This is a tad off subject, but just for the record, we aren't even close to being over populated.

I have never raped a woman, nor would I ever.

But, crime towards humanity by letting the human race die out like that, if one were to be so selfish...is much more serious than rape.

Well, unless the remaining 50 were all trashy skank whores like you...then I would just let them die.

:icare:

In our hypothetical situation you'll only be around for another 50-70 years before everything about you vanishes, and if history judges either of us I would be the man who gave life to the modern human race, rather then a common rapist. I personally feel not doing so would be an abomination.

Also! In the interest of keeping focus on this rather interesting subject I reply to your statement with: "nu uh." and invite you to do the same!

Well, chizzle, you certainly believe that the survival of the human species is more is more important than the rights of an individual. Further, you are not afraid to express an unpopular opinion.

I'm curious as to WHY you feel this way. Do you feel that God put us on the Earth, and its your duty to make sure we don't disappear? You think the moral foundation of your argument is obvious, and therefore left it unsaid. But I'm a little dense, so please, clue me in.

OH MY GOD! ARE YOU SERIOUS?

We are using up our resources at an ubelieveably horrible, rapid, destructive rate.

http://www.overpopulation.net

Almost everything wrong in the world is caused by overpopulation.

We will run out of drinking water in less than 50 years.
The quality of the air we breathe is shit.

Povery is caused by overpopulation...been to Africa lately?

Ghettos, slums, the projects a result of overpopulation. The rainforests, the lakes, EVERYTHING! Too many people = too much waste!

Too many fuckin cars on the road.

Must I go on?

Yeah, I think God made our number 1 instict survival. We are made to survive.

I like what Phaenx said:

"In our hypothetical situation you'll only be around for another 50-70 years before everything about you vanishes, and if history judges either of us I would be the man who gave life to the modern human race, rather then a common rapist. I personally feel not doing so would be an abomination."

In this situation, one is not raping another to dominate or commit a crime against another...or merely for sexual pleasure...one is giving life to the modern human race and should be looked at as a hero..not a criminal.

I admit I took it too far in saying some of the things I said, though. I sure got a rise from it! :lol:

Humans tend to crowd into small places, ever been to Montana? Pennsylvania? That's a cute site, but they're only trying to scare you.

(make a new thread to respond)

No matter what you say now will take away what you said before. You're a sad excuse for a human being.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Are you the judge? Please respond so I can no whether to give a shit or not what you think about me.

If you are God, let me know...then I care.
:icare:

chizzle:
That makes no sense. Clearly you would rape a woman, and in fact enjoy it:
I think rape is a crime against the universe, or God if you prefer. I will never condone forcing oneself onto another.
If I am the trashy skank whore for being the one that will not condone rape for any reason whatsoever, then there is no need to explain what you are.

PKoi,

You are right and I am wrong.

I wouldn't have to rape anyone though...all the bizwiches would want my children...they'd be fighting over my shit.

What kind of person wouldn't want to make the human race surive, I can't begin to comprehend anyone who would just say let our race die because I don't want to have children, it boogles my mind, so I would say in terms of survivial "rape" shouldn't even be an option

Oh Jesus Christ.


Thanks for the laugh.:lol:

oh the irony. :P

i am seriously confused as to why the mods have let this soap opera go as long as it has.

isn't this the site of respect, state opinions, but do not flame?

hmmm. www.tfproject.org i am at the right site.

this is sad.

I actually was just digging into this thread in depth as I came to if via another post about overpopulation.

WhoaitsZ is correct, there is no need to flame.

Please post respectful comments or the thread will be locked.

Any race that deems violence or forced sex ok should be extinct. That's just IMHO.

You're missing the point.

If rape was necessary to continue the species, even though it should be done, it doesn't ever make it "okay". It's merely a horrible thing that has to be done. Try to make a distinction between the two ("okay", and "necessary") in your mind, and I think you'll understand where some of us are coming from.

As for "chizzle", . . . http://www.e46fanatics.com/forum/ima...ilies/jack.gif

We must secure the existence of our people, ill be damned if I let my race die.

If it came down to it , I would rape, I would feel like shit after but it would still be done.

I'm sorry for my rude and disrespectful comments earlier. I appreciate forums like this with no flaming. Please forgive me...I will not do it again.

just a question, are you trying to bring up a crop of psychologically well humans through rape?! Rape will destroy the psyche's of the women who refuse and that will pass on to the children. Then, the precedent will be set and will breed awful repercussions.
An easy way to get the refusers to understand the importance of it is to shun them. The inbreeding problem is difficult, but not insurmountable. (just don't know how long it would work)

i don't see how people can speak for other people, especially when ethics are involved.

i mean it's not like you have can just stick your hand up someone's ass and make someone share your beliefs and ideas. if it only were that simple, i'd be neck deep in everyone's ass... wait a minute, that didn't sound right...

i can only speak for myself, as male of the human species, in the situation noted above. i couldn't rape a woman under any circumstance. if the human race ends because i chose not to rape a woman against her will, then so be it.

