Pro-life video of the day: Sex, the other Olympic sport
by LauraLoo
Warning: Adult content.
To many the Olympics are synonymous with sex – inside the bedroom and outside in public. The Olympics are helping these physically fit competitors fuel sexualized memories for life by allotting 15 condoms per athlete. This is 50,000 more condoms than what was dispensed during the 2008 Olympics in China.
Wait a minute. Can’t these obviously disciplined athletes buy and bring their own contraception?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZeYGz3ld_8[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asa-9XvRRjY[/youtube]
Additionally, in an effort to bolster ardent activity (and put those freebie condoms to good use), one English hotelier removed copies of the Gideon Bible from their40-room venue and replaced them with 50 Shades of Grey.
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
[HT: Drudge Report; credit for title to Technorati]
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.
Saw a picture of a billboard-type advertizement in London (actually on a wall so not quite as big as a billboard) with the standard Olympic rings each with a rolled (as in unused) condom inside the rings (sized to fill the ring). The ad line? “Because not everyone wants to come in first”. I can think of a few ways that could be interpreted, but, regardless, a very outright and lewd (to my opinion) call for promiscuious sex during the games.
Why is it any of your business? In addition to being anti-abortion and anti-birth control, you guys seem to be anti-sex, too. Is there any wonder why you folks are considered a bunch of repressed, Puritanical bigots? But again, people have sex. Big deal. And at least they have condoms available to prevent pregnancy and STD’s. In a Catholic country, these would not be available. But good enough for them, right. Sex between unmarried adults should be punished by unwanted pregnancies (oh, I forgot, that’s always a joy) and STD’s.
CC, maybe the problem with handing out 70,000 condoms and encouraging the athletes to let loose is that condoms don’t actually decrease the spread of STDs:
http://www.1flesh.org/argument_page/condoms-stds/
CC,
Yep, we’re all bigots because we don’t agree with you. Can always count on you for small-minded comments.
Wait a minute. Can’t these “disciplined” athletes put it on ice for a couple weeks while they compete? Sex seems to be like breakfast, practice, team meetings, sight seeing in the host city, bit of sex, compete in your event, etc. Really? Not too impressed with their character. I’ll even make an exception for those athletes who are in London WITH their spouses, fiancés or even long-term boyfriends or girlfriends (although I the last two are dubious, let’s just leave it out there). The rest are Just Shagging!
I agree Jamie! I would rather see the host city while I had the chance, but mainly because I respect myself enough not to be one of a string of one night stands….
Consistent and correct use of male latex condoms can reduce (though not eliminate) the risk of STD transmission…
http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/latex.htm
CC, If you bothered to read the link I gave you, you would have seen that exact same CDC link referenced, and this quote from it:
The most reliable ways to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), are to abstain from sexual activity or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with an uninfected partner.
“The present acceptable quality limit (AQL) for North American condom manufacturers is 99.6% of condoms free of leaks. The British AQL is 97%.”
That means up to 3% of the 70,000 condoms (2,100) will leak. That’s one in 34 condoms. Figuring 15 per athlete (and perfect distribution of the faulty condoms), that is up to 44% of the athletes who will use a faulty condom.
Obviously that’s an unlikely, worst-case scenario, but holy nuts! Don’t these numbers concern you in the slightest?
Many of these problems would be addressed if we could persuade people to accent that which is distinctively human — the intellect. We share the flesh with other species. Why not place more emphasis on intellectually based relationships?
Thus, a decrease in both problem pregnancies and STDs.
If you need optimum energy to compete, why waste it on sex?? I always taught our athlete kids, “Save your energy for the game” and save your reproductive organs if you want healthy children… no brainer in my opinion…..
Ha ha ha ha ha! Oh, bitter old CC! If you could spy on my bedroom with my husband and I you could see that I am definitely NOT anti-sex nor am I puritanical (at least not with my husband, lol) and I have an inkling lots of other pro-lifers here enjoy sex with their spouses too.
It’s because we are so PRO-sex that we want it treated with the respect it deserves. It isn’t a recreational sport like badminton! Sex is powerful emotionally and can physically harm or help a body. Sex is also how new human life is created (yes, yes it is CC. No, the stork does NOT bring babies). Sex is AWESOME and should not be treated like it doesn’t matter. Sex should not be entered into with no commitment or forethought. Sex is a gift when used the way it’s Creator meant for it to be used. And sex is a curse when it isn’t used the way it was intended to be used.
CheaptriCk says July 30, 2012 at 2:10 pm
1. Why is it any of your business?
2. In addition to being anti-abortion and anti-birth control, you guys seem to be anti-sex, too.
3. Is there any wonder why you folks are considered a bunch of repressed, Puritanical bigots?
1. You included us in your sex life when you demanded that we fund your choices and to bail you out when the inevitable consequences of your actions come home to roost.
