RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Make birth control illegal! It's not natural!(12 posts)

Make birth control illegal! It's not natural!ColnagoFE
Jul 31, 2003 7:19 AM
Isn't that the same logic that Bush is using to say gay marriages should be illegal? After all...the reason to have sex is to produce kids isn't it? And anything that stands in the way is just not right. You wouldn't want anyone having sex just for fun now, would you?
monogamy isn't natural, either nmDougSloan
Jul 31, 2003 7:21 AM
Please explain DougFender
Jul 31, 2003 7:24 AM
First time I hear that arguement.
i suppose from a biological standpoint you are rightColnagoFE
Jul 31, 2003 7:27 AM
a man can impregnate many women and can do so until a pretty ripe old age while a woman is more limited. if the goal is to be fruitful and multiply then polygamy would make more sense.
i suppose from a biological standpoint you are rightrwbadley
Jul 31, 2003 7:33 AM
Yes, tho tis not always multiple women. Solo female-multi men is the norm in stressed circumstances. Takes more men to round up supplies to raise the family in that case.
wellDougSloan
Jul 31, 2003 7:34 AM
Moral principles, group pressure, and even laws are required to keep many, if not most, men and many women monogamous. The natural order is to "spread the seed" as widely as possible. Is there really any doubt about that?

In my view, just because something is "natural" does not support or oppose any argument whether something is moral or appropriate. It's almost a stupid argument.

Doug
In the past, most laws were around to keep women monogamous.MR_GRUMPY
Jul 31, 2003 9:00 AM
It wasn't that long ago, that teaching about birth control was against the law also.
Even today, in most parts of the world, men are expected to do their thing, while women are put to death, for the same offence.
In the past, most laws were around to keep women monogamous.ClydeTri
Aug 1, 2003 7:01 AM
that was because in a patriarchial society where land/wealth was passed down through the male side of the family, one wanted to ensure that the male offspring who got the land, the castle, the cattle, the money, etc, were of your genetic offspring....
I tell that to my wife, and then BOOM, she decks me (nm)Dale Brigham
Jul 31, 2003 10:29 AM
monogamy isn't natural for men, but is for women....ClydeTri
Aug 1, 2003 6:57 AM
men want to pass along their genes, so the more women, the more sex, the higher the chance they will..women however want themselves and their offspring to be provided for, fed, sheltered....
you'd be surprised what is "natural"dr hoo
Jul 31, 2003 8:28 AM
Consider the bonobos!

http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html

Not homosexual, but pretty much omnisexual (as a conflict reduction device). Make love not war.

There is plenty more evidence that homosexual relations, and even exclusive homosexual behavior, exists in many species. That would seem to make it natural.
Animals have sex with "close" relatives. Is that natural?Spoiler
Jul 31, 2003 12:16 PM
And it's not just animals from West Virginia.

If the sexual rules of nature are universal,
AND it's natural for animals siblings to engage in homosexual incest, does this mean it's ok for the Olsen twins to put on a show for me?

"...and I think to myself, what a wonderful world."