Subject:
|
Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:00:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
848 times
|
| |
|
|
Tim Courtney wrote:
> "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message
> news:G3zBp9.KGB@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney writes:
> >
> > > There are known methods of having sex and not having it result in • pregnancy
> > > which can be used.
> >
> > I have found it uncommon for Republicans to advocate anal sex. But • remember
> > it's not 100% in a heterosexual couple.
>
> I was not advocating anal sex. I was referring to contraceptives, condoms,
> and other forms of protection.
Most of those forms of protection aren't very reliable. When dealing with the
enormous responsibility of having a child, even 99% effectiveness doesn't cut
it. Sterilization is the only TRUE 100% effective contraceptive (assuming
followup visits prove the procedure worked).
> I do not advocate anal sex.
I wouldn't either as a 100% effective contraceptive, as leakage later could
lead to a pregnancy. Beyond that, it should be up to the couple, and noone
else (ESPECIALLY not the govt).
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
