Moral objections to human sexuality; breeding should be done in a lab

[Lord Jade Cross]

56 minutes ago, James121 said:

Eating meat is also primitive. Should we all be made to stop?

Mankind making tools to serve a purpose is primitive. We should stop this too (despite the fact that the tools required to harvest a lab pregnancy are designed and made by man)

“Many people can find sex disgusting” but for every one that does there are thousands maybe millions that don’t.

We don’t survive as a species by following the few and ignoring the many.

 

 

 

 

 

Funny thing, that the reason we are here today is because of those few in comparison who thought of new ways to survive.

 

It isnt sex that has given us what we have today. Its those few who have thought ahead that have given us the commodities we have today. 

 

If we relied of sex alone, the human race would have easily perished a long time ago due to all the events they have faced simply becauase sex doesnt produce medication or tools to survive. 

 

Unless sticking your penis in a vagina produces out microchips, syringes (good nightmare fuel but not a biologocal fact) and what not immediately after sex, you really are seeing the death of humans in a relatively short period of time

 

 

[James121]

6 minutes ago, Jade Cross said:

Funny thing, that the reason we are here today is because of those few in comparison who thought of new ways to survive.

 

It isnt sex that has given us what we have today. Its those few who have thought ahead that have given us the commodities we have today. 

 

If we relied of sex alone, the human race would have easily perished a long time ago due to all the events they have faced simply becauase dosant produce medication or tools to survive. 

 

Unless sticking your penis in a vagina produces out microchips, syringes (good nightmare fuel but not a biologocal fact) and what notafter sex, you really are seeing the death of humans in a relatively short period of time

 

 

‘Sticking your penis in a vagina’ as you put it is what created the humans that designed and developed the micro chips you speak of.

Now that we arguably have the scientific capability to lab breed the human race you are suggesting that we go against the way in which humans are designed to breed in favour of a lab? Very very extreme!

Maybe, one day when the science exists to remove anyone who is born gay, asexual or sexual, we can lab manipulate them in to being almost a robot with no sexual attraction nor affection towards anyone full stop. This line of thinking is truly truly very ridiculous. 

 

Also, when you say “if we relied on sex alone we would have perished a long time a go” you are not citing any data that supports that. It’s simply your opinion, the opinion of someone who doesn’t like or care for sex and thus a biased, unsupported, defying all logic opinion.

[Lord Jade Cross]

14 minutes ago, James121 said:

‘Sticking your penis in a vagina’ as you put it is what created the humans that designed and developed the micro chips you speak of.

Now that we arguably have the scientific capability to lab breed the human race you are suggesting that we go against the way in which humans are designed to breed in favour of a lab? Very very extreme!

Maybe, one day when the science exists to remove anyone who is born gay, asexual or sexual, we can lab manipulate them in to being almost a robot with no sexual attraction nor affection towards anyone full stop. This line of thinking is truly truly very ridiculous. 

 

Also, when you say “if we relied on sex alone we would have perished a long time a go” you are not citing any data that supports that. It’s simply your opinion, the opinion of someone who doesn’t like or care for sex and thus a biased, unsupported, defying all logic opinion.

 

 

You want data? Think of all the diseases and situations (wars and the like) that humans have undergone. Has sex ended wars or found cure for diseases? Do you get sick, have sex and magically get better? Do you wake up, have sex and go by your day fully nourished?

 

Sex may serve for gratification and emotional fulfilment and thats all well and good but it doesnt provide for much afterwards.

 

Humans were not made to mamipulate their surroundings. Its something they learned so right off the bat, humans already go againts the design of nature. One can even argue that humans themselves are a flaw of nature. Saying that its extreme or ridiculous to think of manipulating genetic coding is like the pot calling the kettle black. 

 

 

 

[Homer]

On 14.2.2018 at 5:05 AM, LittleGoody2Shoes said:

I have moral objections to any forms of sex, and would like utopian world where sex doesn't exist. I'm looking for people who agree with me. 

What are these moral objections based on? How do they show?

[lazypanda]

3 hours ago, Baam said:

Maybe we should evolve and not digest food through our mouths? Just beam food into us Star Trek style? Well no, no one wants to do that, because eating is enjoyable. Just as sex is. But, not everyone finds eating enjoyable, nor does everyone find sex enjoyable.

Hmmm....

