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