Would be parents should need a licence to have intercourse.

"By "people" I did not mean all people. You're right, such a statement would be ridiculous. I ment that, given a large enough sample, some people will behave irresponsibly, doing irresponsible things like having children that they can't support, or won't support. That list was by no means the definition of irresponsibly, but rather a list of examples." Then we have a definition, excellent. "You say that we would need a licence for everyone, not just irresponsible people as if the purpose of the licence wasn't to separate the "responsible" people who could pass the exam, and the "irresponsible" people who can't. That's essentially the purpose of the licence." In your first post you didn't make mention of any kind of exam. What would this exam test you on? There are plenty of college graduates who don't like wearing a condom. "You also say that it would apply to all intercourse as if I was under the impression that it wouldn't. Not all pregnancies are planned. That was the basis for B2. I never said that it would stop all unwanted conceptions, but it would stop some. Just because a piece of litter doesn't destroy the environment, that doesn't mean that it isn't bad for the environment." You said "If licences were required for intercourse, then the conception of unwanted children could be prevented…". "You say that a licence would compromise one's freedom. Doesn't a driver's licence? A gun licence? Licences my compromise freedom slightly, but they do so in favor of the security of the community." If you'd like to consider driving and gun ownership to be natural rights, as sex is, then I suppose I could see where you're coming from. But that's preposterous. The species would not exist without sex. It is a natural function of the human body. Government regulation would be despicable. Perhaps I cannot convince you that sex is a natural right or function. Then surely you realize that the enforcement of this law would result in rights violations, as outlined in my first post. Sex in the home would have to be subject to intrusion, since that would be the only way to catch anyone doing it. Sex is not like the drug trade, where people will stand on the porch to make deals or be caught with drugs in their cars. The only way to catch someone breaking this law (unless they were having sex in public, which is already illegal) is to break into their home or spy on them. Please address this in the next round, as I already did in the first. "I don't want to go into the details of the licence, because I don't have time to develop a working system right now, and you could easily pick apart whatever I posted now." Well my questions should certainly be answered. The license would yield innumerable problems: 1)Is sex between a U.S. citizen and a citizen of another country who does not have a license okay? 2)Establishing what sort of knowledge will assure that a person will not produce unwanted offspring (so that we could create an examination, as you say) 3)Are there time limits? Should it be renewed? If so, what is the basis for any sort of time limit? 4)Can someone study for the exam? 5)Is there a waiting period? What justifies it, if yes? 6)What about gay or lesbian sex? With no risk of pregnancy, do the parties involved still need a license? If so, then we are discriminating. etc., etc.