TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Procreation
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by gmilf 27 and nope. After working with orphans I made up my mind that if I ever really want a child I will take one that needs someone, not make another.

i would think that you were smart enough to realize after 27 years that the sole purpose of any species in existence is for it to pass on its genes. Probably should have thought of that before tying your tubes. One could say, in a nutshell, that you've forfeited your natural purpose in life.

Because in the end, people don't care about overpopulation. They just want to pass along their genes by having their own children. Now as for limiting the number of of children that people should have...that's a different matter.

It puzzles me: if people really believe that their only purpose is to pass on genes, why do they do anything besides eat, work, and have unprotected sex as often as possible?

over here there's a mixture of reasons. women breed for money, there's a sense of entitlement from the state from many, so they have kids and let the state fund it. It bumps them up lists such as housing.

Of all the people I know from school, the amount of intelligent people who've had kids is way overshadowed by those who were a bit dull.

Anyway, if they pass my plans for the future, it'll all be sorted soon enough. That is basically to release lions, polar bears, grizzly bears and countries with too much population or that can't support itself. Soon enough the balance will be sorted out as they massacre the undeserving. Plus animals are so much nicer than idiotic people. You don't see animal chat shows, animals on the corner trying to score money for alcohol, bum smokes or doing meth. Well except cats, but they won't survive against the Lions who are the cream of that type.

quote:

Originally posted by EgosXII Our race will turn into a bunch of inbred retarded crack-whores in 100 years

Having just seen a promo for Jersey Shore I'm thinking we may already be there.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles It puzzles me: if people really believe that their only purpose is to pass on genes, why do they do anything besides eat, work, and have unprotected sex as often as possible?

um, that's pretty much what it used to be like. and not everything we do is for the sake of meeting some ultimate purpose.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles It puzzles me: if people really believe that their only purpose is to pass on genes, why do they do anything besides eat, work, and have unprotected sex as often as possible?

Do you really think we can rewrite the rules of evolution in just a few thousand years? Thinking about it logically i would say today's society is shaped to which the dominant of the population are those that are intelligent, successful and prosperous. They hold a certain stature in society which obviously correlates to the "alpha" status. Now evolution has wired pleasure into procreation as incentive. Alot of us have basically turned this around and simply usurp the pleasure without having to "deal" with the handoff (offspring). So an analogus situation to that would be: "why work hard for the money, when you can get it for free?" where working hard would be the equivalent to having offspring. Also, I think the dominant stature is enough of a drive for people, regardless of the sex, to carry on through life. So long as one strives to have power in today's society, that is sufficient for them, perhaps subconciously, to keep their genes viable.

So again, the rules are hard wired into us, but we simply pick and choose what we desire from them. This doesn't, at all, change the fact that our sole purpose in life is to pass on our genes. Whether or not we follow through with that is up to the individual, not the species.

quote:

Originally posted by Adam420 um, that's pretty much what it used to be like. and not everything we do is for the sake of meeting some ultimate purpose.

correct, whether or not it is obviously apparent or not, that is the way evolution works. The ultimate purpose for the individual (although not all seek to do this) is to pass on their genes.

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit Do you really think we can rewrite the rules of evolution in just a few thousand years?

No, but that is not my point.

"Purpose" is what you make of it. What is "purpose" if not the thing(s) you choose to direct your life toward? And in what way does "biology" (in the simplistic sense in which you interpret it) determine this?

Are your testicles your replacement for "God?" Do you worship them?

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles No, but that is not my point. "Purpose" is what you make of it. What is "purpose" if not the thing(s) you choose to direct your life toward? And in what way does "biology" (in the simplistic sense in which you interpret it) determine this? Are your testicles your replacement for "God?" Do you worship them?

"you" can you make anything you want with your life. This doesn't change the fact that the ultimate goal is survival and to be survived. You aren't going to change the rules for the entire species which we have been following for the past hundreds of millions of years.

God is a pseudo motivational figure. You can be deficient bumbling be who strays from the hive and enjoy it all you like. It doesn't change the fact that the purpose of the bee is to ensure the survival of the queen and its population.

The presumption that you think my testicles are my god is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that they are the only aspect of my life which will ensure the survival of my genes. You can do the math from here.

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit correct, whether or not it is obviously apparent or not, that is the way evolution works. The ultimate purpose for the individual (although not all seek to do this) is to pass on their genes.

You don't appear to understand evolution. Populations evolve, not individuals. It is neither necessary nor optimal for the evolutionary success of a population that all individuals in the population reproduce.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter You don't appear to understand evolution. Populations evolve, not individuals. It is neither necessary nor optimal for the evolutionary success of a population that all individuals in the population reproduce.

I'd say it's requisite, for evolution, that some individuals refrain from production. Of course Hitler tried to accelerate evolution with Eugenics under such an assumption.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter You don't appear to understand evolution. Populations evolve, not individuals. It is neither necessary nor optimal for the evolutionary success of a population that all individuals in the population reproduce.

when did i say that individuals evolve? Perhaps you don't understand what i am saying. In order for the population to evolve it is necessary for individuals to reproduce. Those individuals who have passed on genes suitable for the environment will survive and repeat the cycle.

As for your second statement that is correct. BUT can i ask you what is optimal for the individual?

Is it not true that the most successful individual will be the one to pass on its genes? And thus the survivability of a species would demand that this occurs throughout several populations to ensure that "a" specific group may be able to survive the environment and pass on its genes?

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker I'd say it's requisite, for evolution, that some individuals refrain from production. Of course Hitler tried to accelerate evolution with Eugenics under such an assumption.

Isn't this counter intuitive to creating variation in the gene pool? I would say this sort of "altruism" is forced where weaker animals in a herd refrain from reproducing due to the constraints of a stronger alpha male to which they are threatened by, for example. It isn't a matter of choice per say by the individual. Without the alpha male constraint, the weaker male would be an opportunist in this case and choose to reproduce.

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit tying your tubes.

gmilf is a guy.

quote:

Originally posted by tubularbills gmilf is a guy.

TUBE then

There are still 2 tubes for a guy if he's not a freak and has more which something like 1 in 5000 guys have an extra tube or more. Do condoms always break for you guys too? I kept breaking condoms and having to shell out for that morning after-pill which was 75 bucks, so this was the economical choice And I chose the name gmilf because I was watching a lot of metalocolypse (sp?) at the time.
If you plan on doing it ever it hardly hurts, I didn't realize I was supposed to take the Vicodin an hour before going into the office so I did it without pain killers just a local anesthetic. And recovery took 3 days. If for some reason I want to have my own kid the way they did it makes it possible without a reversal. I just need to get a syringe and draw out sperm from the vas deferens. if they did it properly the antibodies can't get in and kill the sperm as they do in a normal vasectomy procedure because the area is cauterized off.

yea tubes thats right

my grandfather build a business back when he was younge.

he passed to my dad and my dad to me.

the only reason i would want to procreate is to pass the family business on and keep it alive.

i wouldnt mind adopting, mayb ill have a child and adopt another.

but then, having a kid that resembles you,act and looks like you is something else. its the "joy of life" i guess.

Someone breed Banora.

















Who made that thread?

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Someone breed Banora.

Fuck no.

I can understand why you wouldn't want kids now, but your bf has been neutered for gods sake.

My genes are perfect; I can create an army of super beings given the chance I find a hot and mentally stable woman.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.