- Thread starter
- #121
Who said anything about forcibly restraining anyone?
Please stick to the OP.
I believe that a question to clarify meaning is a legitimate component of any discussion. Your scenario was an illustration of two adults knowingly engaging in an activity that causes one of them to become attached to, and responsible for a helpless child - is that not correct?
Even in a hypothetical question, such as yours, the means of obligation is absolutely relevant to the answer. Morally or legally? By choice or by law? (and all that 'by law' entails)
If that question is unacceptable within the parameters of your story - then I agree...we're done here.
We agree that it (the poll and the OP) is a rhetorical question that has both moral and legal implications.
However, you injected the part about "forcibly restraining" people and that is what I was objecting to. That's something that is not even being considered in the OP and that is what prompted my response.