How can it elude the top minds of academia that the purpose of sex is reproduction?

submitted by [deleted] from self.whatever

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If someone loses thier stomach due to cancer and has to be sustained by intravenous nutrition should they continue to eat if they feel hunger? Surely no one would object if they choose to, but only a fool would argue that thier situation somehow diminishes the argument that the purpose of eating is sustenance.

If those people choose to eat rock because they are more convenient and satiate that urge more, surely you would not argue that this proves that eating rocks is normal or somehow a natural part of eating.

Sure you would not argue that eating poison is normal and natural just because some people do it.

Surely you would not deny that eating too much is a disorder, as well as eating too little.

Why does this logic not apply to sex?

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Instinct. They are programmed to push other members of their tribe into having as many children as possible and sacrificing themselves for the mystical collective spirit.