Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Disingenuity at its "finest." It's already been discussed that we're talking about safer sex -- this includes blood tests and protection. If done right, STDs will not be a factor.

Yes, how dare he present his side of the issue!!!
Get the ropes!

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

... did you even read what the link was? He was either being a smart-arse, or just plain annoying.

_________________
CLOCK

Many (possibly most) STDs can't be tested for, though...

_________________

Read it. It was about STDs... Seems like a VERY logical reason to promote abstinence... It's pretty hard to get an STD without the S, isn't it?

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Most can, and using contraception lowers the risk rate even further. If you're not going to have sex because there's a teeny tiny chance you may get a disease, you may as well not ride in cars, play sports, or go on holidays.

_________________
CLOCK

It's not logical, see the above post. Sexually Transmitted Diseases have already been dealth with and dismissed. Just because he provided a link to describing what they are doesn't suddenly make it valid again.

_________________
CLOCK

Oh, really? Can you bring up a cite for that? There are tests that can catch chlymidia, gonorrhea, HIV, hepatitis, herpes, and syphilis. What is it that can't be tested for?

For the love of God, please stop double posting!!!! The Edit button will suffice..

Anyways, if you think STD testing is infallible, I want to buy some smoke from you..

Just because someone tests negative DOES NOT mean that they do not have the STD...

Not all contraception reduces the risk of STDs, either... Birth Control Pills and Diaphragms are good examples of this. Even condoms only reduce the risk..

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

You're saying stuff and not proving it. I went and looked all of those up individually and found that each of those could be tested for, and haven't found one yet that couldn't be. You seem to just be repeating hearsay.

Did you look up the STDs on that list? There were about 30 of them on there, and you looked up... six?

_________________

I didn't actually click your list since posting a link to something that had already been discussed, disingenuously labelled as "proof," looked more like trolling than sincere argument to me.

Besides, I can clearly see how much effort you're putting into this argument. "Look up 30 diseases for me since I think one of them might be untestable. No, I have no evidence for this. No, I didn't look for myself. But I heard it somewhere."

So, here's everything on your list that I didn't already mention.

Bacterial

* Chancroid (Haemophilus ducreyi) - Strikes less than 1/2,000,000. Curable. Testability not mentioned in wiki article.
* Donovanosis (Granuloma inguinale or Calymmatobacterium granulomatis) - Prevented by safe sex. Curable.
* Non-gonococcal urethritis (NGU) (Ureaplasma urealyticum or Mycoplasma hominis) - Curable.

Parasites

* Pubic lice a.k.a "crabs"(Phthirius pubis) - Easily killed.
* Scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) - Easily killed.

Fungal

* Candidiasis - Not an STD

Protozoal

* Amoebiasis (Entamoeba histolytica) - Cured by antibiotics.
* Giardiasis (Giardia lamblia) - Cured by antibiotics.
* Trichomoniasis (Trichomonas vaginalis) - Prevented by condoms, couldn't find anything about testibility.

Clearly, any STD that can be cleared up by a course of antibiotics or prevented by use of condoms isn't worth even needing to find a test for, so I didn't bother looking to see if they're testible. I struck out some since they were just other names for things I already mentioned.

So, um. You're totally wrong, and you made me waste a load of time on your incorrect hearsay and lazy debating. Good going.

I didn't mean to waste your time, but just because a test tell you whether you do have it doesn't mean it will catch whether you don't (often times it doesn't). And safe sex will not prevent anything, just reduce the risk for (SOME) STIs.

_________________

The rate of false negatives is insignificantly small, and to prove otherwise, I'd like you to bring a cite and statistic this time. Counting "safe sex" as including blood tests and barrier contraception, it looks like I've just proven that you can avoid catching any incurable diseases.

That's absolute rubbish. Where are you pulling all this out of? Put the rabbit back in the hat, dear.

_________________
CLOCK

I can provide a counter example, but it's hardly any of your business.. Let's just say that her boyfriend tested negative for HPV, AND they ALWAYS used condoms...

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

I really don't think second hand anecdotal evidence counts for much. You've no idea of the "full story".

_________________
CLOCK

I was getting info from places other than the internet, but some the info may be on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safer_sex (I haven't read the article yet. What I said was-
-if an std test is positive, it means you DO have the disease, but if it's negative it does not necessarily mean you don't have it
-a condom does not prevent but reduces by 79-86%, but doesn't protect at all against things like HPV

_________________

The HPV thing IS factual. I'll give you that one.

Fortunately, it seems that the body eventually becomes immune to its effects and clears the virus, usually over the course of a year. Nonetheless, it is still a factor.

A big problem with that is that it's something they found AFTER they made the initial claim, which probably wasn't based on anything at all. It's still not enough to suggest abstainance is the healthiest state of being.

_________________
CLOCK

No, actually I've known about HPV for quite some time.. It's hard not to when a close friend has it, and I'm quite sure she'd tell you abstainance is quite healthy.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

But yeah, that's born out of personal bias rather than looking at the full picture and coming to a conclusion. Accidents happen and I doubt you know the full story with her.

_________________
CLOCK

ummm, she was my neighbor for a year and roommate for 2 years (plus, I've known her since middle school)... I know more about her than I know about my fiance, maybe even myself!

The details you need to know are as I put them out earlier..

Also, umm, personal bias DOES play into my thoughts on this, just as yours does. If you did not find sex pleasurable, then you probably wouldn't think abstainance was such a bad idea..

Anyways, like I said, I can't really take a side in this. I DO think abstainance is a good idea, but, I'm in no position to tell anyone ANYTHING about abstaining...

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

I would think of it in that way if i was having sex and i wasnt married, but once you're married its romantic and having a child must be the most amazing thing in the world...knowing that you've created a life.


haha...too true...

_________________

BURN ALMIGHTY! 200 POINTS!

But seriously, folks, as far as contraceptives go, I have no problem with them. If you want to have sex before marrige, I think it's fine, and if not, that's fine too. If you really do love somebody, then it really shouldn't matter what you do.

_________________

That wasn't a "Burn Almighty". If that's a "Burn Almighty", then "I am rubber, you and glue" has worked it's way to number one come back of all time.

_________________
CLOCK

YOUR MOM's rubber and glue!
I think that's the number 2 comeback of all time...

_________________

Well, it was a joke, but whatever. Erm... toastpaint.

_________________

Well I would never marry anyone I haven't had sex with. Sexual compatability factors greatly in relationships in my opinion.

_________________

*takes deep, slow, breaths*

I...I...I have to agree with Marshmallow Roast. I could never accept the thought of "It" being something warming or loving. I see "It" as being something that only deystroys a Maraige, instead of helping.

But that's on the most basic scale. But as for this subject, I reamain undecieded.

Infact, I see "It" as a whole being something that I remain undecieded.

So I suppose my verdict is, unknown. So far. I apologize is I wasn't able to add more opinion.