by LauraLoo
See what happens when a baby-faced actor (portraying himself as a 15-year-old virgin in luv) tries to buy condoms through other pharmacy customers. ABC’s John Quiñones asks the question, “What Would You Do?”
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1K1UTLQa3E[/youtube]
Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.
[HT: ABC’s WWYD]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Loved the 73 year old woman! Good for her and the others who said no :-)
The guy in the red and black sweatshirt, is that James Taylor? : P
Too embarrassed to be “responsible?” Good grief.
Glad so many said no!
I don’t much like this show. It’s cringe-worthy in the Candid Camera style, plus it most often searches under rocks for prejudice. We wouldn’t want them at a family barbecue.
This segment is a bit more useful.
Wouldn’t you rather he buy condoms than get his hypothetical girlfriend pregnant and then have an abortion? Being anti-abortion and anti-contraceptives is like living in a fairytale.
Derrr, it is living in a fairytale to believe that condoms are so effective at preventing pregnancy and abortion. Not to mention STD’s, and broken hearts.
Let teen-agers have condoms when they have drill sargeants teach them hand-to-hand combat. They just get into fights anyway, so why not make it safer for them? Oh, they might mis-use this knowledge? Never mind.
Thank goodness a couple people tried to talk this kid out of sex. They are the wise ones.
If this were a real scenario, did the idiots who bought the kid some condoms stop to think? A 15-year-old is a minor. He doesn’t want his mommy to know what he’s doing, but in reality, his mommy is legally responsible for his actions until he reaches adulthood. Oh, but if his little girlfriend gets pregnant, that’s ok, right, because she can always go for an abortion, piece of cake. Well, that just solves everything, doesn’t it?
The first guy in the video who tried to talk junior out of the condoms said that fathering a child is a big deal. Oh, but doesn’t he *know?* We have “solved” junior’s little problem with abortion and STD treatment! Junior doesn’t have to actually BE a father to a child if he helps to create one! He can just get mommy (or maybe the government!!!!!!!) to pay for little chicky girlfriend’s simple, easy abortion.
Ever wonder if the counsel of some idiot adults might be different if abortion weren’t legal?
“if his little girlfriend gets pregnant,” – so you’re assuming she can’t think or act for herself?
“We have “solved” junior’s little problem with abortion and STD treatment” – yes, we have solved many peoples’ problems with abortion and STD treatment. Just like we’ve solved small pox, broken bones and some cancers. You know, the stuff that happens in the reality of lives being lived.
“little chicky girlfriend’s” – again with the demeaning of women. Perhaps if she was a regular church-goer who kept her legs closed until she got married some time later you’d ‘approve’ of her?
Ever wonder if the counsel of some idiot adults might be different if creation-based home-schooling weren’t legal?
“if his little girlfriend gets pregnant,” – so you’re assuming she can’t think or act for herself?
I’m saying a 15 year old CHILD is irresponsible and has ZERO business participating in sexual intercourse. Happy?
We have “solved” junior’s little problem with abortion and STD treatment” – yes, we have solved many peoples’ problems with abortion and STD treatment. Just like we’ve solved small pox, broken bones and some cancers. You know, the stuff that happens in the reality of lives being lived.
Ah, now abortion cures people of pregnancy? LOL. Good one, “reality.”
“little chicky girlfriend’s” – again with the demeaning of women. Perhaps if she was a regular church-goer who kept her legs closed until she got married some time later you’d ‘approve’ of her?
She’s not a woman. She’s a hypothetical child with a boyfriend too immature to even buy his own condoms because he’s afraid his mom will catch him. That’s just so mature. I’m sure they’re both so ready for sex, since they can’t even make a decision to be bold enough to buy their own birth control.
Ever wonder if the counsel of some idiot adults might be different if creation-based home-schooling weren’t legal?
Why don’t you ask the Germans?
“Derrr, it is living in a fairytale to believe that condoms are so effective at preventing pregnancy and abortion. Not to mention STD’s, and broken hearts.”
So let “nature” take its course and when junior impregnates his girlfriend, it will be a truely blessed event. Teen parenting is just so awesome. So are STD’s. And btw, any store clerk who lectures any customer on ANYTHING should be fired. But let’s keep teens away from birth control. Is there any question as to why the highest rates of teen pregnancy are in bible belt states that teach abstinence only?
