re: Non-reproducing members of a species

Off Topic » in reply to Non-reproducing members of a species

re: Non-reproducing members of a species

SDG — 4/20/2006 7:16:07 PM (archived)

i think we've gotten past the point in our development where the ability to reproduce is what distinguishes us in society. In fact the ability and choice to reproduce is a very private affair which has or at least should have no bearing on how one is viewed in society. The value of reproductive ability ranks very low for society, but can rank extremely high to the individual or family. So while a family or even small organization might classify a nonreproducing individual as deviant, one can hardly be classified from society as a whole as deviant since the reproductive abilities have no effect on society at all. Were we in such a state of emergency that every reproducing member's duty was to propgate the next generation of face obliteration you would have a point. However since we are far from such a state your point is now quite blunt.

Steve G.

The whole thread (72 posts)

God, penguins, gays, and ID - ljk - 4/13/2006 4:21:28 PM
- Non-reproducing members of a species - SDF - 4/20/2006 5:23:32 PM
  - re: Non-reproducing members of a species - SDG - 4/20/2006 7:16:07 PM
    - re: Non-reproducing members of a species - SDF - 4/20/2006 8:10:54 PM
      - OK... define YOUR role.... - R.L. - 4/20/2006 10:57:57 PM
        
        Nothing wrong with being single (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 1:03:36 AM
        
        and I'm not demanding spousal benefits either, since I have no special role (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 1:06:35 AM
        
        By your reasoning... - R.L. - 4/21/2006 1:04:31 PM
        
        Not really - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:12:10 PM
        
        So - then you would be ok with gays getting spousal benifits if they adopt? - R.L. - 4/21/2006 5:29:28 PM
        
        Twenty years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation - SDF - 4/22/2006 1:06:18 PM
        
        No, we'd be having the same conversation about race. - Mary Anne - 4/22/2006 4:53:18 PM
      - Pairing off - Tony - 4/20/2006 9:10:17 PM
        
        Good point - SDF - 4/20/2006 11:42:04 PM
        
        re: "Alot of women also marry because they don't want to work." - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 12:58:25 PM
        
        However - SDF - 4/20/2006 11:51:04 PM
        
        Do you think that you turn a PROFIT with the tax breaks by adopting a kid? - R.L. - 4/21/2006 1:07:13 PM
        
        "without first finding a father that will stick around" - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 1:05:15 PM
        
        If he beats her up, he should be charged with assault, taken away, and never allowed to return - SDF - 4/21/2006 4:01:51 PM
        
        Gays already adopt. - tony - 4/21/2006 12:12:41 AM
        
        I didn't know that. A court decision was made on November 26, 1999. - SDF - 4/21/2006 12:35:18 AM
        
        so should single women not be allowed to adopt? (n/t) - SDG - 4/21/2006 12:12:05 AM
        
        No. (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 12:38:59 AM
        
        and if the single woman is gay? (n/t) - SDG - 4/21/2006 5:16:22 AM
        
        then she is still single (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:50:50 PM
        
        "I just don't agree with that. I think children should be raised by a mother and a father." - R.L. - 4/20/2006 11:56:40 PM
        
        Because that is the natural means by which babies are made, with few exceptions (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 12:38:12 AM
        
        Most things people do today isn't 'natural'... why does this one example bother you? - R.L. - 4/21/2006 12:58:29 PM
        
        What makes you think homosexuality is natural? (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:34:20 PM
        
        Because it appears in nature. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 3:50:34 PM
        
        That was my original point, it DOES appear in nature - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:54:24 PM
        
        While you assign them their "place", don't forget to shave their heads and tattoo numbers on their arms. (n/t) - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 4:33:07 PM
        
        Ironically, many of them are already doing such things - SDF - 4/21/2006 4:45:06 PM
        
        So sayeth Some Dumb F... - R.L. - 4/21/2006 5:44:46 PM
        
        Because the cause of the condition is not understood. (n/t) - SDF - 4/22/2006 1:10:34 PM
        
        Why do you need to consider it a disease? - R.L. - 4/23/2006 8:56:08 AM
        
        You are quick to call me bigoted (which is a form of bigotry itself), but I am being objective - SDF - 4/24/2006 12:49:04 PM
        
        Corrections - Mary Anne - 4/25/2006 1:27:56 PM
        
        You are one sick puppy.... - R.L. - 4/24/2006 8:15:17 PM
        
        I don't think so - SDF - 4/25/2006 12:33:36 PM
        
        Irony is a mystery to you, isn't it? - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 4:55:53 PM
        
        Its like coppery except harder... (n/t) - R.L. - 4/22/2006 4:59:21 AM
  - Sounds like a past description of the left-handed. - Mary Anne - 4/20/2006 6:36:08 PM
    - Left-handed people aren't so offensive. - SDF - 4/20/2006 8:15:40 PM
      - What garbage!!! - R.L. - 4/20/2006 10:51:56 PM
        
        The degree of deviance that people are willing to accept varies somewhat, but not really that much. - SDF - 4/21/2006 12:53:10 AM
        
        Setting rather than content. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 1:25:30 PM
        
        It used to be the same for interracial marriage... - R.L. - 4/21/2006 1:12:39 PM
        
        Only in some countries - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:24:03 PM
      - Maybe they don't hate men. - Mary Anne - 4/20/2006 9:26:20 PM
        
        Birds of a feather flock together (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 12:57:44 AM
        
        "And so do pigs and swine... - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 12:44:41 PM
        
        Well, if they act a certain way and their friends act the same way - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:20:15 PM
        
        Um, because human beings are more complex than that. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 3:37:12 PM
        
        I don't think people are complex at all - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:42:46 PM
        
        Obviously. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 3:53:06 PM
        
        Simple response. (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:56:23 PM
        
        Suits you, then. (n/t) - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 3:59:45 PM
        
        LOL. What's wrong, can't win? - SDF - 4/21/2006 4:08:22 PM
        
        According to some parliamentary rules, silence implies consent. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 5:08:51 PM
      - Hatred of men? - Tony - 4/20/2006 9:12:13 PM
        
        It's not really hatred that I feel. It's disgust. Why are you willing to accept their bahaviour, but not willing to accept that I am offended by it? (n/t) - SDF - 4/21/2006 1:01:24 AM
        
        Be offended all you want. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 12:54:16 PM
        
        re: Be offended all you want. - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:16:03 PM
        
        Then file charges for harassment. - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 3:39:32 PM
        
        I still think they should justify their sexual preference before encoding it in law - SDF - 4/21/2006 3:49:37 PM
        
        Why? And do you intend to institute a "test" for that too? - Mary Anne - 4/21/2006 4:00:24 PM
        
        You lasted longer than me :-) - Tony - 4/21/2006 5:14:59 PM
        
        You still letting that eat you up inside? - SDAI-Tech1 - 4/22/2006 6:41:08 AM
        
        Not eating up. - Tony - 4/22/2006 7:38:45 PM
        
        Most diseases are biological. Eventually we find treatments. - SDF - 4/21/2006 4:04:03 PM
        
        Yup, and education is the vaccine against bigotry... (n/t) - R.L. - 4/22/2006 1:49:01 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Off Topic

The whole thread (72 posts)