Oh MY, but you must not be aware of quite a bit of what goes on in the animal world.

Cats and moles are the first critters that come to mind. Male cats have burrs on their pricks which tear at the female on the out stroke, and they're necessary to get the female to ovulate, otherwise she just goes into heat. Moles, IIRC, are worse: the female is a virgin every time! That is, her equivalent of a hymen heals between matings. If you look, you'll find more.

point 1: 50 fertile women and (presumably) 50 fertile men are not enough to ensure the repopulation of the world by the human species. That's way too small of a gene pool. If I remember my high school biology correctly, you would need about 1000 of each to prevent the species from degrading into and inbred, retarded and infertile mess that would die out quickly of its own bad genes.

point 2: the human species became what it is through rape. 10,000 years ago there was no recreational consentual sex as we know it today. the males of the species took the females whenever and whereever they wanted, by force if necessary. You can see the same thing happen by watching stray cats if you have them in your neighborhood. the difference is that back then, they didnt know it was rape, they acted thusly on instinct.

point 3: unless you believe in a mandate for survival from whatever god you worship, then I dont see how you can say that humanity needs to survive. sure, I think we all want the species to go on, and I think its commonly accepted that there is a survival instinct in our genes that propels us to try to keep the species alive. But I dont personally see how it is any great loss to the universe if homo sapiens sapiens becomes extinct. the universe "cares" less for us than we do for the common housefly. with or without humanity in the mix, the universe will continue to do its thing for many millenia, and the passing of humanity will not affect it in the slightest.

point 4: I agree with those who say that if rape is the only means for the survival of the species, perhaps it is time to let the species die out. Rape is a crime against not only the individual but also the species as a whole. In my system of morality, the only crime worse than rape is murder. And I dont believe that either of them can ever be justified.

point 5: There are other means of continuing the species, such as artificial insemination, in vitro vertilization, etc, that could potentially be utilized so that even those women who didnt want have or bear childern could contribute to the continuation of the species.

point 6: chizzle, just in case the mods havent already informed you (and i'm sure they have) you were way out of line in this thread. you are free to express your opinions here, but insulting the other members is NOT accepted. another outburst like what you did in this thread will most assuredly result in your being banned from TFP. please clean up your act.

Please read the thread before you post - there is nothing more annoying. I already apologized.

point 1: if I recall correctly, modern science has also traced back through the mitochondria of the human cells the number of "primeordial Eves" and there are a helluva lot less than 1000. So science contradicts itself constantly, since nobody ever knows for sure what would happen given those circumstances.

point 2 & 3: we care! that's the whole point.
quote George Carlin: "you know where the sanctity of life came from? We made it UP!" Life in itself has the urge to feed and to procreate. We feel (note feel: not rational, pure instinct) we are something special, so we will go on, no matter what it takes. Nobody cares at that point what "the universe" thinks of us.

point 4: explain to me how rape is a crime to humanity? I agree with todays morals and standards, it is a crime, and should be punished. Why? Because we are civilised and cultured enough to refuse it. But we're talking about a totally different setting here, we're talking about no more real culture, since there are only 50 people left (or 100, don't remember if it was 1 man or 50)

point 5: I don't know how well you are aware of this, but when there are 50 men and women around, I doubt high-tech things like in-vitro & artificial insemination will be possible. Also, if you use artif. insemination, the woman still has to bear the child. And I figured in-vitro meant fertilising the egg outside the body and then implanting it... so again she has to bear the child... seems a moot point.

I read the entire thread from first to last. I saw your apology. I said what I did to reiterate to you that we do NOT tolerate such behavior around here. Just want to make sure you take the issue as seriously as the rest of us do.

there. Im now done flogging the lifeless equine.

fuck rape. if people act like this we should become extinct anyhow.

bats also rape for breeding.

we have flawless communication if we try, so there should never be any reason whatsoever for anything like that. and yeah i know you're just saying 'if'. and if 'if' were to occur I say "No."

I understand, just didn't think we had to relive it. I will be nice and try to make friends - I'm not very good at that. :(

a more interesting note
 

Well, the whole question of rape is interesting, i suppose. However, not to be injust to the women, there are times and situations that do not call for morals. It depends on reality. If anyone has seen the movie, umm, Extreme Measures (a good movie btw) where a doctor is doing extreme things to homeless people to try to find some type of medical cure. Basically the concept of the movie revolves around, if you could murder X number of people to cure something like cancer, is it justified. Can you distinguish X being 1, or 1 million when cancer kills MILLIONs? Where can someone 'morally' draw the line. In such a case, it depends on your 'morals'. Nobody can tell me what mine are, and i cannot tell anyone else what theirs should be.

