|
Post by hanan on Apr 19, 2005 20:37:53 GMT -5
I say a NO. If a man really wants to propagate his genes, then find a woman who wants the same and have babies. All people need to know their true father and where they came from. The "in thing" right now is to say that genetic ties are inconsequential and all that matters is who raised and loved you. Well, this is just not true. Blood runs thickly.
One thing is true- only the truly desperate or vain donate sperm.
|
|
|
Post by vela on Apr 19, 2005 21:59:04 GMT -5
I say a NO. If a man really wants to propagate his genes, then find a woman who wants the same and have babies. All people need to know their true father and where they came from. The "in thing" right now is to say that genetic ties are inconsequential and all that matters is who raised and loved you. Well, this is just not true. Blood runs thickly. One thing is true- only the truly desperate or vain donate sperm. Well, it looks like the NOes got it, hanan! I understand your position and that of others that have responded in the negative. I'm sure you understand that this is just a mind game; this is not a right/wrong, win/lose proposition. So, I hope it doesn't bother you if I play the devil's advocate or should I say "the gene's advocate". Your arguments can be morally correct but are not necessarily in your genes best interest. You see, genes have no morality or political correctness. Genes only have one prime directive, which is: perpetuate! If your genes propagate, knowing your true father or where you come from is secondary, even family ties are inconsequential. That, of course, from the gene's perspective! But, of course, we tend to intellectualize everything and in the process sometimes our "good judgement" makes us disregard or feel contempt for natures's dictate.
|
|
|
Post by hanan on Apr 20, 2005 0:19:00 GMT -5
Well, it looks like the NOes got it, hanan! I understand your position and that of others that have responded in the negative. I'm sure you understand that this is just a mind game; this is not a right/wrong, win/lose proposition. So, I hope it doesn't bother you if I play the devil's advocate or should I say "the gene's advocate". Your arguments can be morally correct but are not necessarily in your genes best interest. You see, genes have no morality or political correctness. Genes only have one prime directive, which is: perpetuate! If your genes propagate, knowing your true father or where you come from is secondary, even family ties are inconsequential. That, of course, from the gene's perspective! But, of course, we tend to intellectualize everything and in the process sometimes our "good judgement" makes us disregard or feel contempt for natures's dictate. Okay, I read Selfish Genes and what you talk of is the premise for this book. Don't separate yourself from your genes. When a man willingly donates his spermies to a bank, he knows what he is doing therefore he is selfish in addition to his genes. This is in contrast to the caveman who impregnates any female- he doesn't know what he doing, only acting on instinct. In this case, the genes alone are selfish. What sperm donors are is narcissistic. Most people, even the self derogatory ones are narcissistic. In my country we say "beauty in your eyes is the beauty in my eyes"
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Apr 20, 2005 11:59:46 GMT -5
I would never give my sperm! I can't understand the guys who answered "maybe" or "yes", My children have to be with me, no bastards in my lineage please!
|
|