Baam....would u like to tear apart a dying bleeding animal with ur bare hands and eat its raw flesh ? I'd assume the answer is NO !!!! Thats exactly what I am talking about !!!! Humans have evolved to be more refined !! We cook our food,we eat with cutlery !!!! Why are we doing that ??? That's not natural at all !! Thats not how other animals eat !!!! Nature intended us to get excited at the sight of bleeding flesh and eat it !!! But we as humans cant now !!!!  We need to dress it and cook it and add all kinds of other ingrediants to make it palatable !!

I apply the same argument to sex !!! 

[lazypanda]

4 hours ago, confused lil bee said:

Most of the human population seems to really enjoy sex though so even if it were possible to breed people in a lab

They enjoy it,but many, in the process also mess up their own lives and the lives of others around us(eg-teen pregnancies). 

 

2 hours ago, James121 said:

This is a power no one should be allowed to have.

Why not ?? 

 

2 hours ago, James121 said:

Hitler tried to have enough power over the human race to play god

Hitler was a maniac killer. I cannot believe u used him as an analogy for making babies in a lab !!!

1 hour ago, James121 said:

Mankind making tools to serve a purpose is primitive.

You need to recheck the meaning of primitive !!! Man making tools was his first step to a more advanced existence. There is nothing primitive about that at all. 

But u using a stick with a sharpened stone to fight when we have machine guns is definitely  primitive. And thats my point. Why rely on something primitive and unrelible like sex to make babies when u have superior technologies that give better results !

2 hours ago, James121 said:

 

We don’t survive as a species by following the few and ignoring the many

Thats not exactly true !!!! Evolution only cares about what serves us better,not what majority of the population likes ! Asexuality definitely serves a population better(provided we have other means of reproduction).

 

2 hours ago, James121 said:

My immediate argument is that it is unethical to remove sex and produce children in a lab.

Why ? Why is it unethical ? 

 

1 hour ago, Homer said:

Is there any example of Mankind regulating such a big thing in an ethical manner?

Hmmm....not until now ! But theres always a first time for everything. People of the dark ages would have been right down incredulous if you had suggested democracy to them !!! But it works well now. 

[lazypanda]

1 hour ago, James121 said:

Maybe, one day when the science exists to remove anyone who is born gay, asexual or sexual, we can lab manipulate them in to being almost a robot with no sexual attraction nor affection towards anyone full stop.

The point is....there would be no asexual,sexual,gay person in the first place !!!! There is only one class of people and thats humans. Don't you see how wonderful that is ? No discrimination !!!!!

You dont need sexual attraction to have affection. I never said we should make people unaffectionate.Thats something u imagined ! I believe it is affection that makes humans what they are. 

[Philip027]

Quote

Why rely on something primitive and unrelible like sex to make babies when u have superior technologies that give better results !

Well, for one, a lot of us don't have that kind of money to spare... especially when the kid itself is going to need it after it's born.

 

Also, to most people, sex is fun and they don't actually mind undergoing it as part of the babymaking process, even if it takes numerous attempts.

[lazypanda]

Just now, Philip027 said:

Well, for one, a lot of us don't have that kind of money to spare... especially when the kid itself is going to need it after it's born.

 

Also, to most people, sex is fun and they don't actually mind undergoing it as part of the babymaking process, even if it takes numerous attempts.

I would think of this to be like free healthcare(sorry americans...pls try to imagine that)....the government does it for you....u dont have to pay !!!!

 

Sex is fun for most people....but its a risky activity.

[James121]

9 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

The point is....there would be no asexual,sexual,gay person in the first place !!!! There is only one class of people and thats humans. Don't you see how wonderful that is ? No discrimination !!!!!

You dont need sexual attraction to have affection. I never said we should make people unaffectionate.Thats something u imagined ! I believe it is affection that makes humans what they are. 

You call it no discrimination, I call it absolute discrimination because you remove the variety within the human race that makes us so unique and diverse. It’s almost like you are suggesting everyone being the same would be brilliant. It wouldn’t. If the idea of robots is what you want then great!

And yes I did say remove affection. You can’t expect to simply remove the bits you don’t like and for all other elements to be ignored. 

 

[Homer]

11 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

Why not ?? 

This power will be abused. It's not a question of if, but when. It won't end well.

 

Sex is not any more risky than crossing a road.

 

I don't see why we shouldn't be able to see people as one "class", regardless of gender, right now. If someone wants to find something to discriminate other people for, they'll find something. Remove gender if you like, there's still skin colour, height, weight, intelligence, origin, languages.... it's pretty, er, interesting to claim that getting rid of sex and/or gender will end discrimination.