“According to new statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, teenage mothers account for as many as one in 17 babies born in the South, ABC News reports.”
http://www.okmagazine.com/2010/10/southern-states-report-highest-teenage-pregnancy-rate/
Isn’t that just great!
“Thank goodness a couple people tried to talk this kid out of sex. They are the wise ones.”
Oh right, the kid will be following the straight and narrow. LOL. (I want to a parochial high school back in the early 60’s and abstinence teachings, under the threat of mortal sin, so didn’t work.)
BTW, is there a legal age limit for purchasing condoms? If not, what the kid purchases is nobody’s business.
That folks here support unprotected sex is astounding.
Wow, you anti-choicers really love making comparisons to Nazi Germany… a little too obsessed, maybe?
“I’m saying a 15 year old CHILD is irresponsible and has ZERO business participating in sexual intercourse. Happy?” – no, your use of the term ‘little girlfriend’ was derogatory.
“Ah, now abortion cures people of pregnancy? LOL. Good one, “reality.” – show me where I said ‘cure’. I said ‘solved’.
“She’s not a woman” – apart from the fact that this scenario is totally unreal, we have no idea of the actual age or level of maturity of the ‘girlfriend’.
“I’m sure they’re both so ready for sex, since they can’t even make a decision to be bold enough to buy their own birth control” – so you don’t think that might be due to the fear factor generated by self-righteous, archaic people who would attempt to ‘shame’ them based on their own biases?
It’s interesting that the only one who actually said he was doing the wrong thing was the life-long catholic.
the next scenario was worse. an 18 year old girl was asking women to buy Plan B for her. sad. sad. sad. you can watch the whole show at the WWYD website.
Hello CC, Reality and Derr… if you bought this boy condoms and one broke and he got an STD would you reimburse his mother for the cost of the medication needed to cure him (if its something curable and not Herpes or HIV)? I mean, you feel the need to overrule her role in her son’s life. Nobody is going to look out for a kid’s best interests more than mom and dad. If we don’t want our kids having sex as teens its not because we are “anti-sex” (HELLO, if we got pregnant in the first place we are not against sex) or because we don’t want our kids to have fun but because we realize the seriousness of sex and the potential consequences of sex without commitment and fidelity in marriage. Any wise person would counsel this boy to talk to his mother. It is never wise to go behind a parent’s back. After all if he gets a disease or becomes a dad at 15 guess who is going to be on the hook emotionally and financially to handle the situation? The parents of this boy! Not the idiots buying this boy condoms!
Who you love at 15 is not normally going to be your partner for life. I had a boyfriend at 17 who I thought was so wonderful. Now I look back and gag that I ever locked lips with such a loser! He is a multiple DUI offender who is also a womanizer. I can imagine he has a lot of diseases. Blech. He tried so hard to get me into bed and I almost caved so many times. Boy am I GLAD I didn’t give him my virginity! At 17 you don’t have the maturity to gain a little foresight as your hormones rage. Even more so at 15. No business having sex at those ages!
if you didn’t buy this boy condoms and he got an STD (because we all know he would still have sex) would you reimburse his mother for the cost of the medication needed to cure him?
I mean, you feel the need to overrule her son’s life?
“If we don’t want our kids having sex as teens its not because we are “anti-sex” – no, it’s because you believe they should be about 25 and married.
“the potential consequences of sex without commitment and fidelity in marriage” – ah, that again. Your rules huh.
if he gets a disease or becomes a dad at 15 guess who is going to be on the hook emotionally and financially to handle the situation? The parents of this boy! Not the idiots who caused him to have unprotected sex!
“Who you love at 15 is not normally going to be your partner for life. I had a boyfriend at 17 who I thought was so wonderful. Now I look back and gag that I ever locked lips with such a loser!” – and I got married at 21, was married for over 20 years and feel the same way about that person as you feel about your 17 year old.
“Boy am I GLAD I didn’t give him my virginity” – ah, so you were capable of making a choice, good for you. So can others.
Good, if he wants to make that choice Reality, let him buy his own condoms.
These “adults” who will buy teens condoms, alcohol, porn, drugs and cigs are really cool to teens until you grow up and realize what total idiots and predators most of them are. Adults who will buy this stuff for kids have never emotionally matured past that teen stage themselves and have the need to be buddies with kids rather than caring mentors.
