Lifestyle

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

355 | 356 | 357

 ... 944

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Sexcaliber

Sexcaliber

New York, NY
January 2005

APR 06, 2005 12:46 AM

MisterSatan said:

BillHaverchuck said:
From one of my journal entries:

Fun fact: Over the past 64 generations (since Roman times), the number of people whose genetic couplings were required to bring about the birth of you is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000. This number, though thousands of times bigger than the number of people who have ever lived, is accurate. How? incest, of course. Seriously, albeit possibly on a more removed level (ie: distant cousins, etc.) If you're dating someone from the same country and race, it is very likely that you two are related on some level.
This brought to you by A Short History of Nearly Everything

I'm not saying you should seek out relatives for mating purposes, but chances are you're already double dipping in the gene pool.


Well, mathematically, the above makes sense. But come on, man- first cousins?



Can someone please spell out for us seeming sibling progeny how there are the astronomical # of couplings to produce us? I'm missing something. Also, I think that the risk w/1st cousins is the most significant by far. Thanks!

witchhunter

witchhunter

Jackson, TN
February 2003

APR 06, 2005 01:14 AM

HenryTMensch said:

s5 said:
i think the point they're missing is that while two first cousins having children is low risk, if that trend keeps up for a generation or two (or more), the risk gets worse.

whatever makes people happy, but still, yuck.



This is a public health issue. It may make people happy not to wear their seatbelts or to take antibiotics needlessly. But it's my business when my insurance costs shoot through the roof and emergency rooms are packed because dipshits don't wear seatbelts. It's my business when overuse of antibiotics breeds strains of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics. Just like cousin fucking is my business when the gene pool is filled to the brim with inbred people prone to genetic defects.



This is hardly a public health issue. The risk of abnormalities developing over a few generations of first cousin interbreeding is nonexistant, even in a relativly closed population.
If you are so worried about your insurance rates, do you want to get rid of blacks? They are most likely to contract AIDS or diabetes. How about homosexuals? Attitude like yours are the reason the religious conservative rule this country.

HenryTMensch

HenryTMensch

New York, NY
December 2004

APR 06, 2005 01:53 AM

witchhunter said:

HenryTMensch said:

s5 said:
i think the point they're missing is that while two first cousins having children is low risk, if that trend keeps up for a generation or two (or more), the risk gets worse.

whatever makes people happy, but still, yuck.



This is a public health issue. It may make people happy not to wear their seatbelts or to take antibiotics needlessly. But it's my business when my insurance costs shoot through the roof and emergency rooms are packed because dipshits don't wear seatbelts. It's my business when overuse of antibiotics breeds strains of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics. Just like cousin fucking is my business when the gene pool is filled to the brim with inbred people prone to genetic defects.



This is hardly a public health issue. The risk of abnormalities developing over a few generations of first cousin interbreeding is nonexistant, even in a relativly closed population.
If you are so worried about your insurance rates, do you want to get rid of blacks? They are most likely to contract AIDS or diabetes. How about homosexuals? Attitude like yours are the reason the religious conservative rule this country.



If you say so.

People choose not to wear seat belts and choose to over use antibiotics and choose to fuck their cousins. People don't choose to be blacks or be homosexuals. People do choose to have unprotected sex, and we should have programs -- realistic sex ed in schools, e.g. -- to minimize the number of people that choose to have unprotected sex.

Attitudes like yours are the reason that these boards are cluttered with nonsensical buckwaas.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by HenryTMensch]

NatasKaput

NatasKaput

Bozeman, MT
December 2002

APR 06, 2005 02:13 AM

aw man those sears studio portaits made me pee myself

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by NatasKaput]

Jeff_Fries

Jeff_Fries

Humptulips, WA
September 2003

APR 06, 2005 02:15 AM

Saying you can't have sex with members of your family is basically eugenics.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Jeff_Fries]

Huck

Huck

United Kingdom
July 2004

APR 06, 2005 02:55 AM

believe it or not, i found this guy's analysis of Leviticus quite fascinating. nevertheless, i shudder everytime i see it referred to as the word of God. it is the word of men!

MistressMissy

mistressmissy

Grand Rapids, MI
March 2003

APR 06, 2005 04:42 AM

:shudders:

Bastardo

Bastardo

Boston, MA
January 2005

APR 06, 2005 04:47 AM

Great, just great. Now my computer screen is full of ick.

whoshouldibe

whoshouldibe

Denver, CO
April 2004

APR 06, 2005 05:51 AM

HellboundLiberal said:
It reminds me of something out of Preacher by Garth Ennis.



ok, sorry, can't help myself. As great as that pic of arseface is, he wasn't inbred, just dumb with a shotgun. There were plenty of inbreds in that comic tho, like Jesse's best friend as a kid and his sister/wife-to-be. That shit was brilliant!

ninetysevencents

ninetysevencents

Rochester, NY
August 2003

APR 06, 2005 06:21 AM

Reminds me of one of the creepiest x-files ever. Yeah, the one that starts with the kids finding the freshly buried baby corpse.

BurningLeviathan

BurningLeviathan

Australia
January 2005

APR 06, 2005 06:50 AM

they justed rolled her out every now and again.