 

19 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

Hitler was a maniac killer. I cannot believe u used him as an analogy for making babies in a lab !!!

A lab like this would be a massive playground for a maniac killer...

[lazypanda]

1 minute ago, James121 said:

You call it no discrimination, I call it absolute discrimination because you remove the variety within the human race that makes us so unique and diverse. It’s almost like you are suggesting everyone being the same would be brilliant. It wouldn’t. If the idea of robots is what you want then great!

And yes I did say remove affection. You can’t expect to simply remove the bits you don’t like and for all other elements to be ignored. 

 

I never said make everyone absolutely identical. I was talking only in the context of sexuality....which wouldn't exist because nobody has sex anymore. 

[James121]

 Y

22 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

They enjoy it,but many, in the process also mess up their own lives and the lives of others around us(eg-teen pregnancies). 

 

Why not ?? 

 

Hitler was a maniac killer. I cannot believe u used him as an analogy for making babies in a lab !!!

You need to recheck the meaning of primitive !!! Man making tools was his first step to a more advanced existence. There is nothing primitive about that at all. 

But u using a stick with a sharpened stone to fight when we have machine guns is definitely  primitive. And thats my point. Why rely on something primitive and unrelible like sex to make babies when u have superior technologies that give better results !

Thats not exactly true !!!! Evolution only cares about what serves us better,not what majority of the population likes ! Asexuality definitely serves a population better(provided we have other means of reproduction).

 

Why ? Why is it unethical ? 

 

Hmmm....not until now ! But theres always a first time for everything. People of the dark ages would have been right down incredulous if you had suggested democracy to them !!! But it works well now. 

You cited one issue with sexual enjoyment ignoring all the positives of it.

 

Hitler also said ‘why not’ when it came to removing elements of the human race he didn’t like.

 

I don’t advocate what Hitler did as being right or just, I simply don’t advocate that pressing the human race in to a system of breeding that removes certain human traits is all that different.

[Philip027]

Quote

I would think of this to be like free healthcare(sorry americans...pls try to imagine that)....the government does it for you....u dont have to pay !!!!

 

Sex is fun for most people....but its a risky activity.

There is no way that something like this would be free.  Even in-vitro is expensive as hell, and even that is not guaranteed to work all the time.

 

Having a child in general is risky.  You don't know what kind of kid you're going to get.  You don't know the kind of hardships they'll face.  You don't know how much time/money their care is going to take.  Anyone who accepts the mantle of parent is inherently accepting a hefty degree of risk already.

[James121]

1 hour ago, Jade Cross said:

 

 

You want data? Think of all the diseases and situations (wars and the like) that humans have undergone. Has sex ended wars or found cure for diseases? Do you get sick, have sex and magically get better? Do you wake up, have sex and go by your day fully nourished?

 

Sex may serve for gratification and emotional fulfilment and thats all well and good but it doesnt provide for much afterwards.

 

Humans were not made to mamipulate their surroundings. Its something they learned so right off the bat, humans already go againts the design of nature. One can even argue that humans themselves are a flaw of nature. Saying that its extreme or ridiculous to think of manipulating genetic coding is like the pot calling the kettle black. 

 

 

 

What on earth are you going on about? Sex didn’t cure any disease nor stop a war. Sex merely produces the humans in this world.

 

Its extreme and ridiculous to suggest that we, the human race, should breed exclusively via a lab. 

 

Simple.

[James121]

5 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

I never said make everyone absolutely identical. I was talking only in the context of sexuality....which wouldn't exist because nobody has sex anymore. 

So who now chooses what differences we have then? You? Can I take charge in which case I will remove all hunans who are X, Y, or Z.........

 

like i say, extreme and ridiculous 

[lazypanda]

1 minute ago, Homer said:

Sex is not any more risky than crossing a road.

Sex is not anymore risky than crossing a road drunk...which us still pretty risk !!!

People seem to lose all common sense and logic when they want sex(eg-having unprotected sex).

 

4 minutes ago, Homer said:

it's pretty, er, interesting to claim that getting rid of sex and/or gender will end discrimination.

I never said it will remove ALL kinds of discrimination. Even if we make exact copies of humans there will still be discrimination based on how rich/poor u are etc. 

I was only talking about diacrimination with respect to sexuality.

