View Single Post
Old 07-29-2010, 05:26 PM
RatatouilleStrychnine's Avatar
RatatouilleStrychnine RatatouilleStrychnine is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 19

Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
Child-free from what I have read is the desire to not procreate, period. Passing along your dna inherently means you are going to procreate, thereby excluding it from the definition.
I don't agree. I don't think that having genetic offspring in the world is the same thing as "having children" (as the dictionary definition you linked to defined it.) I don't see a sperm donor who isn't even aware of whether or not his genetic material has been used as a parent, and therefore he does not "have children." And I don't think many men who donate sperm do so because they desire to procreate. Nor is a man who accidentally got a woman pregnant, never saw her again, and was not aware that the baby was born, a parent.

Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
Again, I invoke the "virginity comparison": If you had sex when you were unmarried and say, 17 years old, then you decided that sex before marriage is wrong, you're not a "born-again virgin". Once you have sex, your virginity is GONE - BYE BYE! The same goes for being CF. You can't un-ring that bell.
I don't really see the point in the comparison, because virginity is a fundamentally useless concept to me. The pro-virginity movements does, as you say, accept "renewed virgins", which makes a lot more sense to me than sticking to the dictionary definition of the term "virgin" no matter what.

Is there some law of the universe that says one cannot hold arbitrary opinions about anything? If so, would you please direct me to it? A Wiki link should suffice.
Questioning your arbitrary views is not the same as saying you should not have them.
Reply With Quote