Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-10-2013, 07:28 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
How did we get from OP to repopulating another world?

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 07:32 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:24 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 07:05 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Your mistaken. Its not that I would be trying to get rid of gays. I would want everyone on the ship to be ready, willing, and able to procreate. Sterilized people would also be excluded...more so than gays.

Now upon arriving at the new planet, I wouldn't be surprised if the gay population of the new planet shortly became substantially higher than it was on earth because of state mandate high fertility rates. Some studies show that more children a woman bares the more likely each subsequent son born grows up to be gay.

Now if these studies are correct, then it is not unreasonable to speculate that birth control can lead to a decline in the gay population. Further, for every gay that dies a new gay must be born to replace him/her. If low fertility rates decrease the number of gays being born, its conceivable that homosexuality becomes rare.

RE
"I would want everyone on the ship to be ready, willing, and able to procreate."
If you were genuine about that, you would take only 1 million sperm samples, and 250,000 young women, who could be gay or heterosexual. Think about it.

Yeah, your probably right. I'd definitely take along a lot of sperm and turkey basters.

As a side note, one of the things I bite my tongue about so as not to be punished by all the bigots around me is I feel women are more valuable then men. I'd definitely take more women on the ship. Probably 4 to 1.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 07:33 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 06:03 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Assumption 1: It is better to procreate with someone you love instead of a surrogate.

All data points to how the child is raised as the most important factor, regardless of what standards you use to judge a successful outcome. Children of gay parents, adopted children, etc. are all demonstrably capable of becoming fine human beings. You have no data to support your premise; I have a lot of data to support mine. I would amend your "requirement" to:

1. It is better to have a child when the parent/partners make the child their priority and are committed to raising the child to the best of their abilities;

Single parents, adoptive parents, and gay parents have all successfully raised children. My requirement does not require any specific combination of reproductive organs. Why, again, does yours? Because the bible says so?

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes guitar_nut's post
18-10-2013, 07:35 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:27 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 07:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Name calling makes you feel better, it isn't going to help me.

You're a fucktard.

Oh look at that, it does make me feel better.

Fucktard
Fucktard
Fucktard

That's why people insult other people Earmuffs. It makes them feel better about themselves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 07:41 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:32 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 07:24 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  RE
"I would want everyone on the ship to be ready, willing, and able to procreate."
If you were genuine about that, you would take only 1 million sperm samples, and 250,000 young women, who could be gay or heterosexual. Think about it.

Yeah, your probably right. I'd definitely take along a lot of sperm and turkey basters.

As a side note, one of the things I bite my tongue about so as not to be punished by all the bigots around me is I feel women are more valuable then men. I'd definitely take more women on the ship. Probably 4 to 1.

you're so narrow minded you can't possibly begin to comprehend that people are all the same not because there are no differences, but because there are so many that they can't be categorized and organized as you're poorly trying to do.
You are assuming there is a "best" social organization based on your arbitrary hierarchies, but that assumption is wrong, but you're so deluded that you wouldn't even consider the possibility of you being incorrect. You're more interested in winning, as if you were the grand discoverer of some fundamental social order, than in actually knowing and understanding people.

I'd explain how you are wrong, but you don't want me to, do you?

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 07:42 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:33 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 06:03 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Assumption 1: It is better to procreate with someone you love instead of a surrogate.

All data points to how the child is raised as the most important factor, regardless of what standards you use to judge a successful outcome. Children of gay parents, adopted children, etc. are all demonstrably capable of becoming fine human beings. You have no data to support your premise; I have a lot of data to support mine. I would amend your "requirement" to:

1. It is better to have a child when the parent/partners make the child their priority and are committed to raising the child to the best of their abilities;

Single parents, adoptive parents, and gay parents have all successfully raised children. My requirement does not require any specific combination of reproductive organs. Why, again, does yours? Because the bible says so?

I don't know why I value procreating with a person I love. I just do and I suspect most of the population also values procreating with a person they love.

I'm not going to argue that gays make bad parents if that's what you are trying to bait me into. I'm sure gays can make fine parents.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 07:51 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:42 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I don't know why I value procreating with a person I love. I just do and I suspect most of the population also values procreating with a person they love.

