teratologist
2003-10-24 02:36 pm UTC (link)

quinctia says, What is the purpose of driving a car? Transportation. What is the purpose of sex? Procreation.

Truly spoken like a woman who has never had an orgasm.

I love how in their world, ponying up hundreds of dollars and having a fairly serious medical procedure to correct your mistake isn't considered 'taking responsibility' either. To me, that's the quintessence of taking responsibility, since it prevents anyone else - your parents, the father's parents, the foster care system - from having to deal with the problem.

Silly humans with the breeding and the sentimentalizing.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

kerikeri
2003-10-24 04:16 pm UTC (link)

I love how in their world, ponying up hundreds of dollars and having a fairly serious medical procedure to correct your mistake isn't considered 'taking responsibility' either. To me, that's the quintessence of taking responsibility, since it prevents anyone else - your parents, the father's parents, the foster care system - from having to deal with the problem.

Exactly. The whole "you're irresponsible if you're not prepared for that result" thing is totally irrelevant when applied to people who have abortions, because they WERE prepared-- they had a plan of action and that plan involved abortion, which is currently a perfectly legal and acceptable procedure. What they really mean is "you're irresponsible if you're not prepared to deal with that result in a way that I personally find morally palatable".

The only irresponsible people in this situation are those that allow an unwanted pregnancy to fuck up their lives and the lives of others around them, by carrying it to term and keeping the child when they're not mentally or financially prepared to be a parent.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	quinctia 2003-10-24 04:24 pm UTC (link)
	Maybe I didn't say that clearly. That was the point where I was speaking about me personally, and I preceded it with "I think." ^^; (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	kerikeri 2003-10-24 05:19 pm UTC (link)
	Ah. Well, yeah, saying "I think you're irresponsible if you're not prepared" sounds like passing judgment on others, rather than "I think I would be irresponsible if I wasn't prepared to deal with it in a way that didn't involve abortion." But yeah, that's certainly a fair argument. (Reply to this)(Parent)

folk
2003-10-24 05:29 pm UTC (link)

Okay, if you're (second person) speaking about yourself (second person), then you (second person) need to use "I" (first person), "one" (third person) or "people" (third person). The reason that we (first person) have all those pesky words in English is so people (third person) can use them to communicate their (third person) thoughts in a manner which other people (third person) will readily understand. Language is neat like that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: quinctia 2003-10-24 08:16 pm UTC (link)
	...hmm...let's see. I already stated that I knew I worded it improperly. Why do you want to be wanky here? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	folk 2003-10-24 09:05 pm UTC (link)
	OK, honey? This is a community for pointing and laughing. I was pointing and laughing at you seemingly not being able to tell the difference between the second person "you" form and the third person "one" form and your attempts to rationalise that. Buh-bye now. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	quinctia 2003-10-24 04:25 pm UTC (link)
	...did you read the argument I was making at all? Of course sex is used for other things but that's not why it evolved. My whole point in the shebang is that there are plenty of bad, nonlogical prolife arguments to pick on, but the original post wasn't actually picking a nonlogical one. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

folk
2003-10-24 05:20 pm UTC (link)

No, I just copied-and-pasted at random! Drat, and now ~~you pesky kids~~ your pesky kids, you happy prolifer, you (!) have figured me out.

My point, sweetheart, was that you put your point across in a very wanky way, if you'll excuse the phrase while talking about sex. Sex ain't all about procreation, and saying it is is a rillyrillygrate way to lose an argument. So go you!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

teratologist
2003-10-25 03:39 am UTC (link)

Of course sex is used for other things but that's not why it evolved.

Yes and no.

Sex evolved initially to swap genes, in single-celled organisms; but there's a fair amount of evidence that in higher mammals, including great apes, it also fulfills non-procreative functions including cementing the pair bond and other social bonds. So it simply doesn't follow that every act of sex needs to be open to babymaking by any standard of the word 'natural'.

It's also eminently natural for many animals to 'abort', by abandoning eggs or reabsorbing the fetus for instance, if circumstances are too stressful or resources too scarce to make raising young a winning proposition. This too is good sound evolutionary strategy.*

*Of course, in some instances infanticide is also sound evolutionary strategy, which illustrates the real problem with trying to argue what's 'right' via what's 'natural'.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	diamonde 2003-11-02 05:32 pm UTC (link)
	That post made me all girlishly a-squee. Evolution cares not for your pesky morals! (And sex seems to be a horribly important form of social bonding in some monkeys, too. How else are you supposed to tell your best girlfriend that you love her? Monkeys don't have Hallmark, but they do have fingers...) stares all sparkly crush-eyed (Reply to this)(Parent)

	walkingundine 2003-10-24 03:27 pm UTC (link)
	Okay, silly question time. What's Godwin's Law? Let's call your corollary Folk's Constant. :) (Reply to this)(Thread)

	folk 2003-10-24 03:30 pm UTC (link)
	Google for the precise definition, but it's basically "He who invokes the Nazis in an argument (especially on the 'net) automatically loses." (Reply to this)(Parent)

	feenix 2003-10-24 05:54 pm UTC (link)
	We have ~~not enough~~ way too many corollaries to Godwin's Law as it is. F_W has singlehandedly started a penis tree of wank, sprouting from the tentacle-rape roots of Mike Godwin. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

feenix
2003-10-24 06:04 pm UTC (link)

Oh yeah, and I forgot to add: Godwin's Law, created back in 1990 when the Internet was mostly Usenet, is an axiom states that as the number of posts in a Usenet discussion approaches infinity, the probability of one or more of the participants being compared to Nazis approaches one. From this, it can be proved that once someone compares someone else to Nazis in any forum (Usenet, blog, message board), the discussion is over and the person making the comparison has lost.

snacky's Law is a direct corollary of that, stating that once one compares their opponent in a debate to "those bitchy elitist girls in high school," they have lost.