Adults supporting and enabling 15 year olds to have sex. Nice.
“Adults supporting and enabling 15 year olds to have sex. Nice.” – no, adults assisting in the reduction of risk of something the 15 year olds will do anyway.
Don’t buy alcohol for them, can’t drink.
Don’t buy porn for them, can’t look.
Don’t buy drugs for them, can’t get high.
Don’t buy cigs for them, can’t smoke.
Don’t buy condoms for them, uh oh.
When I was a teen, I made the decision not to have sex and to abstain. Read a bunch of books, talked to people, and listened in my family life courses and came to the conclusion that it would not be sensible and that I was not ready for the consequences. My parents didn’t even know what I had been considering until I told them about the choice I had made, and they thought it was a smart choice. But that’s me, that’s my personality (cautious to a fault) and not every person is like that. Some teens are impulsive and don’t think–and though I really wish they wouldn’t I’m not naive enough to believe they won’t. So I’d rather they at least had some protection.
All that being said, there’s no reason why he can’t buy his own condoms. There’s no age limit on who can purchase.
“I’m saying a 15 year old CHILD is irresponsible and has ZERO business participating in sexual intercourse. Happy?” – no, your use of the term ‘little girlfriend’ was derogatory.
Well, as you know, I don’t tailor my posts to please you. By the way, I also called the kid “junior.” I guess it’s ok though because he’s male. I happen to feel that in the past, when you called me “Kelperson” and “Kellady” that it was meant in a derogatory manner. But because it’s you, reality, I let it go. You can’t expect respect from someone who believes abortion is a good solution to pregnancy and that only religious “idiots” would even think of telling a 15 year old child to please consider NOT having sex at this time.
Solves? Abortion solves pregnancy? Is pregnancy now a puzzle or a riddle to be solved? You compared pregnancy to cancer. I think we’re aware of what you meant.
So, if the girlfriend were 18 and the boyfriend 15, that would be cool with you. Got it. I mean, why worry about statutory rape? Like the one slimy guy in the video said, “He’s gettin’ laid.”
so you don’t think that might be due to the fear factor generated by self-righteous, archaic people who would attempt to ‘shame’ them based on their own biases?
No, I think it was due to the fear of the parental factor. Unless you consider a minor’s parents to be “self-righteous, archaic” people who would dare to try and dissuade their child from having sex at age 15. And you say “their own biases” as if you have none. That’s hilarious! LOL
As for the religious woman, no, the first guy spent a very long time trying to talk this boy out of sex. He tried to get him to consider the consequences. But I guess it’s only shameful and archaic when you admit to being “religious.”
Golly, you do have some hangups about religious people, don’tcha?
There is a difference between terms like ‘Kelperson’ and ‘Kellady’ (person because I was not assuming your gender, lady because you advised me of your gender – and never intended as derogatory, I’m not yor bro ken) and words like ‘little girlfriend’ and “little chicky girlfriend’.
You can’t expect respect from someone who believes that everyone should live by their particular codes and choices.
Who was it that said “We have “solved” junior’s little problem”?
“You compared pregnancy to cancer. I think we’re aware of what you meant.” – again, who was it that said “We have “solved” junior’s little problem with abortion and STD treatment“? Yet another example of your attempted pernicious extrapolations. And further – “we have no idea of the actual age or level of maturity of the ‘girlfriend’.”
“He tried to get him to consider the consequences” – yes, he tried to provide information and education. Not some self-righteous gasping of ‘no, No, NO!” Because he probably realised that that doesn’t work.
“But I guess it’s only shameful and archaic when you admit to being “religious.” – well that’s not the only one but its a biggie.
“hangups about religious people” – ROFL, ROFL, oh my aching sides.
Sydney 8:00 pm – well said.
There is a difference between terms like ‘Kelperson’ and ‘Kellady’ (person because I was not assuming your gender, lady because you advised me of your gender – and never intended as derogatory, I’m not yor bro ken) and words like ‘little girlfriend’ and “little chicky girlfriend’.
How do you know I was intending them to be derogatory? How do I know your calling me names other than my moniker was not intended to be derogatory? I don’t believe anything you say is ever meant to be respectful.
You can’t expect respect from someone who believes that everyone should live by their particular codes and choices.
I’d just really like it if we as a society didn’t kill preborn humans. Other than that, have at it. I may not “approve” (just like you don’t approve of my choice of lifestyle), but I don’t have to “approve” your lifestyle. As long as you’re not killing off humans or inflicting suffering on others, hey, you’re gonna do what you’re gonna do. But we’re talking about a child here, with parents who have to be legally responsible for this child. We’re not talking about consenting adults here in this video.
I used the term “solved” because that is what pro-choicers believe. You believe that abortion and STD treatment are just fine and dandy for dealing with children having sex. I believe self-control (oh, LOL, I know, WHUT? What’s that? I never heard of that) is a better alternative than buying some kid and his kid girlfriend too chicken to enter the store (so the story goes) a box of condoms.
There were a lot who refused to buy him condoms. A female teacher, a grown man – why have you chosen to rag on the “religious” woman? Oh, that’s right. Because of your hangups about religious people. (ROFLROFL oh my aching sides.)
‘Person’ and ‘lady’ compared with ‘little chicky’, uh huh.
I’d just really like it if we as a society didn’t suffer absolutists.
“but I don’t have to “approve” your lifestyle” – certainly not, but what gives you the right to try to change it or restrict it.
“I believe self-control … is a better alternative” – me too, but unneccessary self-denial isn’t.
It is obvious why a teacher wouldn’t buy them for him. The man offered to buy them elsewhere as he didn’t want to be seen purchasing them in that pharmacy either. Gee, I wonder if that gives us more of a clue as to why the young man didn’t want to.
It’s the hang-ups of the religious which cause issues.
Reality, in my opinion, a hypothetical 15 year old girl too chicken to go in with her 15 year old boyfriend and buy condoms is exactly what I said she is. I love how you strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. (Oh, did I just give a Biblical reference? Tsk tsk, naughty, religious old me, how very archaic of me.)
Unnecessary self-denial is a bad thing? Yeah, I guess if those 15 y.o.’s don’t have sex, they’ll be denying themselves a totally awesome experience, sneaking around and lying to their parents so they can get in each other’s pants.
Pro-lifers seek to restrict the taking of innocent human life.
Why is it “obvious” why a teacher wouldn’t buy them for him? She wasn’t HIS teacher. She was A teacher. For all we know, she might have taught sex ed. Why not buy them for him? Hmm? And I wasn’t talking about the greasy, creepy guy (well, I thought he was). I was talking about the first guy who tried to talk the kid out of it. He, the teacher, and the college professor – oh, wait, I mean “religious, archaic lady” – all refused.
‘Person’ and ‘lady’ compared with ‘little chicky’, uh huh
The fact remains that you deliberately disrespected me by using those terms in addition to my moniker. Maybe you should take the plank out of your own eye first (oh, shoot, another Biblical reference).
“so you don’t think that might be due to the fear factor generated by self-righteous, archaic people who would attempt to ‘shame’ them based on their own biases?”
Heaven FORBID immature teenagers (who are too embarassed to buy condoms, but are SO ready for sex) feel any sort of societal impediments to a rolicking sex life. I like that you aren’t even pretending anymore that you think teen sex is something to be discouraged. In your world teenagers shouldn’t have sex, but if you try to discourage them, you’re judging them and making them feel shame and further you have some sort of obligation to buy the shy little tot condoms. There’s a big difference between accepting that some teenagers will make a bad decision no matter what and just throwing in the towel on trying to discourage it.
I don’t know anyone who would think ‘little chicky girlfriend’ means his girlfriend is chicken about something. It was derisory.
“strain out a gnat but swallow a camel” – what, you mean like “You compared pregnancy to cancer. I think we’re aware of what you meant.”
“naughty, religious old me, how very archaic of me” – yeah, like, so totally :-)
“Pro-lifers seek to restrict the taking of innocent human life.” – if only it was that straight forward.
“She was A teacher” – you know as well as I do that that is all it takes. “For all we know, she might have taught sex ed.” – that would make no difference. “Why not buy them for him? Hmm?” – again, you know as well as I do.
“you deliberately disrespected me” – actually no, they were more aligned with ‘yo, dude’ or similar terms of friendly banter. But if you’re so sensitive and defensive, I won’t do it again.
Can’t be worse than a plank across the eyes totally obscuring one’s vision.
Analyzing…….