But this case is completely different, assuming TONS of men, and 50 women, we're talking about a situation that is... well... desperate. Reality 'should' prevail, and the reality of the situtation is, the importance of those 50 women reproducing 'may' outweigh the 'immorality' of forcing some or all of them into reproducing.

I'll simply ignore the scientific genetic problems because the number of women is random, so let's not get too complicated right? It is asked, if someone breaks into your home (or whatever) and gives you the option, one of your loved ones must die, and the other, shall live (whether it be your mother or father, sister or brother, wife or gf, etc etc). What do you do, who do you choose. Morals, feelings, whatever aren't relevant here. Sure, some people don't like a family member or another, but assume for a moment that you love them equally. You have 60 seconds to choose, what do you do? Brutally enough, i would suggest logic in the absense of good moral or emotional judgement. I would choose to live, the one who would live longer in life. I dare not judge the 'quality' of life that they live, because that can change, but in essence, i'd choose the younger one. That's me anyway. It's brutal, but it's honest. And that, in my mind, is what a desperate situation calls for.

Rape is not a good thing, we can agree on this, but the real world isn't so nice. I won't bother arguing whether humanity is worth saving if this is what it comes down to, i cannot justify it either way.

*AN INTERESTING POINT* how about this situation, which i find more interesting.

What if one of them women has an incurable transmittable disease (such as AIDS) that will be passed to her child. Should she be ALLOWED to give birth? Essentially, if she doesn't, we could rid society of it. What if the disease was even more specific, more infectious, more deadly, and it could infect all the new children in society etc. NOW you have a dilema. Opinions?

*deleted because I just read Chizzle's apology*

Would you guys repopulate the earth with unbelievably fugly women? The kind that make you dry heave when you see or touch them...

Imho, nothing justifies rape, absolutely nothing.

I know most people would do anything for survival. The problem is, I equate rape with murder. I know four people who have been raped. The before/after-picture is always the same. In one, there's a soul present. In the other, there isn't.

Furthermore, I don't see what impregnating a woman has to do with my own survival.

Nothing can be done to justify rape. It's my firm conviction.

As for guns - yeah, I have friends who've been stabbed. I also have friends who've been shot. Let me ask you this - when was the last time the wrong person died because of a drive-by stabbing? I don't see what Braveheart has to do with it. Is Saving Private Ryan nicer? Please leave the guns issue for another thread. My sig is not a direct reply to the previous posts.

Which means that the only males who would reproduce, given 50 women none of whom wanted to reproduce, would be rapists.

Good hypothetical...
pitting moral imperative against social imperative.
Look to existing cultures for the answer. Many cultures native to extreme habitats where survival rates are low tend to practice a "sanctioned rape through marriage". I think that this sort of solution is likely because it deals with the moral issue through (forced) marriage. I get the impression that a race so heavily depleated would suddenly become quite conservative and mysogenistic.

Survival trumps morality and ethics, unfortunately.

this post shouldn't even be allowed to be posted...RAPE is RAPE. Your forcing someone to have sex. I guess the question I would ask Meridae'n is would you force that woman to have sex with you because she wouldn't have children?

To all the guys who think rape justifies the survival of the species -

Here's a hypothetical question for you. What if somehow (I don't know how) the survival of the species was only possible if YOU got raped? Would you think "this is for the greater good" while you got violently buggered? Would you?

I know it's just a hypothetical, but in that situation, I find it hard to believe that someone would refuse to procreate. It's ingrained in our genetic makeup. That's why we have urges. There would be no reason to force anyone, just wait awhile and sit around the campfire or ruins or whatever, and with only 50 people alive, she'd bound to come around eventually!

besides, with only 50 people around, it would probably be a bad idea to start having lots of babies until some sort of societal/survival support system were in place. Othwise, the new kids would not help the human race survive. I don't buy the you-should-rape-her-for-the-good-of-the-species argument. Then again, the rape-is-wrong! crowd needs to realize that death by starvation/ being eaten by Bears, etc... is probably much more unpleasant.

I guess I should not have replied to myself, but I just now figured out about the edit thing.

clavus,
I would accept someone raping me for the survival of humanity (I'm a guy).

I think that the rights of any individual are insignificant compared to the survival of the species. The hypothetical women in this situation would in essence be giving all previous humans a second death. All the things that they worked for in their lives would be lost for the selfishness of a few individuals. I consider that a far higher crime than any other, and that any women acting like this could no longer be considered human, and certainly should not retain any rights. One would hope that their offspring wouldn't be so messed up.