And that's what you need to know for 99% of F_W debate. Though, sometimes Stormfreak's Law (which is Godwin's law for race in an unrelated debate) creeps in.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	loafing_oaf 2003-10-24 07:47 pm UTC (link)
	If She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named turns up within the next couple of days, can we blame you for invoking her by typing her name? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	feenix 2003-10-24 09:07 pm UTC (link)
	SHIT! Oh well, it's not like I haven't brought spectacular wankers over here before...~~what is it with dwaggyns and HTTP_REFERERs?~~ And I thought she was banned from the entire site, so it shouldn't be a problem. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	folk 2003-10-24 09:31 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, and she can't change ISP or use a proxy. :P Man, if she appears, I'm just saying... cracks knuckles Perhaps you want to run widdershins backwards around an orange and yellow cat while wearing a BNF to avoid her appearance? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	"It's not such a bad little tree." phosfate 2003-10-26 05:32 am UTC (link)
	The phrase "penis tree of wank" gave me a mental picture of an incredibly fucked-up, stop-motion animation holiday special. I think that all the ibuprofin I took today might have expired. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	faultypremise 2003-10-24 04:32 pm UTC (link)
	Oh lordie. If you think this is funny, check out abortiondebate on lj some time. We get some of the wankiest threads over there. Feminist has been getting bombarded lately, too. (Reply to this)

	l_s_q 2003-10-24 04:43 pm UTC (link)
	You got there before me... damn. Mock the stupid is very wanky. This is a fine example of them being wanky, however. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Re: folk 2003-10-24 05:21 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah. Fresh wank, mmm, get it while it's TEH HAWT. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	pyratejenni 2003-10-24 10:24 pm UTC (link)
	Can we have a corollary to Godwin's Law dealing with a member of a dominant societal group who whines about people bashing that dominant social group? Please, mummy? Of course! I see the same attitude among some of the more out-there Heathens. As a friend put it once, "it's just a bunch of people whining about losing privileges they were never entitled to in the first place." (Reply to this)

zannechaos
2003-10-25 01:01 am UTC (link)

The wank is that he chose to flame a specific religious group that's not even 100% prolife, and the prolife organization is not 100% that specific religion.

There's even atheist prolifers.

But yes, anyone who has even a basic working knowledge of sex knows that sex can lead to procreation. If you're not mature enough to deal with the consequences or afford dealing with them either way, then you've got no business engaging in sex.

And that doesn't apply to sex, but other optional 'fun' things - if you don't have medical insurance and can't afford medical care, don't go skydiving.

It's just common sense.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	folk 2003-10-25 07:59 am UTC (link)
	Oh, yeah, the wank is coming from the poster as well as the commenters, don't get me wrong. The original post was kinda flamebaity, and it worked, oh yes. But yes, anyone who has even a basic working knowledge of sex knows that sex can lead to procreation. Not for me! gleeful grin Other consequences, yes, but pregnancy? Not outside MPREG fics. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	zannechaos 2003-10-25 08:02 am UTC (link)
	Lucky bastard! ::razzes him:: I need to find a doc who'll do a tube snip before I crack and try to spork out my uterus. Fortunately, I can't actually hear sprogs screaming, so my nerves will last a bit longer. ^_^ (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	moonjaguar 2003-10-26 02:30 am UTC (link)
	But you can see their mouths gape open, showing gums (or teeth in various stages of development). (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	zannechaos 2003-10-26 02:48 am UTC (link)
	Actually, after seeing a full-color picture of the gums of a living person infested with maggots, I think I can handle that now. o_O http://www.livejournal.com/community/tws_support/154831.html (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: moonjaguar 2003-10-26 02:54 am UTC (link)
	Ewwww....!! (thank dog the flies all died off where I'm from) (Reply to this)(Parent)

jfpbookworm
2003-10-25 10:36 pm UTC (link)

Plagiarizing myself:

"Conformity to nature, has no connection whatever with right and wrong. The idea can never be fitly introduced into ethical discussions at all, except, occasionally and partially, into the question of degrees of culpability." - John Stuart Mill, On Nature

What is the purpose of sex? Procreation.

I disagree, though perhaps I have a different sense of "purpose" in mind. Sex has the effect of reproduction, and as such a high (again, heterosexual) sex drive is thereby encouraged through natural selection, but I don't think any more can be said than that. Specifically, I don't think the reproductive effect takes any sort of ethical precedence over the other effects of sex.

From a more existentialist perspective, the purpose of anything is entirely subjective. I'd say that the purpose of sex is whatever the people involved make it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	phosfate 2003-10-26 05:37 am UTC (link)
	Truly. "Result" and "purpose" are not necessarily the same thing. Otherwise one might argue that the purpose of automobiles is to make it easier for the intoxicated to kill random strangers, or that the purpose of stick horses is defense against burglars. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2003-10-27 04:01 pm UTC (link)
	Note that she's not the first person to use this crazy heterosexual moon logic. I love that quote. ^___^ (Reply to this)