Talk:Contraception (medical methods)/Draft

abstinance

I am not trying to be anatagonistic here, but this article has to be sophisticated and accurate. Lesbians can be quite sexually active without any more chance of pregnancy than a virgin, as far as I know. I am happy to cut abstinence out of this article altogether, as it sort of begs the question- as already stated, it's really not a method of birth control, but if we are going to mention it and use the term accurately in regards to birth control, we cannot imply that (1) there are not forms of sexual activity that have no risk of pregnancy (e.g. female/female (shall I go on?) and (2) that whether or not a woman has intercourse with a man, including -presumably her husband, is strictly up to her. It's our job to stick to the truth. It's somewhere between offensive and laughable to suggest to a woman in many cultures in this world that she can avoid having more children simply by explaining to her husband (or the invading army) that she has decided to practice abstinence. Give me a break, guys.Nancy Sculerati 12:54, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Nancy, i thought the Catholic faith preach and practice abstinance? So shouldn't abstinance be addressed somewhere in the article? The intro currently reads:

"however, since women of childbearing years can become pregnant even while abstaining from all sexual intercourse, as the result of rape, absolute fidelity to a vow of total abstinence remains an imperfect method of avoiding preganancy."

On the other hand is it necessary to bring in a rape scenario, who is the target audience here? Chris Day (talk) 13:05, 3 May 2007 (CDT)