By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Max King of the Wild on 19 May 2013
Edit Thread
ultima said:
Max King of the Wild said:
curl-6 said:
Max King of the Wild said:
curl-6 said:
 

 

No one is forcing it. It's a consequence of an action most people make the consious decision to partake in.

By having protected sex you're not signing up to have a child, any more than by walking down the street you're signing up to get run over by a car or mugged.

Why that's a terrible argument. First of all, protected sex is not 100%. Most people know this and thus know their might be reprucussions of the action. Secondly, protected is pretty irrelevant. By your argument if they didn't sign up for it they shouldn't have to be responsible. Lastly, your argument is even remotely similar. Walking down the street doesn't cause being hit by a car

I agree with Curl. And that's actually a pretty good analogy. 

This is what you're saying: protected sex isn't 100% reliable. Most people know this. So, if the choose to have sex, they should be prepared to deal with becoming a parent.

Likewise, walking down a street isn't 100% safe. Most people know that they might get hit by a car of get mugged. So, by walking down the street people are consciously making the decision to accept the consequences of getting hit by a car or getting mugged?

At bolded: no walking down the street does not cause you to be hit by a car per se. It is, however, a possible side-effect of walking down a street. Just like conception is a possible side-effect of recreational sex.

Yes, an action that you partake in directly causes an effect is the exact same as someone else being responsible for the control of their own vehicle striking you when you walked down a street...

This is absolutly ridiculous train of thought