| Aielyn said: As I pointed out, the primary difference is that the partner is also aware of the 1% chance of failure, and thus is equally culpable for deciding to go through with the act (assuming no rape takes place). 1. Let me use the analogy to make my point - if the baker knowingly sells a cake that has a 1% chance of causing severe illness, without first informing the customer, then the baker is wholly liable for the result, and assumes all responsibility for that result, should it occur. However, if the baker informs the customer of the risks, and the customer willingly goes through with the purchase, the baker is no longer responsible - the customer is the one that made the decision as to whether or not to buy it, and thus the burden lies with the customer. 2. In the case of sex, both partners are capable of doing things to prevent certain results. Responsibility depends on the exact circumstances. For instance (a heterosexual instance), if the guy wears a condom, the girl is not on the pill, the condom breaks, and the guy pushes for the girl to get the morning-after pill, and the girl refuses (and refuses abortion later, too), then the responsibility typically lies solely on the girl, as the guy did everything in his power to prevent the pregnancy, while the girl did nothing to prevent it. On the other hand, the guy may be even more culpable than the girl in other circumstances. It's easy to get caught up in dichotomous thinking... but things aren't that simple. Responsibility depends on the details, not the probabilities. |
i agree that both partners are equally responsible if they both consent to sex.
1. Okay, I see your point here. Although I'm not sure if the law agrees with you. I'm not sure about selling potentially unsafe food, even if you inform the customers. I would imagine that's illegal. As for the morality, I agree that the owner is zero percent responsible if the customer is informed.
2. Even under that scenario, the man should still be responsible (along with the woman) because he still chose to have sex. He did not do everything in his power to prevent pregnancy - that would require not having sex at all. As for the varying degrees of their responsibility, yes, that would be dependent upon the details. But, under any consensual circumstances, both parties must ultimately face some accountability.
