From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices and Secular Reasoning
Date: 3 Jan 93 18:01:25 GMT
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Indiana University Cyclotron Facility, Bloomington, Indiana
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

In article <1993Jan3.042053.1061@news.columbia.edu>, rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston) writes...
>In article <C09Esx.9B7@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu writes:
>>In article <1993Jan2.230323.29355@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard) writes...
>>>In article <C07oBz.F74@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
>>>>right to divorce their parents.  
>>> 
>>>I totally agree with her, children are not slaves or property, parents are
>>>there to provide for and protect children. 
>>
>>And hopefully to teach them their values.
>>
> 
>Even more hopefully, to teach their children to think, so that their 
>children can make informed decisions about their own values.
> 
>>> 
>>>>Or if the "child" no longer exists, legally, because that
>>>>child has been ruled an adult by the courts?
>>>>
>>>>Why is incest wrong, by secular reasoning? 
>>> 
>>>Because it produces genetic diseases. 
>>
>>Promiscuity propogates all kinds of diseases, many of them fatal.
>>
>>What's your point?
>>
> 
>You have conveniently trimmed the bit where the previous author said
>he would have no problem with incest, if not for the purpose of
>child bearing.

No, it wasn't out of convenience.  It wasn't relevant to my point, so
I trimmed it to shorten my posting.  If you think it matters, tell me
why.

Regardless, I fail to see the difference, whether it's genetic disease
by incest, or pathogenic disease from promiscuity.  

My argument stands.

[...bunch of stuff deleted only to save space ...]

> 
> 
> 
>>> 
>>>>Especially now that the AZT-resistant strains are obviously being spread
>>>>by precisely these people?  According to secular reasoning, a drunk driver
>>>>and a sexually active AIDS carrier are no different.  
>>> 
>>>No according to religious reasoning they are no different.
>>>In secular reasoning the idea of consent plays a role. An HIV+ rapist is a
>>>murderer if someone dies as a result. A person who chooses to have sex with
>>>someone who is HIV+ and dies as a result was not murdered.
>>
>>But, if an HIV+ partner deliberately lies or fails to inform even a willing
>>sex partner that he or she is infected, and the uninformed, albeit willing
>>partner contracts aids and dies, then yes, it most certainly should be
>>at least "manslaughter".
>>
>				   
>So, you are saying that if you have sex with someone, you are
>resposible for conditions that might result from this act. I guess
>you DO believe in child support after all.
> 
>You wouldn't ever be inconsistent in your beliefs, after all.

I'm quite consistent in my "beliefs".  I fail to see your reasoning here.

I never even implied that both sex partners are not responsible, because
they are.  But, only as far as consenting to having sex.

But, the fact remains that anyone who knowingly puts another (who isn't
aware) at risk, causing the uninformed person to die, is a criminal.

Period.

If the consenting partner _knows_ about the other partners AIDS problem,
that's a different story altogether.

No amount of secular reasoning can twist this.

BTW:  Your attempt to show me inconsistent by equating childbirth with
contracting AIDS is a low-blow, and doesn't mean diddly.  Surely you
can do better than that.

Jim Graham 

        -> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
                          Neither do they speak for me.
 ______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu                              |
|           dolmen!jgraham@moose.cs.indiana.edu                        |
| BBS:      The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
|            (812) 334-0418, 24hrs.                                    |
|______________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality