe it is right don't have to do it and those who want to do it can. It is a pretty good system... called "choice".

I hate when people try to push their beliefs on others.

I am not angry at you. Just angry at people who get outraged.

At 9/18/10 05:01 PM, Cootie wrote: Then I guess the parents will just be outraged. It is kind of silly if you ask me since someone isn't forcing the child to take the damn things. It is like being pissed off that a show you do not like is on TV when you could just not watch it. Stupidity. The beliefs of some should not be taken into account when something is optional. Because it is a choice and those who don't believe it is right don't have to do it and those who want to do it can. It is a pretty good system... called "choice".

I hate when people try to push their beliefs on others.

I wouldn't have thought anyone would like anyone else to force different beliefs to their own down their throat, but it's a fact of life. With any given thing, someone is always going to complain about it. The subject of condoms/pro life/religion/ect. is a particularly hazardous minefield and not one to be taken lightly in any way, it's probably one of the most debated subjects in human history, but I don't exactly have any figures. My point is, not taking the political views of someone into context is a bad idea, not taking the religious beliefs of someone into context is a death sentence.

I wasn't even sure how to respond, so my emotes will tell the story:

D':
O:

I always buy condoms from the gas station near my high school. I think the people that work there have gotten so used to it that when I don't buy condoms they look at me funny.

At 9/18/10 04:57 PM, Cootie wrote:
I agree. But some people have sex before they are ready.

That's why we should provide condoms, but discourage having sex. Essentially, abstinence is the only safe way. We should provide condoms, like I said. But providing them for free and everywhere does send the message that sex is a trivial thing and encourages to engage in these activities.

At 9/18/10 02:53 PM, Cootie wrote:

At 9/18/10 02:52 PM, FatJoe214 wrote: So I can get some rubbers in my McDonald's Big Kid's Meal! Yay!!!! Even better we should fly planes and drop loads of condoms.

Better yet, a rocket ship that flies many miles up in the air and explodes causing condoms to rain down upon the Earth.

Wouldn't condoms being exposed to fire cause them to break easier?

At 9/18/10 07:19 PM, RubberTrucky wrote:

At 9/18/10 04:57 PM, Cootie wrote:
I agree. But some people have sex before they are ready.

That's why we should provide condoms, but discourage having sex. Essentially, abstinence is the only safe way. We should provide condoms, like I said. But providing them for free and everywhere does send the message that sex is a trivial thing and encourages to engage in these activities.

Possibly. But the majority of people in the world do have sex in their teen years. In the USA it is an overwhelming amount. Telling kids not to have sex has never and will never work. We just have to make sure that when they do have sex they at least wear a condom. The number is so high that giving out condoms would hardly even make it higher, but giving out condoms would defiantly slow the teen pregnancy rate.

At 9/18/10 02:53 PM, Kanon wrote: Probably be a good idea but I bet the Catholics will have a shit fit about this.

You bet they are!

At 9/18/10 08:09 PM, Cootie wrote: Telling kids not to have sex has never and will never work.

Probably not, but I think peer pressure and the openness of sex and it's status in pop culture does have a dramatic impact on today's youth. It's what causes girls to suck guys off for a bacardi and so on.

We just have to make sure that when they do have sex they at least wear a condom.

I agree with this.

The number is so high that giving out condoms would hardly even make it higher,

I don't think inreality that much teens have unsafe sex.

but giving out condoms would defiantly slow the teen pregnancy rate.

But you still push in the direction of "Sex is okay, here have a bunch of condoms and go fuck someone." Didactically it still is not good if you want to instill sexual moral. Meh, you could go with "My daughter just had sex with 3 guys at the same time, but at least she used condoms." kind of morality.

At 9/18/10 02:48 PM, Cootie wrote:

thoughts?

In England, under 19's have access to free condoms.

At 9/18/10 02:55 PM, Cootie wrote: I looked at the NG picture thread and was quite surprised on how the general population looked. To my surprise they didn't look as though they belonged in a Revenge of The Nerds remake.

Yes, people who post pictures of themselves on the internet generally have good self esteem and are fairly good looking. The vast majority of teenagers don't have sex regularly or have never had sex. Your friends who bragged constantly about getting laid all the time as freshmen are full of it. College though, that's a different story.

A lot of your facts are wrong but the idea you propose (even though it's been proposed before) is a good one. Some people think that if this were to happen, it would promote having sex, while others argue that it doesn't influence sex in a negative or positive way. I guess we'll see what happens in the future.