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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (1973)	3/5/1999 10:50:00 PM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13062

Ummm...but they were taking responsibility to NOT get pregnant. And you do support birth control, right? So, by means of extension, trying NOT to get pregnant means they aren't really responsible for this, because an "Act of God" or some other external force caused a failure of the protection. So, why should they be held responsible? After all, rape and incest are external forces that have altered the arrangement. The only difference being the consensuality of the act. So, maybe consensuality is the issue. If it is, what if a wife with low self esteem is getting to the point of divorce, and her husband "coaxes" her into bed. She has non-consensual sex, gets her divorce, then finds out she is pregnant. Is she responsible?