'The Biology Argument' (A non-libidoist perspective)

[Nine]

Arguing what we should do based on biology is an argument too silly for me to give more than a one or two sentence reply to. For one, what about the people who are sexual, but don't have kids because they don't want them or are too invested in their work? If having kids was the purpose of living, we'd have made it a law.

Second thing, it's a pointless argument applied to a sentient species directing itself by free will.

And if you think about it, factoring in the number of lives we can support, how long we live, quality of life etc., it's our technology (our minds) that do more for the advancement of the species now than our wombs and ding dongs anyway.

Anyone want to make the case that a childless medical researcher is doing less to advance the species than a poverty stricken household full of children? Yeah, me neither.

Not that it matters since (as mentioned) nobody is obliged to research medicine OR have kids. Shit, do what you like.