Active Users:343 Time:11/07/2025 10:39:57 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Stole my answer . . . Palatine Send a noteboard - 26/02/2013 01:20:33 PM

View original postAs for it being moral, that's simply ridiculous. Very few things we do today are in any way "natural," and in any case, there is no one to judge what is natural and what isn't. Overpopulation and resource scarcity are problems, but they're not insurmountable. If human longevity is rising at such a rapid pace, then it's only because human technology is advancing even faster, so I'm confident solutions can and will be found. And if not people will simply starve and die and the problem will still resolve itself.

. . . except for the bit about natural. In my opinion, anything that people do is natural.

*MySmiley*

I play air tambourine. Competitively.
Reply to message
Scientists claim 72 is the new 30 Isaac - 26/02/2013 03:06:04 AM 915 Views
"New" is a relative term, as its usage here demonstrates. Joel - 26/02/2013 04:31:24 AM 426 Views
Re: "New" is a relative term, as its usage here demonstrates. Isaac - 26/02/2013 08:28:58 AM 370 Views
Perhaps quality of life is the basic moral issue here. Joel - 28/02/2013 08:16:48 PM 322 Views
I don't see why it would be immoral, but I can see why it would be undesirable A Deathwatch Guard - 26/02/2013 04:59:32 AM 378 Views
Stole my answer . . . Palatine - 26/02/2013 01:20:33 PM 310 Views
It comes down to the same thing A Deathwatch Guard - 26/02/2013 05:10:14 PM 341 Views
You sound like Voldemort lol Nighthawk - 26/02/2013 01:28:40 PM 420 Views
I haven't read Harry Potter so I'll take your word for it Isaac - 26/02/2013 03:13:55 PM 322 Views
Solution: Only live to 110. No miserable last 10 years. *NM* Bergioyn - 26/02/2013 08:18:41 PM 225 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes