It is a hypothetical question. Do you see any potential problems with everybody havinq sex with everybody else? Are there benefits to monoqamy?
Who WOULD have sufficient knowledqe and wisdom to say what is best for people to do or not do?
Are you cottshop? Seem to have the same keyboard issues.
your point being that risk R of activity A, for a specific activity A, is not zero?
Is this not a truism?
Is anything free of risk?
Security is relative.
Ask any security professional if there is any such thing as absolute security. You will get the same answer.
Security measures should be appropriate to risk, and choosing security measures based on risk is somewhat arbitrary and subjective.
Sex (the horror? the horror?) is a biological function, like eating and drinking. This is, to borrow a phrase from a popular movie, part of the “cycle of life.”
Neither eating, nor drinking, nor sex (the horror? the horror?) is risk free.
Ever.
However, eating, drinking, and sex in the aggregate propagate our species, just like with every other species on earth. This implies that eating, drinking and sex in the aggregate is not unhealthy.
If you seek absolute physical security, you could consider (in theory) the notion of locking yourself up in an isolation cell, and throw away the key. If your isolation cell is effective then your risk of dying from random sex with someone else is reduced to zero.
Those who surrender freedom for security will have neither freedom nor security.
An advantage of being an advocate for following the dogma of organized religion is that one is personally inoculated from the burden of personal responsibility of making potentially difficult and complex personal choices.
Should I cross the road, or not, given that I might be run over by a trolley car? Hmm, should we use common sense, reason, logic, and math? --No, wait, I know the answer-- let's find a religious text chapter and verse for it! If we cannot find such a chapter and verse for it, we need simply join an organized religion and find a representative organized religious authority who shall tell us whether to cross the road or not cross the road, using the appropriate religious text in conjunction with the appropriate approved interpretation, since this pressing question is so obviously religious, and we are so obviously all incapable of using our own minds to figure out an answer independently of the organized religion authority figure.
Whew! Problem solved!
Next?
:-)