Elisabeth

Elisabeth

San Francisco, CA
December 2002

APR 06, 2005 09:36 AM

So what happens when there is an acrimonious divorce? Who is going to take sides?

There are a million more cabs around the block, so to speak, can they find another one instead?

MisterSatan

MisterSatan

Portland, OR
August 2002

APR 06, 2005 09:42 AM

Jeff_Fries said:
Saying you can't have sex with members of your family is basically eugenics.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Jeff_Fries]


Isn't saying you only want to have sex with members of your family pretty much the same thing?

BraveArt

BraveArt

Los Angeles, CA
February 2004

APR 06, 2005 09:57 AM

yumchen said:
What about Uncle/Niece relations? I lost my best friend that way frown

[Edited on Apr 05, 2005 by yumchen]



That seems way worse to me--your brother or sister's KID!!!
AARGH! I am curdling like rotten milk
puke

UnnecessaryZ

unnecessaryz

Astoria, NY
July 2003

APR 06, 2005 10:18 AM

I didn't even have to check the link to see that it was all white people.
wink

Thistle

Thistle

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

APR 06, 2005 10:28 AM

UnnecessaryZ said:
I didn't even have to check the link to see that it was all white people.
wink



white people- so afraid of interracial dating, we will fuck our own cousins just to stay white.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Thistle]

jaLopY

jaLopY

I'm lost
December 2004

APR 06, 2005 10:40 AM

Thistle said:

UnnecessaryZ said:
I didn't even have to check the link to see that it was all white people.
wink



white people- so afraid of interracial dating, we will fuck our own cousins just to stay white.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Thistle]


Speak for yourself. wink

guesIwaspunkOnce

guesIwaspunkOnce

Canada
August 2004

APR 06, 2005 11:07 AM

What I think is quite amusing is that the whole reason the church initially denounced incest was because they didn't want brothers fighting each other for their sisters attention. WHich is unnaturally practical for the church..if you don't want brothers to compeate against each other for their sister tell them to look for love outside the house, makes sense to me. Normally the church tells you not to do something because is evil and you will burn in hell...yadda yadda yadda

Sexcaliber

Sexcaliber

New York, NY
January 2005

APR 06, 2005 11:10 AM

It is not eugenics-a discredited theory of racial superiority-if you either point out the real risk of breeding w/close relations, nor those who personally desire such, which does not relate to trying to alter the gene pool. Though mating w/1st cousins dor generations is a royal family type of greatly increased genetic disorder risk.

Again, can someone explain the trillions of couplings mentioned on p.1? Were they jsu referring to all intercourse, producing kids or not?

JohnSalisbury

JohnSalisbury

Saint Louis, MO
March 2005

APR 06, 2005 12:06 PM

Social taboos usually do have some--um, what's the word?--science underlying; couple things I've read somewhere (which doesn't make 'em true of course): Men of the First Nations on this continent would often travel hundreds of miles to "steal" a woman from a different clan or tribe, instead of marrying within their own; I think that's pretty interesting.
And some studies with human pheromones suggest we are chemically predisposed--that is to say, we are more sexually attracted to, by virtue of pheromone secretion, individuals who don't smell like us, people outside of our immediate gene pool.
But generally speaking I know a lot of people who will try anything once . . .

unravled

unravled

Portland, OR
August 2003

APR 06, 2005 12:09 PM

MisterSatan said:

Jeff_Fries said:
Saying you can't have sex with members of your family is basically eugenics.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Jeff_Fries]


Isn't saying you only want to have sex with members of your family pretty much the same thing?




Are you trying to tell me something?

wsj

wsj

I'm lost
September 2002

APR 06, 2005 12:11 PM

guesIwaspunkOnce said:
What I think is quite amusing is that the whole reason the church initially denounced incest was because they didn't want brothers fighting each other for their sisters attention. WHich is unnaturally practical for the church..if you don't want brothers to compeate against each other for their sister tell them to look for love outside the house, makes sense to me. Normally the church tells you not to do something because is evil and you will burn in hell...yadda yadda yadda



A lot of the church's actions are practical when they are first innitiated, and quite frankly most people are to lazy to listen to any reason other than do/don't do this or go to hell. Problem is that over time the need for the taboo becomes obsolete, but since the taboo is an article of faith by that time, it will remain although for no apparent reason.


ARRR!!!
TKS

MisterSatan

MisterSatan

Portland, OR
August 2002

APR 06, 2005 12:15 PM

unravled said:

MisterSatan said:

Jeff_Fries said:
Saying you can't have sex with members of your family is basically eugenics.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Jeff_Fries]


Isn't saying you only want to have sex with members of your family pretty much the same thing?


Are you trying to tell me something?


I'm your sister.
I'm your sister.
I'm your sister.

TonyTails

TonyTails

Calgary, AB
December 2003

APR 06, 2005 06:27 PM

Thistle said:

UnnecessaryZ said:
I didn't even have to check the link to see that it was all white people.
wink



white people- so afraid of interracial dating, we will fuck our own cousins just to stay white.

[Edited on Apr 06, 2005 by Thistle]



That is the most concise annalysis of this I have seen to date. And probably the most correct.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next