The Instigator
maibad
Pro (for)
Winning
48 Points
The Contender
Deathbeforedishonour
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Casual sex is irresponsible because it has great potential to cause suffering

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/25/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,917 times Debate No: 18469
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (15)

 

maibad

Pro

These arguments are presented in ascending order of the instigator's belief in their philosophical importance.

There is ALWAYS a risk that having sex will create life, which you will then have to either raise or terminate. To create a human life without being ready to provide for its happiness is irresponsible because it causes human suffering to that created child, and may even create suffering to the zygote if it is terminated (please note with respect the "may". We don't know whether or not a zygote is capable of suffering).

Casual sex is also dangerous because of the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, which you can suffer from, and/or knowingly or unknowingly risk transmit to others, which also causes human suffering.
Deathbeforedishonour

Con

I thank my opponent for giving me a chance to debate.

Rebuttal

While my opponent is correct that there is always a chance of pregnancy as a result of having sex, due to the fact that we have had quite a bit of advances in birth control; it is now possible to drastically lower the chances of unwanted pregnancy to almost zero percent. There is many different wethods and forms of controseption ranging from lubricans, to condoms, to pills, and injections [1]. With all these, the possibility of a pregnancy resulting from sex is unlikely.

Disease also be prevented. There are many vaccines such as Cervarix and Gardasil, which can prevent most STDs [2].

These are all cheap low cost methods of making sex more safe, and therefore there is nothing wrong with casual sex[3] [4].

My arguments

I will be stating only one point, and that is the fact that sexual intercourse is healthy for people, therefore it is not irresponsable. There have been lots of studies that have shown that sex is one of the most healthiest activities that a human can perform. Sex is a very good cardio workout, and studies have shown that it cuts your chances of getting a heart attack in half, also the workout burns three hundred calories an hour [5]. Another study has shown that after having sex the brain releases endorphins, that decrease stress, inducing a state of euphoria, so it stops depression. Sperm has also been proven to have a property that releaves stress and depression in women. Women who have sex with a condom are more likely to suffer from depression, then women who did't says another study [6]. Now tell me, is it irresponsible to look after one's own health?
Conclusion
In conclusion, due to the fact that there are an overwhelming amount of health benefits from have sex often; and that there are many different ways to prevent pregnancy and diseases; it is safe to say that casual sex is not irresponsible at all.
Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 1
maibad

Pro

There is no 100% contraceptive--the methods that are closest to less than 1% failure rate (there are NO 100% methods except for removal of the female uterus) are all very expensive, starting at $500 and up for IUDs and contraceptive implants and going up to multi-thousands of dollars for sterilization surgery. All others have at least a 2-25% failure rate even when used properly, which means to get even these rates you must never miss a pill, slip a condom, or be late for a contraceptive shot. [1][2]
Also, there are no birth control methods that will prevent both STDs and pregnancy, save condoms. According to the American Centers for Disease Control, even when used properly and without breakage, condoms can only reduce--not eliminate--the risk of STD's. [3] Although this is your best chance for avoiding both, my opponent argued that sex with condoms does not render the same benefits for the woman as sex without--therefore condom usage after you strip your clothes will also strip women of some key benefits of intercourse.
Cervarix and Gardasil only prevent a single possible virus--the HPV virus. [4] These are the only two STDs listed for which vaccinations are available.
The CDC recommends long-term monogamous relationships with an uninfected partner or abstinence as the only ways to completely avoid STD reception or transmission. Apart from that, they recommend each partner be tested for STDs before any sexual relations together--proving that one night stands and relationships with individuals whose test results you have not personally witnessed and other such casual sex very likely to cause STDs and thereby prone to causing human suffering. [5]
These risks all outweigh the benefits that sex brings outside of a long-term monogamous relationship. Sex inside of a long-term monagamous relationship (the opposite of casual sex) can bring all of the benefits mentioned while maximizing mitigation of the risks mentioned.

[1] http://www.americanpregnancy.org....
[2]http://www.plannedparenthood.org...
[3] http://www.cdc.gov...
[4] http://www.webmd.com...
[5] http://www.cdcnpin.org...
Deathbeforedishonour

Con

Ok, so first I would like to point out that none my opponent's points have anything to do with c.sual sex being irresponsable. The points she has made can also be applied to a committed relationship. STDs and pregnancy are out comes of sex, not just casual sex. Untill my opponent gives a outcome from which the people suffer that is only an outcome of casual sex, her arguments are invalid.

As for my defense, it is possible to have sex that is responsable, and has not comitment. It being healthy is a vert good example of it. I will state a second point.

