Plan will allow 16-year-olds to buy condoms

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I don't have a gripe with "people" having access to condoms.

I have an issue with immature teenagers having access to them, and facilitating that mindset being peddled as "progressive".

Has anyone used the word progressive?

What's wrong with a teenager having access to condoms? What's wrong with a teenager who has been educated enough on the subject to seek out contraceptives having sex?

You talk about maturity, that screams maturity to me! But somehow you have made up some other arbitrary factors to make all of these people seeking contraception immature!

What's the difference between a 16 year old and a 20 year old doing it? Trust me, I knew just as much about sex at 16 than I do now. And i'm guessing you did too (if not, i've no idea why! I'm willing to bet most posters here will agree with me here)

At this stage I think you're just posting for the sake of posting!

Conall Cernach

krudler wrote: »

condoms were illegal to sell outside chemists in this country up until 1992, thats just batsh1t insane, and completely illegal before 1978 they had to be prescribed by a doctor and only to married couples.

there should be condom machines in secondary schools, teenagers have sex, always have, always will, better they have easy access to them and reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancies and std's than offending parents and the moral brigade

One thing I remember when growing up in the 80s was that girls could put you off sex by using the risk of pregnancy as an excuse. As we couldn't just whip out a condom we had to make do. Now with condoms being more readily available girls can't use the absence of one as an excuse not to go all the way. Does this put more pressure on girls today to give in to the boys pleading?

Liam Byrne

MrStuffins wrote: »

No, you're wrong here. Just because they're giving into the urges, does not make them immature at all. Where are you getting this from?

Haven't you ever "given into the urge"? Are you immature for giving into the urge? The vast vast majority of adults are not virgins. Does that make the vast majority of adults immature?

Having sex does not equal immaturity, you're talking out of your hat!

Again, you're stretching what I said in order to make it appear more than what I said.

The element of maturity involved is being capable of saying no. You don't have to use it, but if you're capable of it then you're mature enough.

So the issue is determining a maturity level where you could indeed say no and THEN choose to say yes.

It appears to be a circular argument, but it's perfectly logical.

I'm not saying ANYONE should "not give in" to the urges every so often - that's fun.

What I'm saying is that the maturity required is knowing that you can - and would if necessary - say no.

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Again, you're stretching what I said in order to make it appear more than what I said.

The element of maturity involved is being capable of saying no. You don't have to use it, but if you're capable of it then you're mature enough.

So the issue is determining a maturity level where you could indeed say no and THEN choose to say yes.

It appears to be a circular argument, but it's perfectly logical.

I'm not saying ANYONE should "not give in" to the urges every so often - that's fun.

What I'm saying is that the maturity required is knowing that you can - and would if necessary - say no.

And buying condoms is certainly one of the scenarios that would immerge if a mature 16 year old was able to say "No, we can't risk that, we need to be careful here. Let's not have sex now and wait until I go buy condoms".

So, after all this, turns out you have no real issue to argue anymore. Enjoy your day!

Liam Byrne

Conall Cernach wrote: »

One thing I remember when growing up in the 80s was that girls could put you off sex by using the risk of pregnancy as an excuse. As we couldn't just whip out a condom we had to make do. Now with condoms being more readily available girls can't use the absence of one as an excuse not to go all the way. Does this put more pressure on girls today to give in to the boys pleading?

What makes you think it's "boys pleading" ? Do girls not actually want sex ?

And no-one should need an "excuse" not to go all the way. It's a choice. And while yes is yes (great), no is no.

Anyone - guy or girl - who's with someone who "pleads" is with someone who's too immature to be with.

And if they "give in" to "pleading" then they're immature themselves.

If they want to and are mature, then fine.

But again, if they feel they "can't" say no, then they're too immature and/or with the wrong person.

Liam Byrne

MrStuffins wrote: »

Has anyone used the word progressive?

Ridiculing alternative opinions by dismissing it via "how the real world is" is an example of this.

MrStuffins wrote: »

What's the difference between a 16 year old and a 20 year old doing it? Trust me, I knew just as much about sex at 16 than I do now. And i'm guessing you did too (if not, i've no idea why! I'm willing to bet most posters here will agree with me here)

What's that supposed to mean ?

