From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Steve Franklin: NO MYSTERY (Re: THE IMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION)
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:50:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: oasys.17691
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

net.readers, Steve has graciously given much personal info to the net
in his response as well as drawing some false conclusions about me and
shows some insecurity. (or is it touchiness, Steve?) It is a little
long, but you might enjoy reading it.

And Steve, I was gracious enough not to require you to even put on insulated
gloves for when you read this, although I think Chris might have been
correct and your ears will turn 'crimsome'. :]

In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>In <17610@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:

>>In talk.abortion, franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>>>   Oh, jeeez, I know that. That is my entire point. The emphasis wthin
>>>society is that sex is for pleasure, not reproduction. I am aware of that,
>>>and embarassed by it as well. Although the two should go hand in hand,
>>>it appears that the fetus, a sentient being or not, is the victim.

>>Embarassed??? Why? Leads me to wonder if you've ever had sex, or if
>>you are so inhibited by insecurity that you couldn't enjoy it. Have
>>you ever wondered why humans are the only species on earth that copulate
>>when they wish, instead of when nature dictates? Because it is pleasurable.

The following, net.readers, clears up much mystery for me, at least,
about why Steve believes what he does...

>   I am embarassed not for myself but society. Sex has been lowered
>to an ACT.

Sex has never been anything but an act.

>Not a hinge of a relationship, not the means to a child,
>not even a shred of responsibility. The end result, the child has
>lost priority and is often forgotten. That's what having sex is
>for dude. The fact that it feels good is a bonus...

First off, in parts you conveniently deleted, I describe how various
couples could have relationships without sex, and hinging a relationship
on sex is a sure way to wind up in court. (or so I've heard) Eventually,
at least within my experience, most people will wind up with children
who are not a "lost priority or forgotten," as a matter of fact, they
are generally loved and treated well, primarily because the parents
waited until they were ready to have them. As for it feeling good I'll
get to that later....

>In any case, between beer commercials and your post, you have proved
>my point wonderfully. If I don't have sex, I"m insecure. Nice. I'll
>have you know that abstaining from premarital sex is a conscious
>and difficult decision. It's something I"m proud of, and I'm not going
>to be offended by your attempt to mock my practices.

As for beer commercials, I generally consider them insulting to a gnat's
intelligence, if you take them seriously, you really have a problem.:)

Now, to the point... where, and please quote, did I ever say you were
insecure if you didn't have sex? I believe I said I wonder "if you are 
so inhibited by insecurity that you couldn't enjoy it [sex]" which I
interpret to mean that I wondered if you had sex but were so insecure
you got no pleasure out of it. I did not ever mock abstinance, and if
you wish to abstain until marriage that is YOUR choice. But, I must
in all honesty ask, if you ever in your life intend to have sex, what
gives you the idea you can ask others to give up something they have
already tried, enjoy, and have no problems with when you yourself intend
to embark on this as soon as you're married? Sex is about as natural
a pleasure as you can get...no drugs, no strange escapades that wear
your body down to the point that endorphins are called in to kill the
pain, and no life threatening activities that pump huge amounts of adrenallin
into your system so you can overcome the natural fear, just a sharing
with someone you care for (usually :).

>   You know why sex is "pleasurable" as you so adeptly summarized it?
>Because if it wasn't, our population would be a bit of a problem. However,
>mother nature hasn't really allowed for Trojan condoms and abortions...

Calling on the Clue Fairy......need immediate help....
UNBELIEVABLE.....In the old days, as in before civilization, the world
was a male-dominated place. This means that the male provided the food
(at least in most societies, loosely used, where hunting or strength
was needed to gather food), shelter, and ruled whatever type of family
group that existed. This meant that the man copulated when he wanted,
as it was pleasurable for him. I'm pretty sure that whether the woman
had any pleasure in sex at that time was completely immaterial and probably
usually didn't occur (if all the stories you hear in these enlightened
times have half a grain of truth to them) so the only person that had
to have a desire to propogate the human species was the male.
Biology -100,000

Hell if it wasn't for Trojans and abortions, we could return to those
wonderful times of staking out unwanted 'children' on the ole hillside,
so much more humane...you're right let's return to those good old days.

>Heck, we humans can't just be content with battling the hell out of other
>species can we? No, we've had to take on our own kind too... Pathetic.
>And I'm going to try not to be rude, but don't you EVER treat abstinence
>as an insult again. 

Hey, I never did. <|-]
Touchy, aren't we?

>Lemme guess - you obviously didn't wait till marriage
>for sex, 

Correctomundo...but at least it was someone I had a long relation with,
as in years. Better than some marriages.

>but do you wait till Christmas to open your presents? There's
>a time and a place for everything, and promiscuity is sure presenting
>us with a hell of a problem now isn't it?

Well, the only problems I see are a result of a lack of education and
a propogation of ignorant attitudes generated by people who don't tell
their children anything, that way, what they don't know, they won't 
participate in. 

>   Incedentally, I don't think there is a shred of insecurity in me.
>However, you and your mentality telling people "if you dont' have sex,
>you ain't normal" has gotta go buddy. You keep telling yourself you're
>macho. I don't wanna hear about it.

Maybe not, but a hell of a lot of ignorance. What you haven't experienced,
you can't really ever have a feel for. You can be told what swimming
feels like, but until you do, you have no right to critique it. As for
'my mentality', here we go with the touchy bit again. Again, I don't
believe I even indicated this anywhere. Anyone, if you can point out
where I advocate that everyone should go out and screw before any particular
age, please quote it and email or post it. I'm curious where Steve got
this idea from...

As for telling myself I'm "macho" [smirk, snicker, hee hee HAHAHAHAHAHAHA]
whoooooooo, what a concept. Macho is for uneducated assholes, Steve.
Us gentlemen don't need such insecure images to be ourselves, say what
we think, etc...

BTW, I just realized that pretty much anyone on the net could have said
what I did, and several are women. Are you insinuating that these women
would be then considered macho by you?

As for gentlemen not having sex, go watch 'Dangerous Liasons.' I understand
that the events portrayed in this movie were not uncommon to the nobility
of France, although the ending was a bit tragic (it was for dramatic
purposes).

Ron
Newsgroups: talk.abortion