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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (78866)	11/10/2003 7:28:30 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I never said that the government should require abstinence. What the government should do is simply say that if you choose NOT to live that life, and if you choose to act in a way that creates a life, then you do not have the option to say "oops" and destroy that life. I am not mistaken about what you said. I think the above is terrible public policy. It is based on the principle of child rearing as punishment for not choosing the lifestyle you advocate and for having had bad luck in so doing. Besides creating a punishment all out of proportion to the crime and making the vast majority of the population subject to it, it would further increase the societal burden of screwed up kids who turn into screwed up adults. If abortion is illegal, then the government is, in effect, requiring abstinence by putting violators in an pregnancy lottery. They may not enforce the abstinence, itself, but they give a weighty sentence to those who are either unlucky in their pursuit of a sex life or who are victims of bullies and rapists. However, the victim side of that is partially fixable. Whenever an unwanted baby is born, we could have a judge decide which parent has greater responsibility for the failure of birth control and assign the punishment to that party. Then we will have teenage boys who get their dates drunk or buy cheap condoms raising children. And we can punish our rapists by having them raise children. Now, that'll work. Seriously, though, if we were to take your approach, then it would not be right to expect the woman to bear all the burden. She's stuck with burden of childbirth and all that that costs her. That's punishment enough. Let the guy have the burden of raising the kid. After all, child rearing is punishment, not something that requires skills or motivation or any particular personal qualities. And you wonder how I could call your approach ridiculous! That puritanical streak of yours is unbefitting a libertarian.