A good example of being responsable would be that you resist being put into a emotional crisis. When someone gets into a serious relationship it is most of the time not going to last, therefore at the end of the relationship hearts get broken. At the same time sex is a natural need in the human body. It is a instict that we all have. So, the solution to this is that one has sex and not get into a committed relationship so they don't get hurt and still get sex.

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 2
maibad

Pro

I would like to refute my opponent's (non-referenced) claim that STDs happen as a result of sex within commited relationships. This is not true--according to my above posted links from the U.S. Center for Disease control, you cannot contract an STD except from someone else with an STD. Therefore, if two people without STDs mate, neither will spontaneously generate an STD--and his private clarfication that sex is never committed because everyone lies to each other simply supports my claim that casual sex is irresponsible.

It has also been claimed, in the comments, that you can contract STDs from public fixtures and bathrooms. This is patently false;""To my knowledge, no one has ever acquired an STD on the toilet seat -- unless they were having sex on the toilet seat!" says Abigail Salyers, PhD, president of the American Society for Microbiology (ASM)." [1]

Regarding my opponent's claim that there is no such thing as a committed relationship, I would like to point out that neither myself nor my spouse has ever had sex or sexual relations with anyone else (beyond a few high-school grade kisses that didn't even involve the tongue). There is an element of trust there, and it is not a given--and is impossible for my opponent to prove--that all intimate pairs are doomed to betray their commitments and go engage in casual sex.

The emotional detachment argument is a change of subject--we are attempting to show that casual sex is irresponsible--not that emotional attachment is irresponsible. It is also a matter of my opponent's opinion that I challenge him to back up.

Many will disagree with my argument based on their own sexual decisions. I ask you to instead consider the quality of my argument. I have used facts and logic based upon those facts, where my opponent has fatally strayed. Based on the quality of my debate:

Vote Pro!


[1]http://www.webmd.com...


Deathbeforedishonour

Con

I concede.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by maibad 5 years ago
maibad
If it has ever happened, I'd appreciate it if you can find a confirmed case... it will give me an excuse to avoid public bathrooms.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 5 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
>> "It has also been claimed, in the comments, that you can contract STDs from public fixtures and bathrooms. This is patently false;""To my knowledge, no one has ever acquired an STD on the toilet seat -- unless they were having sex on the toilet seat!" says Abigail Salyers, PhD, president of the American Society for Microbiology (ASM)." [1]"

http://www.microbiologybytes.com...

It's not like they linger around on plastic. You get them from deposited bodily fluids in those locations. It's rare, but certainly possible. You can contract an STD from the same locations you can contract any other virus - it's not like STD's have some special virus property that makes it so you only get them from sex - that just *usually* how you get it.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 5 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
None of Pro's arguments have anything to do with casual sex. They apply to ALL sex. Take for example, his most powerful objection - that of unknown STD transmission. STD's can come from other sources than sex - including public restrooms and other public fixtures. So the only real difference casual sex would possibly make is an increase in the number of potential people that could become infected.

But since once you contract the disease, it's with you forever, this argument is entirely moot - i.e. frequency of sex says nothing about the character of the sexual relationship.

And besides that, Pro has yet to show any capacity for suffering that is present only in casual sex, but not in non-casual sex.
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 5 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
IKR lol
Posted by OMGJustinBieber 5 years ago
OMGJustinBieber
Pro is a puritan.
Posted by maibad 5 years ago
maibad
I look forward to it! Have a good night.
Posted by maibad 5 years ago
maibad
Ranging from one night stands to sex with significant others with whom no commitment for long-term partnership has been made.
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 5 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
Ok thanks i'll post my argument tommorrow.
Posted by maibad 5 years ago
maibad
Casual = without commitment, for the sake of the pleasure thereof and with no regard to with whom or otherwise why.
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 5 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
define casual sex.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by browley14 2 years ago
browley14
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con gave up so pro obviously wins.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con concedes
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Need I say more sorry death but I think she won, by a lot.
Vote Placed by GaryBacon 5 years ago
GaryBacon
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro is a CLEAR winner. There is no need to elaborate on my voting decision.
Vote Placed by wiploc 5 years ago
wiploc
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Better arguments, and Con conceded. But, hey, maibad, I'd love to debate you on this topic, later, in about three weeks. Right now I'm on a road trip, and I don't have time.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession
Vote Placed by airmax1227 5 years ago
airmax1227
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by jm_notguilty 5 years ago
jm_notguilty
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Mestari 5 years ago
Mestari
maibadDeathbeforedishonourTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.