I'm not going to argue that gays make bad parents if that's what you are trying to bait me into. I'm sure gays can make fine parents.

I'm not baiting you into anything. My point is that it doesn't matter where the baby comes from. What matters is how its raised. A gay couple can raise a child they did not create, just as adoptive parents can. The love is still there.

Why do you think that creating the baby you raise makes any difference in the outcome? I don't think it does, and data supports my opinion. Therefore, your only argument against homosexuality, procreation, is meaningless. Babies get made, and babies get raised. Parental sexuality is a moot factor.

You're over 40; I thought you were a kid by the way you wrote about others. See, when I was a teenager, I made fun of gays. I called them names and treated them like second class people. It's one of the few things I'm really ashamed of. Thanks to maturity, exposure to the rest of the world, and the patience of others, I learned that I was being an enormous cunt. We're all stuck on this planet doing our best to make it through life with the hand we were dealt. Why make life worse for others? I hope someday you learn the same lesson.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes guitar_nut's post
18-10-2013, 07:55 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:41 PM)nach_in Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 07:32 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Yeah, your probably right. I'd definitely take along a lot of sperm and turkey basters.

As a side note, one of the things I bite my tongue about so as not to be punished by all the bigots around me is I feel women are more valuable then men. I'd definitely take more women on the ship. Probably 4 to 1.

you're so narrow minded you can't possibly begin to comprehend that people are all the same not because there are no differences, but because there are so many that they can't be categorized and organized as you're poorly trying to do.
You are assuming there is a "best" social organization based on your arbitrary hierarchies, but that assumption is wrong, but you're so deluded that you wouldn't even consider the possibility of you being incorrect. You're more interested in winning, as if you were the grand discoverer of some fundamental social order, than in actually knowing and understanding people.

I'd explain how you are wrong, but you don't want me to, do you?

I think communism is a disaster at the level of the state, but works in communal organizations like a monastery or convent. My views about the world are wide open and based on the principle "it depends". What is evil in one situation is good in another. I don't like polygamy(although I don't believe there should be laws forbidding it - I don't like to legislate my views on others as so many of you in this forum would choose to do), but in the space ship/doomed earth scenario, polygamy would be good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 07:57 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 07:55 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-10-2013 07:41 PM)nach_in Wrote:  you're so narrow minded you can't possibly begin to comprehend that people are all the same not because there are no differences, but because there are so many that they can't be categorized and organized as you're poorly trying to do.
You are assuming there is a "best" social organization based on your arbitrary hierarchies, but that assumption is wrong, but you're so deluded that you wouldn't even consider the possibility of you being incorrect. You're more interested in winning, as if you were the grand discoverer of some fundamental social order, than in actually knowing and understanding people.

I'd explain how you are wrong, but you don't want me to, do you?

I think communism is a disaster at the level of the state, but works in communal organizations like a monastery or convent. My views about the world are wide open and based on the principle "it depends". What is evil in one situation is good in another. I don't like polygamy(although I don't believe there should be laws forbidding it - I don't like to legislate my views on others as so many of you in this forum would choose to do), but in the space ship/doomed earth scenario, polygamy would be good.

That has absolutely nothing to do with what I said Shocking

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-10-2013, 08:11 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(18-10-2013 05:41 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  Boooo. They're not the same, but to say one is lesser than the other and then support legislation saying so is bigoted.

Bigotry, by definition, does mean to disagree with the opinion of others. But it has since come to mean expressing intolerance towards others based on race, gender, sexuality, etc. There is no shame in disagreeing with ideas and viewpoints. You should, however, feel shame in viewing fellow human beings as less than you because of their sexual preference, a view you learned from a religion.

I never said homosexuals were lessor human beings. Your making this up in lieu of a compelling counter argument.

I said there is a rational reason to hold homosexuality with less regard(as compared to heterosexuality).

Now I am perfectly willing to go out and judge individuals and their worth to humanity.....but individual sexuality would just be a small portion of the metric. I hold Alan Turing in higher regard then Hugh Hefner. I deduct points from Turing for being gay and committing suicide, but he still edges out the Hefman in the final tally.

Would you be surprised if a homosexual like Girlyman gave Turing points for being gay? Would you say that was evil of him to do so?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: