No good can come from this:

[bio]

Beauty fades... stupid is forever.

Of course, my wife is both beautiful to me and smart as hell. This goes well for me, because we spend most of our time talking to each other.

I can't imagine what it must be like to be married to someone like Jessica Simpson. She's great to look at, but mentally vacant. That would get old really fast.

[Rocketdork]

Ok, we have deviated from where this began...bugfreezer and I. We started with a 23 year old (hot) teacher having sex with a 14 year old boy (lucky bastard) and moved onto a deeper discussion on our society.

I guess I am on the liberal side of things, and really see nothing wrong with a 23 year old having sex with a 14 year old. In fact I think we all agree (the men anyway) that we would have loved to have an oportunity like this when we were 14.

If we take all the social implecations aside, the risk of veneral disease, relationship issues and pregnancy, the real issue here is whether or not the teacher should be thrown in Jail. First of all the law says its not OK for a 23 year old to have sex with anyone under 18, she broke the law, she should be punished.

My thoughts here are that the law was wrong. I have a 15 year old daughter and if a 23 year old guy came by as her boyfriend I would pby be very suspicious, but in principal, he *could* be the right guy for her, and I wouldn't throw him out of the house.

I never implied that sex not being evil automatically leads to uninhibited sex with anyone at any time, nor did I say its OK to step outside of a commited relationship. All I am saying is that sex is OK, its not evil, its as natural to humanity as eating or breathing and just as essential. If we as a society would drop the idea that sex is an evil thing, I think we as a society would be much better off. We could educate our kids about sex, prepare them for it. Teach them to make decisions that are responsible and take responsibility for their upbringing (when it comes to sex). The sex is evil argument takes away the ability of society to educate our children in what is safe and sane when it comes to sex. The schools can't have sex education because its against some peoples belief that sex before marriage is wrong. We can't give them access to condoms, and other forms of birth control. We all know that sex is fun, and that kids, given the opportunity, will have sex. I would rather my daughter didn't have sex, but if she chooses to, she already knows what to do to be safe.

It seems to me that in the two cases cited that the issues with the relationship were there way prior to going outside of the marriage for sex. The idea of what do we tell the kids is no different that in any screwed up relationship that fails, we tell them the truth. Do they need to know at the age of 2 that mommy had sex with a 14 year old? No, I don't think we do. We tell them what they will understand, and if they ask, we can tell them the whole story later in their lives. The underlying issue here was not the sex outside of the marriage, it is the screwed up relationship that allowed the thought that sex outside of the marriage was an OK thing, that there was nothing left to risk.

I am all for committed relationships that inhibit sex outside of the relationship. I am also for having sex within the rules that you establish for yourself. I am also all for the idea that sex is OK, that two people in Love or not in love can have sex, and that they have not broken moral laws...In my mind morality is about being true to self and society, not about sex.

[bugfreezer]

Besides which we are trained to regard a certain body type as superior, b/c that is what the media pushes on us, whether or not it is scientific - as some have tried to categorize the science of attraction; something about symmetry - but only a few (25% is generous, IMHO) meet the standard, and even then some get their help from Photoshop or from surgery. Again the gals take it in the shorts because many try to meet "the standard" and can't.

[Pigman]

Your arguments assume something that is simply not true - they assume that people are inherently logical. They are not, even most of the educated ones. Most people want to be told what to think as long as it agrees with their idea of how things should be, or at least does not interfere with their chosen lifestyle.

WOW! total agreement. It would seem that we form our ideas of what is right and wrong and then enjoy the input that feeds our conclusions. That is why true debate / truth tables / etc. just doesn't happen much anymore.

When we argue from emotion, the truth is almost always harder to determine. The biggest thing I took away from my Philosophy classes was the logical argument structure and fallacy determination.

It would appear that most if not all marketing techniques use fallacies to make their point.

To argue with people who are unable to see past their own emotions and are unwilling or unable to address the facts/truth, is a waste of time.

Naturally, if a person "feels" a certain way, that actually becomes a fact to them. That is, they actually "feel" that way.

On the other hand, think about how boring the world would be if we actually did operate in a continuous logical way.. I.E. Mr Spock! What fun would that be?

[Rocketdork]

Besides which we are trained to regard a certain body type as superior, b/c that is what the media pushes on us,

That's because a certain body type IS superior. Its not the media, its biology! Its about successful propegation of humanity. The fact that only 25% of the US fits the bill is about generous food portions and sedentary lifestyle, not about the media telling us something is right or wrong.

All this stuff is natural, Women practice natural selection too. They choose the guy that will provide, stay with them and offer security, its what biology dictates. In an interesting study they found that many women had external affairs that resulted in a higher than usual percentage of pregnacies. They concluded that they chose the man that would take care of the kids to be the one they married, but they chose the stronger, more robust male to breed with...

Funny thing is that the animal world does the same thing...natural selection at work!

Nature takes care of us, they make sure that we are equal when it comes to biology. The man doesn't have to worry about where his sperm goes, but nature has decided that we are responsible for providing for the family. Very much against the current method of thinking, but a reality in the past.

[eddiecanuck]

That's because a certain body type IS superior. Its not the media, its biology! Its about successful propegation of humanity. The fact that only 25% of the US fits the bill is about generous food portions and sedentary lifestyle, not about the media telling us something is right or wrong.

*insert BIG can of worms being opened*

Here we go.

[bugfreezer]

I think they were trying to inject levity into the discussion. That's OK, I'll still shake your hand if we ever meet.

For those who think we're too intense...an illustration:

If people were to drop their drawers an' drop their load unrestrainedly, I can imagine a scene at the Lazy-I...y'all are going out to the smoking area...ok, as many of you that smoke...and the following is heard;

{Bio} Man, how 'bout those friggin' thrips?

