Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Totalitarianist · 11-09-2002, 08:06 AM

Do we want the individuals of a population to be less likely to be infected by sexually transmitted diseases? Does promiscuous sex increase the likelihood of an individual becoming infected by a sexually transmitted disease? If your answers to these questions are in the positive, you might desire a ban on premarital sexual contact, which decreases the likelihood of promiscuous sex, which in turn decreases the amount of sexually transmitted diseases that are transmitted, which is, in my perspective, a good thing.

It follows logically that if a child is the result of premiscuous, premarital sex, he is outside the law on the condition that premarital sex be outlawed, and such would be desirable (again, to lessen the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases): and the breaking of the law by an individual ought to have its consequences, for otherwise the breaking of the law would be more likely to occur, and if it were to be more likely to occur, the transmission (as regards this particular law) of sexually transmitted diseases would be more likely to occur likewise, which is not desirable. If a child is outside the law (i.e., if he is born of a mother that committed premarital sexual contact), the law does not apply to him, and whatever the state desires is desirable as the consequence of breaking the law, if lessening the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is desirable. My question, given the above conditions, is this: What ought to be done with the child, who is outside the law? (I hope this does not sound too cold hearted.)

[ November 09, 2002: Message edited by: Trebaxian Vir ]

tronvillain · 11-09-2002, 03:57 PM

Yes, we do want the individuals of a population to be less likely to be infected by sexually transmitted diseases. Yes, promiscuous sex does increase the likelihood of an individual becoming infected by a sexually transmitted disease. No, we do not desire a ban on premarital sex.

Now, if we were to pass such an insane ban, the child of premarital unions would not be "outside the law." Our society does not punish children for the "crimes" of their parents.

Nickle · 11-09-2002, 07:48 PM

Does driving on the highway increase your chances of death? If yes, shouldn't we outlaw cars?

Primordial Groove · 11-09-2002, 11:48 PM

Everyday Im reminded that there are some wierd [people} out there.

Edited to remove derogatory personal statement.

[ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Grizzly ]

Edwin · 11-10-2002, 02:12 AM

Quote:

My question, given the above conditions, is this: What ought to be done with the child, who is outside the law?

Well, we could treat them exactly the same as any other child.

thebeave · 11-10-2002, 10:05 AM

If we outlawed eating, we could cure obesity. Good idea! Let's get Congress to make eating a crime!

DutchAtheist · 11-13-2002, 02:27 PM

In Oman, (and saudi I assume...) women who become pregnant outside of marriage are sent to prison for life. Their children are born in prison, and spend the rest of their lives there. When they are about ten years old they separate them from their mothers and move them to the men's section of the prison, any guesses what happens to them?

I hope that you are not advocating this kind of law.

Quote:

you might desire a ban on premarital sexual contact, which decreases the likelihood of promiscuous sex

Will this be as effective as the war on drugs was at reducing drug use?

Quote:

It follows logically that if a child is the result of premiscuous, premarital sex, he is outside the law on the condition that premarital sex be outlawed

It doesn't follow at all, certainly not logically. If two individuals under the drinking age got drunk, and had sex as a result, would any resulting pregnancy result in a child that is outside of the law? No, even though the child is arguably the result of an illegal act.

Quote:

and the breaking of the law by an individual ought to have its consequences

Certainly there should be consequences attached to breaking the law, but I believe that most legal systems apply this punishment to the individual(s) who committed the crime

Quote:

(I hope this does not sound too cold hearted.)

oops, it does sound cold hearted.

Personally I agree with J. Swift when it comes to dealing with excess children, but tastes may vary.

11-13-2002, 03:38 PM

Quote:

In Oman, (and saudi I assume...) women who become pregnant outside of marriage are sent to prison for life. Their children are born in prison, and spend the rest of their lives there. When they are about ten years old they separate them from their mothers and move them to the men's section of the prison, any guesses what happens to them?

(Jaw hitting the floor) I did not know this. I mean I did not think they would be encouraging of that kind of thing, but... whoa. that's just beyond-words-horrible.

[ November 13, 2002: Message edited by: Jagged Little Pill ]

red robot · 11-13-2002, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DutchAtheist:
Personally I agree with J. Swift when it comes to dealing with excess children, but tastes may vary.

Wouldn't work too well in the US, though. 't would only add to our obeisity problem.

Ms. Siv · 11-13-2002, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Does driving on the highway increase your chances of death? If yes, shouldn't we outlaw cars?

Quote:

If we outlawed eating, we could cure obesity. Good idea! Let's get Congress to make eating a crime!

Great counter-points. [

]

But isn't Lady A making the faulty assumption that Post-marital promiscuity is somehow less dangerous than pre-marital promiscuity ??

- Sivakami.

11-09-2002, 08:06 AM	#1
Totalitarianist Banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 1,234	Promiscuous and premarital sexual contact Do we want the individuals of a population to be less likely to be infected by sexually transmitted diseases? Does promiscuous sex increase the likelihood of an individual becoming infected by a sexually transmitted disease? If your answers to these questions are in the positive, you might desire a ban on premarital sexual contact, which decreases the likelihood of promiscuous sex, which in turn decreases the amount of sexually transmitted diseases that are transmitted, which is, in my perspective, a good thing. It follows logically that if a child is the result of premiscuous, premarital sex, he is outside the law on the condition that premarital sex be outlawed, and such would be desirable (again, to lessen the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases): and the breaking of the law by an individual ought to have its consequences, for otherwise the breaking of the law would be more likely to occur, and if it were to be more likely to occur, the transmission (as regards this particular law) of sexually transmitted diseases would be more likely to occur likewise, which is not desirable. If a child is outside the law (i.e., if he is born of a mother that committed premarital sexual contact), the law does not apply to him, and whatever the state desires is desirable as the consequence of breaking the law, if lessening the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases is desirable. My question, given the above conditions, is this: What ought to be done with the child, who is outside the law? (I hope this does not sound too cold hearted.) [ November 09, 2002: Message edited by: Trebaxian Vir ]</p>

11-09-2002, 11:48 PM	#4
Primordial Groove Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Earth Posts: 1,570	Everyday Im reminded that there are some wierd [people} out there. Edited to remove derogatory personal statement. [ November 10, 2002: Message edited by: Grizzly ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-09-2002, 03:57 PM	#2
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Yes, we do want the individuals of a population to be less likely to be infected by sexually transmitted diseases. Yes, promiscuous sex does increase the likelihood of an individual becoming infected by a sexually transmitted disease. No, we do not desire a ban on premarital sex. Now, if we were to pass such an insane ban, the child of premarital unions would not be "outside the law." Our society does not punish children for the "crimes" of their parents.

11-09-2002, 07:48 PM	#3
Nickle Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Texas Posts: 385	Does driving on the highway increase your chances of death? If yes, shouldn't we outlaw cars?

11-10-2002, 10:05 AM	#6
thebeave Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Silicon Valley, CA Posts: 4,183	If we outlawed eating, we could cure obesity. Good idea! Let's get Congress to make eating a crime!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.