The pharmacists are so constrained by HIPAA regs these days…….. the probability of the pharmacist going to the kids mom is NIL.
If an actual prospective female sex partner of teen years could see the method by which her studly 15 year old boyfriend sought to obtain a condom……. being too afraid to purchase it himself…. would it increase the attraction factor?
Tag this great video to the May 9th WSJ article about the pills influence on the selection of sex partners.
Thinks that make you say HMMMMMMMMMMM
She was A teacher” – you know as well as I do that that is all it takes. “For all we know, she might have taught sex ed.” – that would make no difference. “Why not buy them for him? Hmm?” – again, you know as well as I do.
If I knew what you were talking about, I wouldn’t have asked you about it.
No, “Chicky” does not mean “chicken.”
Straining out a gnat: harping on my use of the term “chicky.” Swallowing a camel: Advocating that the kids go ahead and have sex (and abort if pregnancy occurs, naturally) so they can avoid “unnecessary self-denial” and anything resembling “archaic” religion.
I’m done with this conversation now. It has wasted enough of my valuable time.
It’s interesting that the only one who actually said he was doing the wrong thing was the life-long catholic.
Uh, well, I’m not Catholic or even very religious and I would tell this young person they should at least think twice about engaging in sexual activity at such a young age.
Funny how “anti-choicers” are said to be so intolerant, yet the PC’ers here have no qualms about attacking someone’s faith, even when religion isn’t even mentioned.
That “life long Catholic” was also a college professor. But I guess that doesn’t matter, because adherence to religion = ignorance in the eyes of an anti-lifer.
In reply to Reality @ 10:31pm
Check out the age of consent laws. By law, a 15 year old child cannot consent to sex. You are willing to buy him condoms in order that he break the law. Charming. Don’t forget to buy him some beer for before and the cigs for after. I would tell you to give him some cash for gas so he can be romantic in the back seat but he’s not even old enough to drive yet for crying out loud! But hey, what does it matter. You think we should give the utmost respect to a law that kill humans as you disregard the ones you want.
Get some friends your own age and stop enabling children to make poor choices. Jeesh.
Yeah, I guess if those 15 y.o.’s don’t have sex, they’ll be denying themselves a totally awesome experience, sneaking around and lying to their parents so they can get in each other’s pants.
And for crummy sex, no less.
But our societal mantra is quantity not quality! Sex in as great quantities from as early an age as we can legitimize. 15? No problem!
She was A teacher” – you know as well as I do that that is all it takes. “For all we know, she might have taught sex ed.” – that would make no difference. “Why not buy them for him? Hmm?” – again, you know as well as I do.
Actually, I’ve known a few teachers who would likely have made the purchase, as sad as that may be. What is it about her career that makes you feel she wouldn’t make the purchase? It isn’t even as though she works with kids daily-she’s a professor. Just curious. Is it her level of education? Perhaps you are of the mindset that highly educated individuals should discourage teen sex? I am here to inform you that plenty of quite well-educated persons encourage and even facilitate teenagers engaging in all sorts of risky behavior, sex included. Some (like the teacher spotlighted on Jill’s blog a little while back) even engage in said behavior with teens. Some go so far as to try covering up said behavior by paying for abortions. Some simply try to “aid” the teens by helping them procure abortions (giving a ride, providing a cover story for parents, etc). But that’s probably just my paranoid self eh?
Kel, “If I knew what you were talking about, I wouldn’t have asked you about it.” – unless you have been living under a rock, you would be aware that teachers are very susceptible to all sorts of allegations and campaigns against them on the flimsiest of grounds in regards to their behavior. If a female teacher purchased condoms for a 15 year old male her job would be at great risk.
“Advocating that the kids go ahead and have sex” – untrue. All I said was that they would most likely have sex anyway and that it would be better if they had a means of reducing risk.
“I’m done with this conversation now. It has wasted enough of my valuable time.” – another lost battle eh, why do you persist.
“adherence to religion = ignorance in the eyes of an anti-lifer” – 1. I’m not an anti-lifer. 2. I’m atheist. 3. yes adherence to religion does require ignoring scientific facts and reality.
phillymiss, “yet the PC’ers here have no qualms about attacking someone’s faith, even when religion isn’t even mentioned.” – did you watch the video or not?
