Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (54815)	9/6/1999 1:41:00 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Thanks for your comments, Cobe. I agree with everything you said, of course. As for your advice to your sons? Well... I am sure if you and your husband and most of your friends and community have remained celibate except within the bonds of matrimony, you can rest assured your sons will do the same! hee hee hee. But seriously. My opinion is that it really isn't a good idea for people to think they have to get married to have sex. I think it's liable to lead to ill-considered unions.

To: Ilaine who wrote (54815)	9/6/1999 2:24:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I tell my sons, "keep your pants pulled up and your pecker in your pants, and no one is going to get into trouble." I hope they listen to me. But if your father had followed that advice, you wouldn't be around to pass it on! Or if your husband had followed it, you wouldn't have anyone to pass it on to. We parents who tell our sons that (and I am one, too) are fighting evolution, unfortunately. There is very little in evolutionary biology to make one think that a genetic preference for monogamy is an evolutionarily desirable trait to pass on.

To: Ilaine who wrote (54815)	9/6/1999 3:41:00 PM
From: Edwarda	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

I can tell you, from experience, that you would get nothing better than the standard response about "well, what if you're wrong ~ isn't it better to err on the side of caution?" Which point was made, repeatedly, by those who oppose abortion. They think that, if only abortion were banned, then no one would get an abortion. You and I are old enough to remember that abortions were to be had, if one wanted one badly enough, either from "sympathetic" physicians, if compensated highly enough, or from non-professionals, some of whom sort of knew what they were doing. Well, I admit that I have already posted this standard response on this thread in the past. And, as you know, I am old enough to remember the days of illegal abortions and the horrors that occurred all too often. Yet I wonder, if a society thinks that something should not be occurring--e.g., shooting heroin--does the fact that it happens anyway illegally mean that it should be legalized? BTW, I am asking a serious philosophical question rather than trying to get us into another "yes/no" on the issue of abortion. I am trying to widen the discussion.