Is a biological imperative a grand design?
Nature wants me to impregnate as many females as I can find, thus assuring that my genetic material is as widespread as possible. Isn't this also part of the grand design? Society disapproves of this behaviour. Is society imposing an abnormal code? Is monogamy, which prevents the genetic material of the most competitive from being as widely spread as nature would like it to be, "biologically dysfunctional"?
Lots of people choose not to reproduce. Some are committed to their religions, or their careers, or to a sexual preference that does not encourage reproduction. Are they abnormal?
There are people that don't like me, and there always will be people that don't like me. Do I expend energy trying in vain to change them?
No, I expend energy in what I hope is not a vain attempt to persuade them to leave me alone.
Sorry, that was an assumption, a pretty safe one, but still one. What are you then?
I am not affiliated with any political party. Each has positions of which I approve, and positions of which I disapprove. I am probably closest to libertarianism than anything else, but the Libertarian Party espouses far too fundamentalist a line to attract me.
I am still waiting for the day the Democrats figure out how to really win.
A lot of people have spent the last eight years waiting for the Republicans to figure that one out, and one of the major problems the Republicans have had has been division within the party: how to attract (or pander to) the religious right without including items in the platform that alienate more moderate conservatives. The shoe you describe fits both feet, and Republicans have hardly been dominating the political landscape lately. |
