This comment says a lot more about you than it does about the article or his cause, and it ain't pretty.
Actually, Mr. Sabia missed an important insight here when he notes that the costs of sex have rapidly declined.
Libertarians often define morality in economic terms -- people will or won't do something because of the inherent costs/benefits of a particular course of action.
It's interesting to look at today's social problems through this lens. It explains a lot.
Traditional morality in this view is expensive, because it generally involves the rejection of an immediate pleasure in favor of some longer-term gain -- or sometimes even nothing at all.
Libertarian cries for normalization of various vices (and in this regard, Hollywood and the various media outlets are consummate libertarians) simply raises the perceived cost of moral behavior. Moreover, "the market" richly rewards those who best promote the pursuit of cheap and immediate pleasure.
And libertarians -- you, for instance -- tend to loudly denounce those who object to those market forces. It's enough to make one conclude that a truly libertarian society is inherently unstable.
Not really, and this has been going on for many years. I was a student at SUNY @ Stony Brook more than 10 years ago, and was the only person in my suite who had a "long distance relationship" with a girl back home. All 5 other guys in my suite participated in regular "hooking up" on thursday nights (the party night at Stony Brook) before heading home to girlfriends on the weekends. One of the guys managed to spread clymidia to 5 different women on campus, as well as his girlfriend! The fact that he managed to spread it around like that can be shown that not only was he something of a "pig," but the women were willing too.
Mark
With conservatives like you, who needs Democrats?