2. It is you who squirms like a victorian prude when there is a frank discussion of sexual pratices.
3. It is no mystery that YOU believe we are a bunch of closed minded biggots. But that says more about YOU than us.
Nearly all the pro-life men and women who comment here are fathers and mothers and few if any of them relied on technology to arrange the union of their sperm and their eggs.
We did the old fashioned way.
Our children are living evidence that two became one flesh.
We are not demanding that you fund our choices.
Please keep your uterus out of our wallets.
KtB – preach it Ken! LL ;)
I’ve been questioned about putting “adoption” in with other “negatives” resulting from poor sexual choices. This article about an adoptee might give some insight: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/blog/article/kill-my-parents-the-story-of-marlene-olive/index.html
True, the Menendez brothers were not adopted. They may well have been wanted and planned pregnancies. But adoptees are 15 times more likely than other people to commit the sort of offense Marlene Olive did.
This isn’t pro-abortion. This is for ensuring that those who get pregnant are prepared to have and raise babies.
Orianna Fallaci: “Sex is an activity for porters. It gets the blood circulating in the legs. We intellectuals need the blood circulating in our heads.”
Oh man, 50 Shades. I still can not believe that lame Twilight fanfic actually got published.
A week or so ago, someone posted to Fandom!Secrets saying that they had been at work, reading a book, when one of their coworkers caught a brief sight of the cover and said, “Wow, I love that book! Don’t you think the two leads are great together?” The secret-poster, not realizing that the coworker had mistaken the cover for something else, agreed. Then, without further preamble, the coworker poured out all her darkest sexual fantasies to the secret-poster and asked about hers. The coworker had thought the secret-poster was reading 50 Shades Of Gray. The secret-poster was actually reading Good Omens by Terry Pratchett.
I suppose it was awkward at the time, but I haven’t stopped laughing about this yet, third-hand as it is.
one thing that no one has mentioned yet is, while certainly a minority, there is a noticeable presence of (legal) minors competing in the Olympics. There are 15, 16, and 17 year old Olympians. Some years (although I don’t know if there are any this year) there are even 14 year olds in some of the gym or riding events! While I personally wouldn’t consider these people ‘children’, if nothing else the level of self control and dedication it takes to obtain that level of achievement is indicative of a fully formed personality and therefore an adult, not a child, we are talking about people who are *legally* still children, many of whom may come from places where they are not yet old enough to legally have sex. Giving away condoms to a 16 year old high school student thousands of miles from home who is having limited or no interaction with their parents and are surrounded primarily by people older than themselves while they are in an emotionally charged and highly stressful situation is stupidity on an epic level.
also, in response to condom failure rate, that 3% (as mentioned earlier) is judged by sperm. Many stds are transmitted via cells/virus/etc which are much smaller than sperm. For instance the HIV virus is 100 times smaller than a sperm cell. So the manufacturer admits three out of every one hundred condoms has ‘holes’ in it large enough to let through sperm, or will slip/break allowing sperm through…and people are nieve enough to believe they are equally ‘good’ at keeping out stds? Not to mention that there is a HUGE difference between the lab tests showing a 3% failure rate and the ‘real world’ failure rate, which tends to be closer to 20% for pregnancy. In the real world condoms are barely better than the pull-out method to avoid pregnancy, and barely better than asking ‘hey, are you clean?’ for std protection.
For Jespren: Do you think we can persuade people to place more emphasis on the intellect than on the desires that we share with other animals?
Giving out condoms creates a climate in which men feel within their rights to expect sex from women. The women are being pressured by the Olympic host committee to have sex with strangers, albeit very sexy strangers.
hippie says:
August 1, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Giving out condoms creates a climate in which men feel within their rights to expect sex from women. The women are being pressured by the Olympic host committee to have sex with strangers, albeit very sexy strangers.
(Denise) How do we get men to focus more on intellectual relationships?
The other problem with this, aside from being crass, lewd, and generally encouraging low moral standards, is that it enceourages prostitution, and therefore, sex trafficking.
If you could spy on my bedroom with my husband and I
Shuddering…..
How do we get men to focus more on intellectual relationships?
Uh, women could refuse to have sex with anyone but their husbands.
Praxedes says:
August 2, 2012 at 9:26 am
How do we get men to focus more on intellectual relationships?
Uh, women could refuse to have sex with anyone but their husbands.
(Denise) Being a husband isn’t necessarily a guarantee of anything. I have a close friend, William Hetherington, who served 24 years in prison because his then-wife Linda claimed he had raped her while they were separated and a jury believed her. I personally believe the sentence was out of line even if a spousal rape occurred. Knowing William well, I think it’s likely his ex-wife lied.
Married couples aren’t necessarily sexually active. In fact, some people say the best way to end sexual tension is marriage. The woman or man can lose interest from sheer boredom. An impassioned swain can turn into a weary Al Bundy after the nuptials.
As I’ve pointed out before, celibacy often sells the best among those for whom it matters least: long married couples and post-menopausal women.