Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tektronix.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!moiram
From: moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison )
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: marriage |= (necessarily) commitment
Message-ID: <5635@tektronix.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Aug-85 13:36:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: tektroni.5635
Posted: Fri Aug 23 13:36:02 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 01:27:44 EDT
References: <687@ttidcc.UUCP> <689@ttidcc.UUCP>
Reply-To: moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison )
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 23
Summary: 

>>Adrienne Regard
>>
>>... the question of kids is linked to the question of sex, not the question
>>of marriage, so it seems more sensible to consider the effect related to
>>the real cause, not the spun-sugar assumption...

>The Polymath
>Given the state of the modern world, the above reasoning
>logically leads to the idea that the question of  kids  is  linked  to  the
>question of _birth control_, rather than sex per se.
>
>Given that modern birth control  methods  are  effective  enough ...
> and readily available enough... it follows that the  decision  _not_
>to  use  them  is  the  crux  of the matter with regard to having children.

No, I'd have to go with Adrienne on this one.  *Paper Chase* did a recent
episode around accidental pregnancies.  When the man sputtered, "but how?",
the woman calmly stated, "I'm a statistic."  Birth control methods DO
fail, and better to have had some discussion of "what if" before one is
faced with making a decision.

Moira Mallison
tektronix!moiram