 

6 minutes ago, Homer said:

A lab like this would be a massive playground for a maniac killer...

How so ? I'm talking about a facility to make babies,not concentration camps. 

[James121]

1 minute ago, lazypanda said:

Sex is not anymore risky than crossing a road drunk...which us still pretty risk !!!

People seem to lose all common sense and logic when they want sex(eg-having unprotected sex).

Just where do you get this stuff from? 

[Lord Jade Cross]

5 minutes ago, James121 said:

Sex didn’t cure any disease nor stop a war.

 

 

My point exactly

 

Quote

 

Its extreme and ridiculous to suggest that we, the human race, should breed exclusively via a lab. 

 

And what would the argument for that be? That its "unnatural"? 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

[James121]

Just now, Jade Cross said:

My point exactly

 

And what would the argument for that be? That its "unnatural"? 

 

 

 

 

Your point exactly. Sex didn’t create any disease nor start any war either. 

 

And yes, it is unnatural.

[lazypanda]

3 minutes ago, James121 said:

Sex didn’t cure any disease nor stop a war.

Thats exactly his point.

 

4 minutes ago, James121 said:

Its extreme and ridiculous to suggest that we, the human race, should breed exclusively via a lab

Still better than millions of starving and sick children all over the world

4 minutes ago, James121 said:

So who now chooses what differences we have then? You? Can I take charge in which case I will remove all hunans who are X, Y, or Z.........

 

I already said we are talking about a hypothetical ideal world were the people regulating this are ethical !!! If ur going to keep bringing up this already beaten to death argument of ethics....i give up on you !!! 

[lazypanda]

3 minutes ago, James121 said:

Just where do you get this stuff from? 

Hmm...lets think....from Charlie Sheen!!! And the thousands of teen moms all over the world !!! Etc etc....

[lazypanda]

14 minutes ago, James121 said:

You cited one issue with sexual enjoyment ignoring all the positives of it.

What are the positives of that ? A superficial gratification ? 

I'm all ears....pls enlighten me !!! 

 

Please don't say babies....because the argument now is why u need sex when you have a better technology to reproduce !!

[Baam]

54 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

Hmmm....

Baam....would u like to tear apart a dying bleeding animal with ur bare hands and eat its raw flesh ? I'd assume the answer is NO !!!! Thats exactly what I am talking about !!!! Humans have evolved to be more refined !! We cook our food,we eat with cutlery !!!! Why are we doing that ??? That's not natural at all !! Thats not how other animals eat !!!! Nature intended us to get excited at the sight of bleeding flesh and eat it !!! But we as humans cant now !!!!  We need to dress it and cook it and add all kinds of other ingrediants to make it palatable !!

I apply the same argument to sex !!! 

Uh... 'Tearing apart a dying bleeding animal and eat its raw flesh.' That is in no way comparable to sex... You seem to think that sex is disgusting, and that all sexual people are inferior, unrefined, and barbaric. Do you think that you are better and superior to me because you're asexual? Do you think you've evolved further than sexual people? Just because you personally do not like sex, does not make everyone who disagrees with you terrible people. 

 

2 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

Hmm...lets think....from Charlie Sheen!!! And the thousands of teen moms all over the world !!! Etc etc....

You really think they're representative of the majority of sexual people?

[Homer]

6 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

Please don't say babies....because the argument now is why u need sex when you have a better technology to reproduce !!

There are about 2,752 threads on here where you can find loads of different reasons for having sex, other than breeding. And even reproducing has an emotional factor to it that lots of people won't get from ordering a lab child.

 

9 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

What are the positives of that ? A superficial gratification ? 

I'm all ears....pls enlighten me !!! 

Who's to determine what's superficial and what's not?

 

21 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

How so ? I'm talking about a facility to make babies,not concentration camps. 

Me too. Do you really not see any danger to hand the ingredients to breeding to one small group of people?

[lazypanda]

6 minutes ago, Baam said:

eem to think that sex is disgusting, and that all sexual people are inferior, unrefined, and barbaric. Do you think that you are better and superior to me because you're asexual? Do you think you've evolved further than sexual people? Just because you personally do not like sex, does not make everyone who disagrees with you terrible people. 

I think sex is disgusting....definitely...but i never said asexuals are superior or sexuals are barbaric or any of the bullshit u have claimed above. I respect sexuals as equals and humans but the fact remains that they are exposing themselves to disgusting bodily fluids and potenial infection everytime they have sex ! If u imagine things i never said thats not my problem! If your going to take an open discussion so personally and claim that I think ur terrible because u dont agree with me, you should not even be in an open forum in the first place. Just chill...

