User Tag List

View Poll Results: Gay Marriage - Yes or no?

Voters
72. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    67 93.06%
  • No

    7 9.72%
Multiple Choice Poll.
First 122021222324 Last

Results 211 to 220 of 245

  1. #211
    Gone Aesthete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/sx
    Posts
    385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Interesting proposal.

    Who defines what "the worst of humanity" is, and where the cutoff should be for reproduction permission?
    How will this be enforced and what will be the punishment for those who break the law?
    Hm...I considered something like that at first, but I think a law like that would be hard to keep in place.

    I came up with a new idea: survival of the fittest. I read that Darwin said something along the lines of "The fittest is not the strongest, nor the most intelligent, but the one most susceptible to change" - basically the one that can adapt to changes in the tribe/society/country the best of all. So, what better way to have the best of humanity have children than to promote noble people in everyday culture and society. Instead of focusing on the negative - "X, Y, and Z will not have children" - we can focus on the positive - "Let's make sure A, B, and C are more likely to have children".

    Ultimately, this is not just for the betterment of humanity, but for everything that humanity comes in contact with to profit as well.
    Great men are like eagles, and build their nest on some lofty solitude.

    Schopenhauer

  2. #212
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aesthete View Post
    Hm...I considered something like that at first, but I think a law like that would be hard to keep in place.

    I came up with a new idea: survival of the fittest. I read that Darwin said something along the lines of "The fittest is not the strongest, nor the most intelligent, but the one most susceptible to change" - basically the one that can adapt to changes in the tribe/society/country the best of all. So, what better way to have the best of humanity have children than to promote noble people in everyday culture and society. Instead of focusing on the negative - "X, Y, and Z will not have children" - we can focus on the positive - "Let's make sure A, B, and C are more likely to have children".

    Ultimately, this is not just for the betterment of humanity, but for everything that humanity comes in contact with to profit as well.
    You're right, that idea would probably work better than forbidding reproduction. So who identifies the "best of humanity" (aka which traits are "superior"? intelligence, height, attractiveness, physical strength, artistic ability, etc? and which ones are actually linked to inherited genes?) and chooses which parents should be encouraged in their efforts to have offspring?

    What happens when there is disagreement on which traits are "noble" enough to be encouraged?

    What about potential parents who have some "superior" genes and some "inferior" genes (which, let's face it, is most people!) - should they be encouraged to have kids?

    What about parents who have "superior" genes, but personality traits and/or circumstances that are likely to make them worse parents, possibly psychologically harming their children or reducing their potential? Should they be encouraged to have kids?
    -end of thread-

  3. #213
    Gone Aesthete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/sx
    Posts
    385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    You're right, that idea would probably work better than forbidding reproduction. So who identifies the "best of humanity" (aka which traits are "superior"? intelligence, height, attractiveness, physical strength, artistic ability, etc? and which ones are actually linked to inherited genes?) and chooses which parents should be encouraged in their efforts to have offspring?

    What happens when there is disagreement on which traits are "noble" enough to be encouraged?

    What about potential parents who have some "superior" genes and some "inferior" genes (which, let's face it, is most people!) - should they be encouraged to have kids?

    What about parents who have "superior" genes, but personality traits and/or circumstances that are likely to make them worse parents, possibly psychologically harming their children or reducing their potential? Should they be encouraged to have kids?
    When I think of superior, I think of free people: not people who have thousands of liberties and chose to indulge in every single one of them, but those who are least likely to natural compulsions. Natural compulsions means extremes of hatred, lust, anger and such things, as well as the inability to be master of oneself. If you've read The Republic by Plato, think of his philosopher, the man/woman with the golden soul.

    Well, eventually somebody will win in such an argument. I think we should promote individual, noble traits, but the "whole package".

    Well, I don't think you'll ever find perfection within any human, so it's best if those who are closest to perfection. As well - in a numerical sense - it won't hurt if a man 90% noble reproduces and a man 91% noble doesn't; as long as it's not the man 12% noble who is more likely to have children.

    Well, not one human is born one way and remains thus for the rest of his live: he is affected at all times by his surroundings. So, if I was to have the best parents in the world, but would be a scoundrel myself, I shouldn't have children. It's not just about the passing on of genes, but also the raising of children: if I raise children badly, no matter whom they descend from, they might still fall for the same tricks as myself (perhaps not as much as others, but still would).
    Great men are like eagles, and build their nest on some lofty solitude.

    Schopenhauer

  4. #214
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aesthete View Post
    When I think of superior, I think of free people: not people who have thousands of liberties and chose to indulge in every single one of them, but those who are least likely to natural compulsions. Natural compulsions means extremes of hatred, lust, anger and such things, as well as the inability to be master of oneself. If you've read The Republic by Plato, think of his philosopher, the man/woman with the golden soul.

    Well, eventually somebody will win in such an argument. I think we should promote individual, noble traits, but the "whole package".

    Well, I don't think you'll ever find perfection within any human, so it's best if those who are closest to perfection. As well - in a numerical sense - it won't hurt if a man 90% noble reproduces and a man 91% noble doesn't; as long as it's not the man 12% noble who is more likely to have children.

