NationStates Jolt Archive

Where do some of you people get the notion that life is only for reproducing, and that if people aren't cranking out the babies, they're worthless? (this is mostly in response to some people in the "Why gays are a negative influence" thread that seem to think this) And why haven't you seen a psychiatrist about that?

<------------ Happily married, 15+ years, no kids, lotsa fun!
<------------ Most beloved Uncle of many, many rugrats.

Life is for living.

Where do some of you people get the notion that life is only for reproducing, and that if people aren't cranking out the babies, they're worthless? (this is mostly in response to some people in the "Why gays are a negative influence" thread that seem to think this) And why haven't you seen a psychiatrist about that?
If you take a look at both history and general evolution though … the urge to reproduce before death had to be overwhelming

The soul purpose of most (specially male) species was to simply pass on their genetic code … so much of what little socialization they did do was just to attract strong female stock to breed with

Really is not all that surprising that some of that holds over

(Though a lot those that argue against gay rights really usually don’t believe in evolution …some do)

Where do some of you people get the notion that life is only for reproducing, and that if people aren't cranking out the babies, they're worthless? (this is mostly in response to some people in the "Why gays are a negative influence" thread that seem to think this) And why haven't you seen a psychiatrist about that?How can Life continue without reproduction? if there was 0 population growth, how long will the human race survive?

heck, calculate if every family only had one child... how long will the race survive?

and since you brought it up, if 50% of the population were in a same sex partnership, the burden of "cranking out the babies" falls on the 50% heterosexual couples who then have to "crank 'em out" almost twice as much to keep the species going.

IVF? sure, but you still need 1 femal egg and 1 male sperm as well as a woman to be fertilizied and carry the child to term... kinda unfair for the Male/male couples who'll be forced to adopt. and if the Population growth falls, then the number of children to be adopted will vanish. and let's not forget the cost of IVF. HMO won't pay for it. so the poor female/female families are out of that option.

Adopt from 3rd world countries? you'll promote the baby black market, plus give the image that human lives are for sale. 3rd world contries might make babies their export.

Tell women that it's their civic duty to have babies? Yeah, right. try telling them that, with a mile head start... and a fast car... then you might survive the experience.

Life isn't just reproduction... but Reproduction is Life.

Wouldn't it be easy enough for the gay population to get artificial impregnation as far as a 2 female couple goes...Anyways, if you look at how a good chunk of the population lives right now, you can see we can't even feed the people we DO have.

Where do some of you people get the notion that life is only for reproducing, and that if people aren't cranking out the babies, they're worthless?

Self-deprication. Basically, the only people who believe that are people who can't get laid.

Where do some of you people get the notion that life is only for reproducing, and that if people aren't cranking out the babies, they're worthless?
Biologically speaking, the former part is correct. I do believe that the point of life is fundamentally to procreate the species. Humans are approaching another level, it really is quite amazing what we've been able to do. Though there are some, not many other species reach the human level of versatility in what they do in life. But still, it all boils down to the fact that the name of the game is reproduction in biology.