Let's look at the numbers.

8.5 + 1.3 x 10^6 = daily sperm production per gram

~1.75 oz = average weight of testicle

49 g ~ 1.75 oz

(8.5 + 1.3 x 10^6) x 49 = 63,700,416.5 sperm per day

~200,000,000 sperm in avg expulsion

1 in 4 chance of conception from sex

1.25 × 10-9 chance of one sperm fertilizing

chance x sperm/day = .08 good sperm wasted per day

~90,000,000 males in United States who could conceivably conceive

So, if no one had sex. . . .

males x wasted = 7,200,000 BABIES DENIED LIFE A DAY
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 115,000

7.2 million > 115,000

QED.

And don't forget to take into account the probability of twins or triplets, and imagine what happens when we take in to account masturbation. That's the true Holocaust that abstinence could prevent.

Thanks for playing. None of this math is endorsed by the Math Teachers of America, Abstinence is Excellence, Parents Against Sex by Teens, The Republican Party of the United States, Eleanor Roosevelt, Coat Hangar Producers of the Greater Northeast Area, Fred Phelps, Let's Bomb An Abortion Clinic, The Catholic Church, Trojan Horse Condoms, or the Society for Making (*)(*)(*)(*) Up.

Really, how does Abstinence kill something that doesn't exist yet?

__________________
For real coverage of the Iraq war see
http://michaelyon-online.com/

Conan! What is best in life?
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women

Did they look like psychos? Is that what they looked like? They were vampires. Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a **** how crazy they are!

IT KILLS SPERM! OMG, don't you see that sperm are ALIVE??? You people are just pro-death.

__________________
I'll get nicer when you get smarter.

HELLO McFLY!

There aren't laws against killing anything, only killing people. Clearly sperm is not people! A fetus, however, is a developing human being, just like a 1 year old infant is!
The masturbation is abortion argument only works on non thinking people!
Thinking people realize that, just as a bag of flour is not a cake, sperm in and of itself is not a fetus!

Myth summarily debunked! Now can we move on to something really intellectually stimulating???

This argument is just another prime example of why no culture should ever tolerate socialism.


This argument is the product of that which is so limited that it is unable to tell the difference between human life and the sum of the biological stuff that make up the body of a human being.


I wish I could say that this argument is the sewage that settles at the bottom of the socialist-think-tank. But in truth it's not actually 'thought' per se and aside from that it's actually pretty average. I seriously doubt if Hussein, Hill or Bill or the sum of the three could do any better.

But no matter how you slice it, sperm is not human life, it will never be human life and all the wishing that it would so you can justify murdering infant humans before they're born is not going to change that.

But socialism feeds on stupid so arguments which serve that quality are to be expected.

excellent points!

__________________
Jesus beat the devil with two sticks. Colossian 2:13,15

Proud American!

Communism/Socialism is similar to legalizing burglary and murder!

Sorry I didn't get all of that old chap, I was in the bathroom committing genocide.

This just proves my point. This statement just underlines the fact that socialist suffer severe cognitive limitations.

No matter what means you have to prove that sperm is not human life, the socialist will not be able to grasp this simple point. Idiocy is a major problem and it was a huge mistake in the US when there was not a minimal level of intelligence that one had to prove, well north of the ability to sign your name, in order to vote.

I would say that one level we might consider may be the ability to be able to recognize the difference between human life and human cells.

But it's important to recognize that this whole argument is nothing more than a way to spin abortion, to make infanticide seem OK, so chicks can feel comfortable with letting losers have sex with them.

SO you can immediately see why this argument is being pushed so hard.

I have a challenge to make, could someone please give me an argument against abortion without reverting to abstract moralism about how it's wrong just because you say it is.

If a mother is in poverty and she is with child, would it be best to put that child into a life of poverty only to drag down economically on the whole family? That will just hurt everyone.

The problem is that all you people are so rooted in your petite-bourgeois moralism that you are blind to the plight of real people right in front of your face!

Good or Bad is not in the abstract judgment, it is in the experience of the individual and the affect an action has upon the individual experiences of many people, for good or ill. So if the abortion of a fetus will genuinely improve the plight of individuals involved then it is worth it.

This argument is, as I have said from the first time I read it, nothing more than an excuse to allow access for losers to sex with fellow losers.


Abortion is wrong, IF, there is any truth to the rumor that human life is precious and human rights are valid.

Now Western Human Rights are best spelled out in the US Declaration of Independence and if the principles that Jefferson laid out in that document are sound, then abortion is wrong because it takes the life of a human being on the grounds that the respective life is inconvenient.

Now if you want to argue with Jefferson, that's fine, but don't pretend that you, a human being that happened to not be aborted and survived to the present stage of development you now enjoy, magically enjoy human rights that human being in earlier stages of development do not.

What Socialist are simply not smart enough to understand is that when they set aside principle to provide themselves with the means to have intercourse at the expense of the lives of those that are conceived in the process, they set the foundation for someone else down the road, to decide that THEIR life is not particularly noteworthy and can be aborted.

They will say 'no' now and when that day comes, when their life is deemed inconvenient, they'll stand around asking each other "how could this happen" and eventually come to conclude that it's someone elses fault.

But this is why we should have some kind of test that these people have to pass before they can vote.