MrStuffins wrote: »

At this stage I think you're just posting for the sake of posting!

Think what you like - you're wrong.

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What's that supposed to mean ?

It means that 16 year olds know all about sex just as they know all about how what goes up must come down and how the earth orbits the sun.

You did too! If you didn't, I would be surprised. Just as surprised if you told me that at 16 you thought the sun orbited the earth!

Liam Byrne

MrStuffins wrote: »

You did too! If you didn't, I would be surprised. Just as surprised if you told me that at 16 you thought the sun orbited the earth!

Ah, so you're telling me what I know and knew, now ? And again stretching your frame of reference to include other stuff to make your stance look more logical ?

Ridiculous.

suicide_circus

Chris Hansen wrote: »

Feck sake did fingering die a death in this country??

Amen, nothing like a bit of old fashioned.

K-9

The under age pregnancy rate is dropping so the safe sex message must be starting to get through. As others said, they'll get them anyway so it's a rather stupid law.

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Ah, so you're telling me what I know and knew, now ? And again stretching your frame of reference to include other stuff to make your stance look more logical ?

Ridiculous.

Nope, because knowledge is accumulated over a period of time and it is perfectly reasonable to assume what a person might know at a specific age. It would be very difficult for someone to live until the age of 16 without learning about sex. My analogy is quite valid.

After all, according to research, 63% of people in the UK lose their virginity before the age of 18.

Your refusal to admit that a 16 year old knows all about sex and that you knew about sex when YOU were 16 COULD mean that at 16 you were just not mature enough to comprehend the magnatude of the complication of sex!

But maybe i'm wrong!

CrazyRabbit

Why stop at 16?

Trojan are already thinking ahead:



And with some endorsements, they could sell very well.

MrStuffins

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Why stop at 16?

Trojan are already thinking ahead:



And with some endorsements, they could sell very well.

The Trojan sillhouette looks like an older man and a young boy having a sword fight............ very disturbing.

Fake, but still disturbing!

Liam Byrne

MrStuffins wrote: »

Your refusal to admit that a 16 year old knows all about sex and that you knew about sex when YOU were 16 COULD mean that at 16 you were just not mature enough to comprehend the magnatude of the complication of sex!

But maybe i'm wrong!

It wouldn't be the first time in this thread. :rolleyes:

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

It wouldn't be the first time in this thread. :rolleyes:

You have had every opportunity to point out where I have been wrong in the thread. You have yet to do so.

More of your just posting for the sake of posting! I have put forward clear and reasoned points. Yours are not so and are based on the assumption that every 16 year old in the country is immature (and of course, everyone who "gives into the urge" is in fact immature also..... which makes almost all of us immature). There is no denying that the vast majority of the country's 16 year olds are fully aware of the facts of sexual intercourse.

Argue my points if you will. But you won't, just as you haven't. Because you can't. You know they make sense but you just don't want to be seen to back down. That's fine!

saa

Lets say a 14 year old wants to buy condoms

they most likely want to have sex, oh no they're not allowed to buy them


14 year old goes and has unprotected sex.


And the condoms in vending machines are usually in pubs... maybe male toilets in shopping centres, bit sexist eh why would women need to be buying those dirty yokes!

Liam Byrne

MrStuffins wrote: »

You have had every opportunity to point out where I have been wrong in the thread. You have yet to do so.

You made a couple of sweeping assumptions about me, all of which were 100% wrong.

MrStuffins wrote: »

Yours are not so and are based on the assumption that every 16 year old in the country is immature (and of course, everyone who "gives into the urge" is in fact immature also..... which makes almost all of us immature).

Never once claimed that.

You said that they simply "wouldn't say no". THAT is immature.

If they're mature enough to say no, and choose not to, that is their choice. I've said this, and I've no problem with that. But the claim that "no man would say no to sex with a beautiful woman" was bull****. Have done, and will do again, for different reasons. So don't lie or make ridiculous claims.

