Mog and Master, I swear that between the pair of you is the most unromantic view of intercourse I have ever read.

Rehctub:”Fact is dont have sex unless you take responsibility for what it creates. So, who is responsible?”

Fact is people do have sex a lot without thought to what could be created. I’m a bit scared to say it but it isn’t the sex it is the choice of what to do if something is created aye.

Us grown ups would understand this varies from situation to situation. Unless we happen to be one of a couple that has produced a child with half the details on a birth certificate missing then none of can judge or assume or criticize or condemn.

Well obviously we can but doesn’t make sense to do it to 30,000 different situations.

*And if an old bloke my age can understand that basic biology, then surely anyone should be able to*

Mister, clearly you only know a bit about biology, but not enough.

In biology, its the male who invests a mere ejaculation, so its in his
biological interest to spread his genes around, as far and wide as
possible. If the female wants a provider to help feed the offspring,
its up to her to be fussy and select a suitable male. The real loser
in biology is the bloke who raises some other guy's children.

Ahh Yabbs, I see now, it's up to the "woman" to make good choices, but not the "man". Gee, that enables us the blame the woman. I see you've got it all worked out. Good onya cob.

Jewels, actually I'm quite the romantic (or was, I'm well past it now). There was nothing better in life than to spend those wonderful times with my wife, who I loved with all my heart, and still do even though she's left this planet. I go through a lot of torment when I try to rationalise my non belief in an afterlife with the fact that she's gone. I think it's something I'll never come to terms with. But I do have support from loved ones, so I'm ok.

*Ahh Yabbs, I see now, it's up to the "woman" to make good choices, but not the "man". Gee, that enables us the blame the woman. I see you've got it all worked out. Good onya cob.*

Nope Mister, it was your claim of using basic biology to justify
your reasoning, that was the point. There is no such thing as
objective morality, morality is simply our subjective opinion.

Do not confuse your personal morality with biology.

Pairbonding in nature, evolved for good reasons in some species.
Humans are just one of them

Yabby I have to laugh about your fondness for biological reductionism and the way you use *one* theoretical interpretation as if it were established fact.

You confuse fact with subjective interpretation.

For example, if we're talking about spreading genes about, then it would be just as much in a female's interest to spread her own about wouldn't it. Just because a man has many sperm, he isn't obliged or driven in any way to run about depositing them willy nilly; a woman also has hundreds of eggs that will never be used. In the interest of mixing up the genes, she'd be just as irresistably driven to having a baby every year.

It would also make as much or more sense for a female to be as promiscuous as a man, or more so, if we're talking about her obtaining the most vigorous sperm to fertilize her egg/s. Group sex would then be the norm, with one woman to several partners in rapid succession, so that the most superiour sperm could out race all the others to the egg.

Another thing to think about: women have many eggs (and are therefore biologically capable of giving birth to many children) and men have many sperm - yet both men and women enjoy the act of sex irrespective of fertility, age or the desire to have children. That is, sex is not only performed in the interest of reproduction. It may also be seen to have a function as an expression of trust and intimacy between people.

I don't hold any of the first two views as desirable, or as THE way that humans are bound to behave. What I am pointing out is that interpretation of scienific fact is also a subjective matter.

And like I said Yabbs, it's VERY "convenient" for you to make your "assertion" that it's up to "only" the woman to make the choice, whereas men can just spread their spern around willy nilly, without being "bound" by choice.

Gee Yabbs, that enables you to blame the "woman". Nice to know you take the moral high ground, and that your "version" of biological science just happens by "sheer chance" to BLAME WOMEN but NOT blame men when things go wrong.

Yes, nice to know you're keeping philosophy out of this and that you are sticking to pure science! Well done Yabbs ol' cobber! Nudge nudge, wink wink!