Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Reprisal" data-source="post: 215138" data-attributes="member: 1161"><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:"&nbsp; data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> It's worthwhile, but not necessarily number one on the priority list... which I consider a positive thing.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f621.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":mad:" title="Mad&nbsp; &nbsp; :mad:"&nbsp; data-smilie="4"data-shortname=":mad:" /> What a terrible thing to say to a person!&nbsp; I'd caution you to use some modicum of <a href="http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=tact" target="_blank">tact</a> when in discussion here lest you wish to be held in disrepute.&nbsp; That sentence smacks of (arrogant) absolutism when it is clearly not needed.&nbsp; Please, use some decorum and choose what you say a bit better.&nbsp; Civility is the word here, or so I believe it to be...Yes, it's established that if we're looking at it from a (very limited) genetic point of view, that if you fail to procreate, you've failed to continue your genetic lineage, but I wouldn't look at it the same way from a more comprehensive point of view.&nbsp; The sentence above makes it seem that you're supporting the view that our only function as human beings is to continue ourselves, when I believe many, many people see it differently.&nbsp; Reducing humanity's reason for existence to mere procreation can be seen as very offensive to some people, and while the idea itself can be debated in a civil matter, the way you've chosen to express it is... well, somewhat distressing.To The Original Poster and the Moderators:&nbsp; Sorry for hijacking the post, but I felt I had to say something...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Reprisal, post: 215138, member: 1161"] :rolleyes: It's worthwhile, but not necessarily number one on the priority list... which I consider a positive thing. :mad: What a [i]terrible[/i] thing to say to a person! I'd caution you to use some modicum of [url=http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=tact]tact[/url] when in discussion here lest you wish to be held in disrepute. That sentence smacks of (arrogant) absolutism when it is clearly not needed. Please, use some decorum and choose what you say a bit better. Civility is the word here, or so I believe it to be... Yes, it's established that if we're looking at it from a (very [i]limited[/i]) genetic point of view, that if you fail to procreate, you've failed to continue your genetic lineage, but I wouldn't look at it the same way from a more comprehensive point of view. The sentence above makes it seem that you're supporting the view that our [i]only[/i] function as human beings is to continue ourselves, when I believe many, [i]many[/i] people see it differently. Reducing humanity's reason for existence to mere procreation can be seen as very offensive to some people, and while the idea itself can be debated in a civil matter, the way you've chosen to express it is... well, somewhat distressing. [b]To The Original Poster and the Moderators:[/b] Sorry for hijacking the post, but I felt I had to say something... [/QUOTE]

Verification