{Porc} Yeah, wonder when facilities will kill the bastiches?

{Bio} I'm gonna put in another request...<SQUISH!>...AW, CRAP!

...ok, I tried ....

Okay we are back. Now that you have clarified your point, I want to make clear that I do not think of sex as inherently evil - what society thinks I cannot help easily - merely that it, like other body functions, cannot be used without regulation.
Besides, my wife and I enjoy each other's company...a lot. We also enjoy talking, too.

If we take all the social implecations aside, the risk of veneral disease, relationship issues and pregnancy, the real issue here is whether or not the teacher should be thrown in Jail.

Problem is, as I demonstrated earlier and as you clarify later, you can't. We think we can regulate ourselves by controlled experiments and isolate these things - people really have a hard time getting outside ourselves to that degree b/c we cannot fully master our subconscious drives - take addictions lots of folks know that eating too much, drinking alcohol too much, smoking, drugs, etc., but so many of these cannot kick the habit, even though we know it'll hurt or kill us. And those are the more obvious issues. The subtle ones are tougher. Hence Dr. Phil getting rich.

That's all for now. Have a nice day!

:edit

That's because a certain body type IS superior. Its not the media, its biology! Its about successful propegation of humanity. The fact that only 25% of the US fits the bill is about generous food portions and sedentary lifestyle, not about the media telling us something is right or wrong.

*insert BIG can of worms being opened*

Here we go.

No Kiddin!
Pity the can opener didn't break, still gotta go for today.
:/edit

[bugfreezer]

Your arguments assume something that is simply not true - they assume that people are inherently logical. They are not, even most of the educated ones. Most people want to be told what to think as long as it agrees with their idea of how things should be, or at least does not interfere with their chosen lifestyle.

WOW! total agreement. It would seem that we form our ideas of what is right and wrong and then enjoy the input that feeds our conclusions. That is why true debate / truth tables / etc. just doesn't happen much anymore.

When we argue from emotion, the truth is almost always harder to determine. The biggest thing I took away from my Philosophy classes was the logical argument structure and fallacy determination.

It would appear that most if not all marketing techniques use fallacies to make their point.

To argue with people who are unable to see past their own emotions and are unwilling or unable to address the facts/truth, is a waste of time.

Naturally, if a person "feels" a certain way, that actually becomes a fact to them. That is, they actually "feel" that way.

On the other hand, think about how boring the world would be if we actually did operate in a continuous logical way.. I.E. Mr Spock! What fun would that be?

It wouldn't be fun and it would never happen anyway. One of the great failures of a materialistic/scientific worldview is that while it can answer what will happen if we do X, it does not answer why we do X and why we don't do Y if X gives a negative result. The scientific method (which logic helped define) should never have been enshrined as a god (or a replacement for God), rather it should have been a tool to help us understand how things work here on earth. Our emphasis on what we could see and replicate could never silence what we cannot see or replicate, but we tried. Say what you like about "religion", but it was a way to control what we could not logically control ourselves.

Crud, I really gotta go - mebbe we'll have more later.

Nice day, y'all!

[Pigman]

It wouldn't be fun and it would never happen anyway. One of the great failures of a materialistic/scientific worldview is that while it can answer what will happen if we do X, it does not answer why we do X and why we don't do Y if X gives a negative result. The scientific method (which logic helped define) should never have been enshrined as a god (or a replacement for God), rather it should have been a tool to help us understand how things work here on earth. Our emphasis on what we could see and replicate could never silence what we cannot see or replicate, but we tried. Say what you like about "religion", but it was a way to control what we could not logically control ourselves.

Crud, I really gotta go - mebbe we'll have more later.

Nice day, y'all!

Well... one thing my old Professor made sure we understood was that EVERY discussion did not need to be one of pure or attempted pure logic.

I guess I get upset when someone makes a specific claim that they present as a fact. If, for example, you think Spiderman sucks.. then so be it. If, you claim he always wears pink knickers and a black bra, I may call you on it.

[bugfreezer]

That's because a certain body type IS superior. Its not the media, its biology! Its about successful propegation of humanity. The fact that only 25% of the US fits the bill is about generous food portions and sedentary lifestyle, not about the media telling us something is right or wrong.

*insert BIG can of worms being opened*

Here we go.

Taking that argument to its logical conclusion, you'd get something like Hitler's Lebensborn, which for you young'uns out there, was a selective breeding program to fill the Third Reich with blond-haired, blue-eyed folks, since of course they were the superior race...

...we know how well that worked out for Hitler!

[bio]

Taking that argument to its logical conclusion, you'd get something like Hitler's Lebensborn, which for you young'uns out there, was a selective breeding program to fill the Third Reich with blond-haired, blue-eyed folks, since of course they were the superior race...

...we know how well that worked out for Hitler!

There has been selective breeding for as long as there has been breeding... be it by man or animal. It's called natrual selection.

Tall men are more likely to sucessfully breed than short men are (as women are more receptive to them), thereby passing on those genetic traits. This is why the avarage height of humanity is slowly growing.

[bugfreezer]

That is true in the Netherlands where the avg male height is 6'1", but here in the States, the male average height I last heard is still 5'9" (and has been for decades) - must be all them short Hollywooders gettin' all the action to keep the averages short!

:edit
...or all the tall guys keep hooking up with all the short women, who knows?
:/edit

My point is that we should not legislate selective breeding. That never works.

[Moxie]

I've heard a lot of men go off about how they like petite women.

[bio]

I've heard a lot of men go off about how they like petite women.

Always marry a woman with small hands. It makes your dick look bigger.

[Marie]

I will throw out that many people seem to put way too much judgement on how other people "look". To either ignore or worshop someone based on how they "look" to you, may show intollerance and or rob you of a valuable relationship.