 

14 minutes ago, Baam said:

You really think they're representative of the majority of sexual people?

No they are not. But the fact remains that majority of the sexual people make poor decisions when they are "in the heat". Why do people have flings when they know it would mess up their family? Why do people sleep with high risk groups like prostitutes and catch STDs? Why do horny teens have unprotected sex despite being advised by parents and teachers not to ? Why do couples have more babies than they can afford ? 

Again,im not saying all sexuals are like this....just that there are a LOT of people like this.

[lazypanda]

7 minutes ago, Homer said:

There are about 2,752 threads on here where you can find loads of different reasons for having sex, other than breeding.

Pls quote a few....i have better things to do than sit and read 2,752 threads on a subject i have very little interest in.

 

9 minutes ago, Homer said:

Who's to determine what's superficial and what's not?

Ahhh....philosophy !!!! The one thing we can always turn to when we have no counter...

 

10 minutes ago, Homer said:

Do you really not see any danger to hand the ingredients to breeding to one small group of people?

Again,I have already stated from the beginning that I am talking about a hypothetical ideal world with ethical people regulating the labs !!!! 

 

[Telecaster68]

One upside - we could breed out poor spelling and grammar.

[Homer]

1 minute ago, lazypanda said:

Ahhh....philosophy !!!! The one thing we can always turn to when we have no counter...

So you don't know the answer?

 

1 minute ago, lazypanda said:

Pls quote a few....i have better things to do than sit and read 2,752 threads on a subject i have very little interest in.

The SPFA section is quite rich in this regard. You should check it out some time

[Baam]

18 minutes ago, lazypanda said:

I think sex is disgusting....definitely...but i never said asexuals are superior or sexuals are barbaric or any of the bullshit u have claimed above. I respect sexuals as equals and humans but the fact remains that they are exposing themselves to disgusting bodily fluids and potenial infection everytime they have sex ! If u imagine things i never said thats not my problem! If your going to take an open discussion so personally and claim that I think ur terrible because u dont agree with me, you should not even be in an open forum in the first place. Just chill...

I do not think I am unreasonable in saying you were implying such things:

Quote

I think sex is disgusting and so damn primitive, hence future humans should be bred in a lab with artificial uteruses! 

Implying that sexual people are primal and need to evolve.

Quote

Too bad I don't have control over the human race....if I did...at least there wont be terrible STDs,birth complications and over population !!! 

Saying that the world would be better off if you were in charge, and taking away the free-will of sexual people would make the world a better place. I.e. Implying that we are inferior.

Quote

Baam....would u like to tear apart a dying bleeding animal with ur bare hands and eat its raw flesh ?

Again, implying that sexual people are primal beings and completely barbaric here (by inflating THIS with sexual acts).

Quote

 Humans have evolved to be more refined !!  [...] I apply the same argument to sex !!! 

Implying that sexual people need to evolve, again.

Quote

Asexuality definitely serves a population better(provided we have other means of reproduction).

Now this is BLATANT asexual elitism here. This is clearly stating that you are superior to me and all other sexual people.

 

I think I have every right to react in the way I did for all these statements. As a sexual person, yes, I am offended by the things you have implied about me. I am not barbaric. I am not inferior. And the world would not be a better place if I, along with every other sexual person, were asexual. 

 

Quote

No they are not. But the fact remains that majority of the sexual people make poor decisions when they are "in the heat". Why do people have flings when they know it would mess up their family? Why do people sleep with high risk groups like prostitutes and catch STDs? Why do horny teens have unprotected sex despite being advised by parents and teachers not to ? Why do couples have more babies than they can afford ? 

Again,im not saying all sexuals are like this....just that there are a LOT of people like this.

No. Where did you get this 'poor decision when they are "in the heat"' nonsense from? Did you carry out research on every sexual person and determine this? This is your own warped view of sexual people. Movies and television is not representative of sexual people. They're entertainment for a reason... You think because some people make immature decisions (especially young people), that the entire human race should be sterilised?

 

If you admit that not all sexuals are like this, then why do you insist that all of us should suffer for some people's bad decisions?

 

EDIT: Oh, and by the way, I didn't mean that you thought that I in particular am inferior. I meant me, as a sexual person.