[Kosh]

Woah, déjà vu. I am absolutely positive we have had this exact same arguement before, with pretty much identical statements being made.

About pre-marital sex? Certainly.

[Mefustae]

Nah, the whole ultra-high birth-rate = global domination crap. I can definintely recall almost the exact same arguements being trotted out at least once before.

But, back OT; i'm thinking that most people who decry sex for pleasure are in fact badly in need of some.

[Rictor]

I'd point out that in about a generation all of Africa is going to have AIDs, which basically means they're ****ed regardless.

All of Africa already has AIDs, and still they manage to have a huge birthrate. It's not going to get any worse than it is already, what with medicine and awareness of the diesese and blabla. If poverty, civil war, corruption and every diesese under the sun hasn't killed them so far, it's not going to in the future. The numbers don't lie: the wors the living conditions are, the higher the birthrate. Direct proportionality.

Uh, Rictor, my point was that these poor countries would have a much higher population, were it not for the fact that the birth rate is turning the whole continent into a Mathusian nightmare.

In the long run, regulating the birth rate will give us the advantage.

Assuming that the world can support X number of people, though with technology I'm not at all sure that this number is static, why are you so sure that these people who are going are going to be in Europe or North America. It's a simple fact: the West is loosing people, the Third World is gaining people. And slowly, very slowly, all the Africans and Indians are getting a little bit richer. That why I say that within the next 50 or so years, it's likely that they will reach parity, meaning that the amount of money one Nigerian has will be roughly equivalent (roughly) to the amount of money one American or Japenese has. And at that point, he with the most people wins. One tihing you need to realize is that poverty doesn't kill people, or rather it does but not overall. Poverty creates more people than it kills, and if each one of these has even a small portion of the wealth and power that an American or Brit has, their country is going to be on the same level. Less quality, more quantity, same result in the end.

That is BS. Indrustialization is a very painful process. Besides, if that is so, then why hasn't Africa developed yet? Out of control birth rates is one of the things that is strangling development over there.

Read the numbers in front of you: they don't need economic development. they can live in mud huts and have no running water, if there are ten times more of them than theee are of you, you lose. Africa IS developing by the way. Slowly, but it is definitely developing. Lagos is bigger than most Western cities, has skyscrapers and Internet cafes and boutiques. And this in a country where the per-capita GDP is about 50 times less than in the US. Thirty years ago, Asia was as much a ****hole as Africa is today. Civil wars, destitution, totalitarian regimes and so on, all over the place. And slowly they got their **** together, and now look at them. The biggest boom towns are all in Asia, their economies are soaring. Fifty years ago, Japan was what Vietnam is today. All the cheap clothes and plates said "Made in Japan". Then they kept at it and got rich, and now look at them. Thirty years ago it was South Korea, and all those "Made in Korea" and "Made in Taiwan" labels add up, and now they're living the high life. Next up are Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Loas, Malaysia, China, Cambodia etc. They are all in the process of becoming wealthy, and so will Africa.

[Kosh]

Cambodia becoming wealthy?

[Ford Prefect]

But, back OT; i'm thinking that most people who decry sex for pleasure are in fact badly in need of some.

Glad someone else said it.

My favorite part is how people argue that nature "intended" sex to be this or that. Nature didn't intend ****. Nature didn't put up a sign saying, "Thou shalt not copulate for non-utilitarian reasons." We take pleasure in sex. That is a fact of nature. And with the rise of civilization it also became a fact of culture. "Nature" doesn't care whether or not you enjoy snu-snu, because nature isn't a thing-- nature is everything.

[Rictor]

Cambodia becoming wealthy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodia

"Despite severe flooding, GDP grew at 5.0% in 2000, 6.3% in 2001, and 5.2% in 2002. During 2003 and 2004 the growth rate remained steady at 5.0%"

5% growth rate is quite respectable, less than the 2.5% average in the EU. Give them thrity years and you'll see. Actually, Cambodia is kind of a bad example, even though it does prove the point. A better example would be Vietnam or Indonesia.  Realize that tge present situation is meaningless, it's onlt the trends that count. The world does not end in ten or twenty years, all these countries will get more efficient and wealthier far into the future. Half a decade ago, Japan and China were backwards, peasant societies and no one in their right mind would have claimed that they would become world powers. Now, Tokyo and Beijing easily give New York and London a run for their money.

[Mr. Vega]

Poverty creates more people than it kills

We're ignoring the massive political unrest here that is caused by high death rates, be they from flooding, famine,  or disease, which further exacerbate the problems.

[aldo_14]

Cambodia becoming wealthy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodia

"Despite severe flooding, GDP grew at 5.0% in 2000, 6.3% in 2001, and 5.2% in 2002. During 2003 and 2004 the growth rate remained steady at 5.0%"

5% growth rate is quite respectable, less than the 2.5% average in the EU. Give them thrity years and you'll see. Actually, Cambodia is kind of a bad example, even though it does prove the point. A better example would be Vietnam or Indonesia.  Realize that tge present situation is meaningless, it's onlt the trends that count. The world does not end in ten or twenty years, all these countries will get more efficient and wealthier far into the future. Half a decade ago, Japan and China were backwards, peasant societies and no one in their right mind would have claimed that they would become world powers. Now, Tokyo and Beijing easily give New York and London a run for their money.

Isn't GDP utterly utterly meaningless?  I mean, IIRC, under GDP the nations economic hero is a dying lung cancer patient undergoing a costly divorce.

[Kosh]

Ok, let's get back on topic:

Abortions for all!
Boooooo!!!!!!!!

Abortions for none!
Boooooo!!!!!!!!!

Abortions for some, miniature american flags for the rest!
Yea!!!!!!!!!!

[aldo_14]

Supposed to happen?

Worded poorly, yes. My aim is that sex, the act of reproduction and creating children, should only take place when two people are married and able to support children. What it's become is a tool simply for pleasure, with things such as contraceptives only reinforcing the idea.

That's the only thing it ever was...... sex for pleasure is very much a part of human behaviour; it has been since the dawn of time, as it forms a method for females (in particular) to evaluate males as a potential mate, and to provide a method for physical bonding prior to actual reproduction (because reproduction is more labour intensive for the female).  If sex was ever intended - in human development/psychology - for solely reproductive purposes, women would not (have needed to evolve the capacity to) be more effective at hiding ovulation nor have greater orgasmic capacity  (compared to other higher primates). 

After all, marriage isn't exactly original human behaviour; we're evolutionarily polygamous, hence sexual dimorphism and, indeed, polygamy in other cultures.  Whilst monogamy is beneficial in raising a child - possibly, again, a reason for 'sex for pleasure' as a pre and post-child bonding action - by nature men are inclined to 'spread their seed', something seen frequently in isolated tribes whose culture can be viewed as historically & culturally closer to early hunter-gatherer homo sapiens.

(see also; http://www.unm.edu/~psych/faculty/mate_choice.htm  for interesting and semi-related background)

[Mefustae]

After all, marriage isn't exactly original human behaviour; we're evolutionarily polygamous, hence sexual dimorphism and, indeed, polygamy in other cultures.  Whilst monogamy is beneficial in raising a child - possibly, again, a reason for 'sex for pleasure' as a pre and post-child bonding action - by nature men are inclined to 'spread their seed', something seen frequently in isolated tribes whose culture can be viewed as historically & culturally closer to early hunter-gatherer homo sapiens.

Indeed. The sexual act should be celebrated, not relegated only for reproduction. Honestly, society needs to shake loose the notion of 'sex = bad/shameful/immoral' that religion [i'm looking at you, Christianity] implanted in our cultures. You don't like sex, fine by me. But don't you dare try to tell me what I can and cannot do with my equipment.

[Rictor]

Cambodia becoming wealthy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodia

"Despite severe flooding, GDP grew at 5.0% in 2000, 6.3% in 2001, and 5.2% in 2002. During 2003 and 2004 the growth rate remained steady at 5.0%"

5% growth rate is quite respectable, less than the 2.5% average in the EU. Give them thrity years and you'll see. Actually, Cambodia is kind of a bad example, even though it does prove the point. A better example would be Vietnam or Indonesia.  Realize that tge present situation is meaningless, it's onlt the trends that count. The world does not end in ten or twenty years, all these countries will get more efficient and wealthier far into the future. Half a decade ago, Japan and China were backwards, peasant societies and no one in their right mind would have claimed that they would become world powers. Now, Tokyo and Beijing easily give New York and London a run for their money.

Isn't GDP utterly utterly meaningless?  I mean, IIRC, under GDP the nations economic hero is a dying lung cancer patient undergoing a costly divorce.

In theory, sure. But would you argue that it is a general indicator of wealth? The fact that the US has a great GDP than Togo doesn't mean that the US is filled with divorced cancer-patients. My main point is that there is absolutely nothing preventing all of Asia, Middle East included, as well as Africa and South America from pulling a Japan or South Korea. Indeed, there is strong indication that they are doing exactly that, some slower than others but all fast enough to make a noticeable difference over decades not centuries. The West, even including Russia, has less than a billion people and declining. One billion out of let's say 7 or 8 billion in the next few decades. If every one of those Nigerians and Thais has 1/5th the per-person wealth or influence as a Canadian, well you see where I'm headed.

[Kosh]

My main point is that there is absolutely nothing preventing all of Asia, Middle East included, as well as Africa and South America from pulling a Japan or South Korea.

With Africa, AIDS as well as the usual mismanagement will stunt it's growth. In many countries in Africa the AIDS infection rate is 30% of the adult population.

South America has also had issues with governance.

It all comes down to effective governance and management, and many of those countries don't have it.