Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
I made my case for the label of parasite being wrong and symbiant being correct. Unless you'd like to argue that the continuation of the species isn't beneficial.
|
Well, its a complex thing. It would nice if it were a simple matter of "every child carried to term is beneficial to the species" but that's not always the case. Beneficence is in the eye of the beholder. Clearly a pregnancy that threatens the life of the mother isn't necessarily beneficial to the species, and a pregnancy that perhaps threatens the livelihood of the mother isn't necessarily beneficial to the species. Even an ideal pregnancy with ideal parents isn't necessarily beneficial to the species. In fact, there seems to be a natural predisposition by the species towards abortion if you count all the pregnancies that fail without abortions.
Speaking of natural predispositions, humanity seems to be spreading like wildfire. Nobody knows the earth's carrying capacity, but we do know that it must exist. It might be argued that the cause of species continuation might benefit from a decrease in the birth rate, which is something that the legalization of abortion accomplishes, though perhaps not to a very significant effect thus far.
But that isn't even necessarily that important. Until humanity reaches a point where the continuation of the species is threatened by abortion then your point is null.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
Since when does a parasite have your own DNA? Is your Pancreas a parasite considering it saps food/air/etc from you and does nothing in return?
|
Apparently, "the smaller, less complete member of asymmetrical conjoined twins" is considered a parasite. So the answer to your first question is probably a long time.
As for the pancreas, doesn't it produce insulin? A better example would be the appendix, which i think just sits around waiting to get clogged with shit so that it can be surgically removed.