MrStuffins wrote: »

Argue my points if you will. But you won't, just as you haven't. Because you can't. You know they make sense but you just don't want to be seen to back down. That's fine!

Absolute rubbish. You've repeatedly put words in my mouth and twisted my arguments.

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You said that they simply "wouldn't say no". THAT is immature.

How is that immature? Sex is awesome! And with contraception, they can enjoy sex without the risks.

if someone offered them €20 for nothing, why would they turn that down? Would it be mature of him to say no?

In this scenario, the 16 year old has no reason to say no. What's his motivation for not having sex? For saying no to something that is great? Give him a reason! Because up until now you're just posting for the sake of it!

Alopex

So is the legal age to buy condoms 17 or 18?

They're a harmelss piece of rubber, why would there be any age restriction? Sort of like banning tin-foil because it may be used for heroin.

Also I do not believe oral sex is illegal for under-17s, what if someone wants to use a condom for that?

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What next ? Supply them with needles just because they're not mature enough to say "no, f**k off, to some idiot who wants them to try cocaine" ?

We do give needles to anyone who needs them. You think the exchange is gonna tell a 14 year old heroin user to share syringes with her mates?

jme2010

POSH ****

Liam Byrne

MrStuffins wrote: »

Because up until now you're just posting for the sake of it!

So you keep saying :rolleyes: [ clicks ignore ]

Blueboyd

Just read this.

Unbelievable that someone would ban contraceptives from anybody. Sounds some sort of Sharia -law to me that has no place in modern society.

Up here they give condoms away for free to kids at radio station campaigns like "Use a condom" at rock concerts.

Teens in schools at vey young age are given sex ed. and shown how to put a condom on a plastic willy. And they get to try that for themselves.

theillest

Probably just a plan so that RTE can start 14 and pregnant....probably be better than what ever else their makin.

coc.k_sh!t_

And this will change....nothing. Fecks sake they just get them in the toilets of pubs or whatever. Most are probably too embarrassed to go get em in a chemist anyway so whats the difference.
But i guess in the gov everyone knows that no teen under 17 ever has sex. Sure we all know that!!

citizen_p

never knew you had to be of age buying condoms...

wonderfulname

saa wrote: »

And the condoms in vending machines are usually in pubs... maybe male toilets in shopping centres, bit sexist eh why would women need to be buying those dirty yokes!

Because most men who need condoms need them for acts with women, and we're equals now didn't you hear? This is why we need to have no nonsense sex ed in this country, there is no reason a woman should not have a condom in her purse.

In other news;

There is no minimum age at which contraceptives can be sold to young people. However, pharmacists are legally entitled to refuse to supply them to those aged under 17

MrStuffins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

So you keep saying :rolleyes: [ clicks ignore ]

Is that how you deal with a problem you can't beat? Ignore it? Lovely

Mike 1972

AnonoBoy wrote: »

I thought they had got rid of the age restriction on condoms years ago here?

They have.

The article quoted by the OP was written by a clueless fukwit "journalist" whose parents ought to have been using condoms (and the pill just to make sure).

Nutgrover

Fianna Fail spokesman on children, Charlie McConalogue, welcomed the report, but said there was an issue with 16-year-olds accessing contraception. "The object of government policy has to be to try and encourage young people not to engage in sexual activity until they're ready for it and not before the legal age of consent.

The government policy of a modern democratic country (which Ireland is aspiring to be) definitely should NOT be to teach its citizens when to have sex nor should the government combat means that help prevent spreading STDs or unwanted pregnancy.

Condoms are distributed for free in African countries by many charities to whoever wants to make use of them, regardless of age. Why should young Irish people have harder access to contraceptives than their African colleagues?

Upbringing should be left for parents, not government or pharmacies. It's high time to get up from this kneeling posture, I believe?

mconigol

smokedeels wrote: »

Buy them in pub toilets.... problem solved.

I remember being 16, getting laid was the hard part not buying protection.

They should ban those machines and also only allow chemists to sell condoms during school hours and not at all during summer, easter, halloween or christmas.

That'll learn them teenagers.

:pac: