Debate : 10652


Off-Topic / Debate / 10652	10651 \| 10653

Subject:	Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Fri, 1 Jun 2001 21:26:27 GMT
Viewed:	304 times

Dave Schuler wrote: > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: > > > I mention this because others might read your 90% figure and react with the > > > same knee-jerk outrage that I felt > > > > Can you explain the outrage? We were really just bandying possible solutions. > > I suggested that sterilizing 90% of women would accomplish the same ends while > > doing less harm to the world economy. > > Like I said, it was knee-jerk, rather than rationally considered, and > stemmed most likely from the usual perception of the male deciding what's > best by seizing control of the female's reproductive process. Upon > reflection I realized what you were actually suggesting, and the outrage > faded to "Hmm..." > > > It's just infertility. It would suck and all, don't get me wrong, but it's not > > like gouging their eyes out. > > But from an evolutionary standpoint, the denial of genetic lineage is a > far greater crime than the gouging out of eyes. In your mind maybe. To me and my wife, we'd MUCH rather have our sight than kids ;-) I spent $4K for laser surgery just to correct my badly nearsight vision, and I haven't regretted it for a second. -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support | Netscape Communications Corp | A division of AOL Time Warner | iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/ | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer

Message has 2 Replies:

		Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
(...) not (...) I suppose. But so what? The individuals are the ones who'll feel the pain in either case, and I think most people would rather have their eyes than their eggs. (...) kids (...) and I (...) So far, I think I'm winning. I've spent more (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
(...) In my mind, and in the "mind" of 3.5+ billion years of evolution so far. Which do you think provides objectively a greater chance that your genetics will live on--your ability to see, or your ability to reproduce? Dave! (23 years ago, 2-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
(...) Like I said, it was knee-jerk, rather than rationally considered, and stemmed most likely from the usual perception of the male deciding what's best by seizing control of the female's reproductive process. Upon reflection I realized what you (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

29 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search