Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cadovax!keithd
From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Madelyn's question
Message-ID: <559@cadovax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Apr-85 13:24:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: cadovax.559
Posted: Wed Apr 24 13:24:05 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 28-Apr-85 04:22:11 EDT
References: <361@ttidcc.UUCP>, <5185@cbscc.UUCP>
Organization: Contel Cado, Torrance, CA
Lines: 29

>No, you don't get it.  I agree that sex is not ONLY for procreation.
>But are you going to maintain that it has NOTHING to do with procreation?
>The argument being presented here seems to imply that.  Having sex *is*
>how pregnancy ocurrs most naturally.  People who engage in that ought
>to be aware of this as a possibility and take it into account. [Dubuc]

I wholeheartedly agree with this one.  It's important to note the phrase
'ought to be aware'.

>Of course I believe in free will and freedom to choose; and that includes
>sexual behaviour.  You seem to treat sex as an activity that it beyond
>the realm of individual choice.  I believe that people generally *choose*
>of have sex.  If they will not accept the possibility of pregnancy that
>goes along with their choice, I think they are being irresponsible.

Again, they must know of the consequences of their choice.  To me, this
means sex education.

>Is your argument really "everybody has to have sex so it is unfair to
>say that people must be responsible if their having sex results in
>pregnancy"?  No, I think you know better.  So why don't you give me
>a little credit and not imply that I hold such ridiculous beliefs?

I wouldn't assume that all people who want to have sex are inherently
responsible though.

Keith Doyle
#  {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd