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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (29233)	2/16/2005 2:11:19 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

If you're going to respond to hypotheticals, respond to the hypothetical presented. You have changed it, so of course you can argue against it. My question is this: If a teacher were to reasonably and responsibly conclude that the only way to prevent a student from committing suicide was to have sex with that student, and if a prudent and reasonable person viewing the situation after the fact would conclude that the teacher's belief that sex with the student was necessary to prevent the student from committing suicide was in fact reasonable and that it was more likely than not that if the teacher had refused to have sex teh student would indeed have committed suicide, is it wrong for the teacher to have that sex? You can argue independently that the hypothetical is unlikely, and of course it is. You can say that it has little to do with the present case, and given the facts as we know them you would be right. But I was challenged as to whether there were ANY circumstances that could justify a teacher having sex with a student. So I'm allowed to make up any theoretically possible hypothetical I want to to explore that question. First, please, answer the hypothetical as posed, assuming the points made to be true and accurate. Than you can argue with the hypothetical if you want to. But let's have honest dialectic here, please.