Should people with high quality DNA become sperm donors instead of starting families?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ghost of Cutten, Mar 10, 2011.

  1. stu

    stu

    Well just maybe that's the thing when you lock in deep seated preconceptions of how things must be. Since when did constructive criticism become a bad thing? Deconstruction leading to "the death of God" could be one positive outcome. Those "stupid" animals don't worship deities and it seems they are going to survive your existential abyss. Deconstruction could well be the one thing a human consciousness needs to use more often to avoid a dodgy ending from all that feedback anxiety.
     
    #11     Mar 11, 2011
  2. Ricter

    Ricter

    You do not understand existentialism.
     
    #12     Mar 11, 2011
  3. stu

    stu

    You imagine the existentialism which is people being free to be responsible for what they make of themselves is looking into an abyss?
    Maybe you could use some deconstruction right there to appreciate what it is you are actually suggesting.
     
    #13     Mar 11, 2011
  4. Pekelo

    Pekelo

    Have you considered marrying a woman who is richer than you? Of course, why would she marry you??? In the case of divorce, you could be ripping off of her....

    But please yes, sow your Colbert's Formula 401 quality semen around, so humanity will be left a better place once you leave us....
     
    #14     Mar 11, 2011
  5. Ricter

    Ricter

    I didn't mean to say you couldn't define it.
     
    #15     Mar 11, 2011
  6. Do you not think that there are values that can be passed on through the act of raising your theoretical child?

    Are there no important cerebral and moral attributes that can only be imparted through the process of parenting?

    Is your 'superior' DNA enough to allow a productive, purposeful and happy life to your offspring?
     
    #16     Mar 11, 2011
  7. No, dreams of this kind are not something I've had, in fact I have always been very much against having any kids. Besides, I will be dead in a few decades anyway, at which point I will obviously no longer care about the future. However, there may be a moral duty to humanity to do my bit to further the survival and progress of the species.

    After all, if any of my ancestors had had a similar lack of desire to reproduce, I would not be alive. Ditto for every human alive today. Seems a bit irrational to act in a way that would have prevented you from ever existing, if your predecessors had adopted the same behaviour.
     
    #17     Mar 20, 2011
  8. If the entire world act like I have up until the present, humanity will become extinct by the end of the 21st century. Even on an individual level, you yourself are only alive because hundreds of ancestors aggressively sought out females to copulate with.
     
    #18     Mar 20, 2011
  9. True - but most people going to sperm banks can't conceive normally with their partners. My act will bring happiness two one or two people, and create new individuals. That should be a net benefit. And unless the mother is a total basket case, the resulting child should be at least reasonably functioning as a human being.
     
    #19     Mar 20, 2011
  10. Not true. If I impregnated many women of average intelligence or lower, their offspring would grow up to become significantly more intelligent than them. That is a net benefit. If my DNA wouldn't benefit humanity, females would not want to breed with me, whereas I have had a few who expressed an interest in doing so.

    Also, donating sperm is hardly difficult, and there is some pleasure involved in the process.
     
    #20     Mar 20, 2011