Subject:
|
Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Nov 2000 19:00:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
722 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Simpson writes:
> IMO, you're in a philosophical pinch by asserting that the true purpose of sex
> isn't really about reproduction. Again, I agree, but what of you? What is it
> about? If it is not about reproduction, but reproduction naturally follows,
> then what is our role as creators when it does actually result? Why in fact,
> do we have sex?
I kind of screwed up my wording, as you and Tim have both correctly
pointed out. I addressed my actual meaning in my reply to his post,
stating, in essence, that the evolutionary purpose for sex is reproduction,
but reproduction can no longer be claimed as the sole purpose of sex.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