    Well, not one human is born one way and remains thus for the rest of his live: he is affected at all times by his surroundings. So, if I was to have the best parents in the world, but would be a scoundrel myself, I shouldn't have children. It's not just about the passing on of genes, but also the raising of children: if I raise children badly, no matter whom they descend from, they might still fall for the same tricks as myself (perhaps not as much as others, but still would).
    Ok, so you think we should assign a numerical value to each positive trait and each negative trait as well as predicted parenting ability, and encourage people with the highest overall numerical value (let's say above a certain threshold) to reproduce?

    What about direct interactions between traits? Would you ignore those or factor them in? Let's say someone with awesome artistic traits but poor vision, or someone with very high intelligence but poor motivation, so they accomplish little in their lifetime? What about someone with good genes for musical ability, but who will probably not have the resources (financial or otherwise) to train their kids in music from a young age?

    You haven't answered who you think should be in charge of determining which traits are "superior". You say that "superior" to you means someone of moderate temperament, who is self-controlled and avoids extremes ("moderate"/"extreme" as defined subjectively by you, or some other way?). But nobody will let you single-handedly decide a eugenics program for a country, so who will? Will it be a committee of elected officials? Government-appointed or popular vote? Doctors, or geneticists, or medical researchers? Ethicists, sociologists, child psychologists? How will they be trained to recognize the "best" traits? How much taxpayer funding do you think this project is worth, and what projects should be cut from the budget to make room for this?
    -end of thread-

  5. #215
    Gone Aesthete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/sx
    Posts
    385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Ok, so you think we should assign a numerical value to each positive trait and each negative trait as well as predicted parenting ability, and encourage people with the highest overall numerical value (let's say above a certain threshold) to reproduce?

    What about direct interactions between traits? Would you ignore those or factor them in? Let's say someone with awesome artistic traits but poor vision, or someone with very high intelligence but poor motivation, so they accomplish little in their lifetime?

    You haven't answered who you think should be in charge of determining which traits are "superior". You say that "superior" to you means someone of moderate temperament, who is self-controlled and avoids extremes ("moderate"/"extreme" as defined subjectively by you, or some other way?). But nobody will let you single-handedly decide a eugenics program for a country, so who will? Will it be a committee of elected officials? Government-appointed or popular vote? Doctors, or geneticists, or medical researchers? Ethicists, sociologists, child psychologists? How will they be trained to recognize the "best" traits? How much taxpayer funding do you think this project is worth, and what projects should be cut from the budget to make room for this?
    I have to go now; I'll answer all your questions on Friday.
    Great men are like eagles, and build their nest on some lofty solitude.

    Schopenhauer

  6. #216
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    first they'll let people of the same sex get married, whats next? inter-gender?!

    seriously, between urbanization and the internet, the chances that a person knows a few gay people (and eventually gay couple or two) grows, and then most of the time, your going to find rather normal people, where a lot of the crap you might have being told about down the line ending up doing more to discredit whoever tried indoctrinated you then it will do to them. i think that much like inter racial marriages, in a generation or so, this issue is going to be one of those things people look back on and think "Wtf?".

    that's being said, i think within those who call themselves liberals on such issues, there is an unnecessary villainization of the conservative streak behind it. the simple reality is that not all change is good for society, and it is good that we have people resisting and arguing against changes, because it forces those pushing towards these changes to argue for them. society needs that filter, just as society needs people longing for imaginary golden ages of past just as it needs the people longing for the golden roads not yet taken, so that we can always have the widest selection of possible solutions when dealing with a problem (and yes, that includes sources you might not like, such as religions).

  7. #217
    Senior Member pinkgraffiti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    748 sx/so
    Posts
    1,489

    Default

    "18 Joyful Declarations Of Love From Newlyweds In Seattle
    Meet some of the couples who were married on Washington's first day of marriage equality. AKA more pictures that will make you cry."
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/joyfu...lyweds-in-seat

  8. #218
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aesthete View Post
    "My harem-filled Utopia?" You're a funny person. Fine, if you want to let all that's worst of humanity continue reproducing, that's your problem.
    How is it a problem for me? I have no problem with it. It has no affect on me whatsoever...

    Are you suggesting gay people/people who wear nothing but underpants in public are "the worst of humanity"?
    I would venture you are the one with the problem.

    I'm not a Nietzschean in terms of morality or anything; there are certain points I agree on, but I wouldn't call myself a disciple of Nietzsche.
    How about a disciple of Hitler? Does that work better for you?
    Unfortunately, your calls for a eugenics revival are likely to fall on deaf ears. At least until people manage to forget about the final solution.

    Well, if a person's body is all that is relevant - or the primary thing of relevance - to you when "falling in love", then there's not much I can argue with you about.
    You're the one espousing survival of the fittest... Those dudes look pretty fit to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  9. #219

    Default

    Attachment 8590

    Nay!!! Nay!!!!



    Couldnt resist.

  10. #220
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Attachment 8590

    Nay!!! Nay!!!!



    Couldnt resist.
    Aw, stop horsin' around!

    (couldn't resist either)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Marriage. Yes or no.
    By highlander in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 12-09-2012, 12:19 PM
  2. Gay Marriage. Yes or no.
    By highlander in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 12-09-2012, 12:19 PM
  3. Preschool, Yes or No?
    By Tigerlily in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 01-07-2009, 12:18 AM
  4. Homeschooling: yes or no?
    By Oberon in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 04-04-2008, 06:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO