Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rolla Coasta who wrote (32774)	4/10/2008 6:26:44 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219610

Rolla, I think you are misreporting her. <She is a renowned professor. She had 2 children. And SHe doesn't like your genetic selection by human being. Total crap idea ! > I don't think there are any women who will randomly have children with any creepy guy who shows up during ovulation. They ALL use genetic selection to eliminate the bad genes from the human population. Males have common experience of that situation and I'm absolutely certain you are no exception. The main job women do is winnow the human gene pool. They are pretty good at it too, as shown by the fact that humans have made such great progress compared with that of chimps. It's a virtuous feedback loop. The smarter women get, the better they are able to select suitable males, who apparently didn't include you so far. If she's a renown professor, she might even have some cyberspace presence which would confirm that she didn't use any selection process in selecting the father of her two children. $10 to a knob of goat poop says you can't find one. Mqurice

To: Rolla Coasta who wrote (32774)	4/10/2008 12:37:15 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219610

Rolla, who do you think should do the selecting, if not humans and especially if not the mother. <SHe doesn't like your genetic selection by human being. Total crap idea ! > Who, or what chose the father of her children if not a human being? What chose her to have children if not her? It is quite obvious that she, a human being, chose to have children. Ipso facto, a human being did the genetic selection of her to have children. She also, more than likely, was not raped and therefore selected the bloke to indulge in mating behaviour. Being a world-renowned professor, you'd think she knew that doing mating behaviour with a bloke, without contraception, could resu;t in genetic selection of children. So, as you should be able to see, human beings, aka people, and specifically female people, do the genetic selecting already. They have always done the genetic selection. What I'm proposing is that they be able to do less guesswork, crossing of fingers and hoping they don't get a mutant baby, and instead directly select the DNA they want. You are saying that it should be illegal for her to choose. Which means you think the state should dictate the genetic selection process. Which is what you are saying is a bad thing = state run eugenics = women forced to have babies using the processes dictated by the state. It's rather obvious that if women are not allowed to do genetic selection in a sensible and scientific way, they will be stuck with the same methods used by chimps = very limited knowledge and not much choice. As usual, as soon as governments stick their ignorance into things and start bossing people around, they do stupid things. Women have done a reasonable job until now. I say leave them to select the losers and ethnically cleanse them from the gene pool, and leave them alone to use whatever selection process they choose. Admittedly, they have selected plenty of people who were not fit for replication - look around you, and at you. That's evidence that they could do with some help. Women have had enough men and governments telling them how their and their children's lives should be. You should mind your own business. Mqurice