Really Praxedes? Did you not read what I wrote comparing sex with those other activities? Not buying those other items will prevent them indulging. Not buying them condoms will not prevent them indulging in sex. I’m playing with you, are you my age?
“It isn’t even as though she works with kids daily-she’s a professor.” – we were talking about the younger lady who is a teacher MaryRose.
Reality,
Not buying those other items will not necessarily prevent kids from indulging in them. Some will steal them or find others to buy them. I know of adults who buy alcohol for teens only if they all stay over at their homes. Not buying condoms for some kids will prevent them from indulging in sex.
No matter how you look at it, your view enables children to engage in activities that are not in their best interest. If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the problem. Invite the kid and his date out to a group event or take them to the movies. Do something but don’t encourage behavior that is not in his or his gf’s best interest.
Your argument earlier regarding buying condoms was, “no, adults assisting in the reduction of risk of something the 15 year olds will do anyway.” They are going to drive someday anyway so let them take the car or motorcycle before they get a license. They are going to have sex someday anyway so why not let the sex be with you? They are going to try pot anyway so light the bowl for them.
Your thinking is warped.
They will have sex, with or without protection. If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the problem.
“let them take the car or motorcycle before they get a license” – they can’t if they don’t have the keys. But there’s nothing that can prevent them having sex.
“They are going to have sex someday anyway so why not let the sex be with you?” – what’s that supposed to mean?
I find your thinking to be a denial of reality.
What an interesting discourse. If sex is not legal in this state until 17 and alcohol until 21, what an interesting legal case if a horrible consequence happens after the adult has aided the 15 year old. Just saw interesting signs posted outside of a high school last week for the prom-graduation season (picture of a liquor bottle on the sign with the motto) “Parents who hosts, will suffer the most”. Sounds like the police plan to come after any parent aiding and abetting teens drinking. Same should go for any adult regarding encouraging and promoting sex, alcohol and drugs. The consequences can be life-altering or life-ending for the teens involved if they contract a deadly STD (HIV), deadly for their possible unborn baby if they choose to abort him/her, HIV, Herpes or syphilis for newborns can be deadly, HPV can cause cervical, penile, anal, head and neck cancer.
(Sarcasm alert) Naaay! None of this stuff could ever happen. It’s just them dang pro-lifer religious nuts trying to scare kids from having sex.
Got a question all you “kids are going to have sex, buy them condoms” folks. Have you ever seen what a baby who has herpes or syphliis looks like and has to go through, severe brain damage grand-mal seizures, horrible lesions, deformities, deafness, etc. Did you know that both of these STDs can be transmitted by skin-to-skin contact, you don’t have to exchange body fluids, (which condoms are supposed to catch). Condoms offer very little if any risk reduction for these STDs. HPV is also transmitted skin-to-skin and the numbers of head and neck cancers are on the rise due to oral sex because teens say it’s “safe sex since I cannot get pregnant”. Pregnancy is not the worst thing that can happen to teens today. There are over 25 different STDs today, many are viral, incurable ones, that they cannot get rid of.
Good night.
“The consequences can be life-altering or life-ending for the teens involved if they contract a deadly STD (HIV), deadly for their possible unborn baby if they choose to abort him/her, HIV, Herpes or syphilis for newborns can be deadly, HPV can cause cervical, penile, anal, head and neck cancer.” – agreed. And sex is safer with condoms than without.
“None of this stuff could ever happen” – well it does, hence condoms. better than nothing.
“Did you know that both of these STDs can be transmitted by skin-to-skin contact” – no more kissing or hugging or shaking hands with anyone for me then!
Sweet dreams.
Such an idiotic response reality. For people like you I need to specify “can be transmitted by skin-to-skin SEXUAL CONTACT OR SEXUAL ACTIVITY”. I’m pretty sure any one with half a brain understood you don’t get an STD (Sexually Transmitted Disease) that can give you cervical, penile, anal, head or neck cancer by shaking hands or hugging (with kissing Herpes 1 or 2 can be transferred by the lesions shedding the virus, that is why if a mom has herpes sores the drs and hospital ask her to not kiss her infant, to cover the lesions and do do meticulous handwashing before handling her baby). Like I said Herpes or syphilis can be deadly to an infant.
Hey mods I keep trying to save my response to reality and I keep getting “saving comment failure”. Can you help me?