110 Year Sentence for making Threats on MySpace

[The True Adonis]

I found this to be interesting.


Sometimes kidney failure can cause delays of maturity. I worked in a
dialysis clinic that had a kid who was fourteen but looked like he was ten
years old.  He weighed about eighty pounds, had a high pitched voice,  no
facial or body hair, a lot of "baby fat" but was fourteen. The doctor said
part of it was that his protein turnover was so low it delayed maturity.

Apparently in older times people matured later, probably in part due to
diet. JS Bach, for example, had a "sweet soprano" voice until his late
teens. He was born in the late sixteen hundreds in Germany.   He later
fathered twenty one kids so it wasn't an endocrinological defect (there were
castrati back then too).

If some sadistic person ever raises a child on a Caloric Restricted Diet it
is possible we'll see such things again. They'll stand four feet tall and
probably live to be 180 years... maybe. We also know that kids today mature
earlier as time goes on. Some feel it's because we eat more today. We are
also seeing a higher incidence of testicle cancer in young men. However
these changes could also be caused by environmental factors, such a
pollutants which mimic hormones.

In fully fed adults, you ask?  There are cases of people living to 120 years
of age (or close to it) who have no special diets, drugs or other help.

Gene Herron

[The_Leafy_Bug]

You can question whatever you want, I only ask for a civil tone.

That said, you may have missed my response to a similar question from Adonis.  My response was "I understand what you are saying, and can grasp the historical and physiological context.  It's just that I'm a little too accustomed to 20th century social mores to be as open as some others seem to be to wrapping my brain around the concept of sex (with someone that young)."

Word on the misunderstanding.

Ok... what is your point you are trying to achieve with that statement? It doesn't mean you have to participate in it. This isn't an all or nothing mentality.

[Triple-H_2005]

So in that case we should bar those who we suspect won't live long from sexual activity?

Nope.  Just don't see the point of that particular debate.

With regard to the developmentally handicaped...I don't know.  That's a tough one.  I worked with mentally handicapped adults for over 2 years while i was in college and volunteer with a program in my church that cares for them.  the mental reasoning abilities are not (in many cases) advanced enough to comprehend the meaning or consequences behind sex.  However, the hormonal triggers are there.  Within my company (8 homes, 6-8 clients per home), we knew there were certian clients that we had to keep a close eye on, or they would try to have sex.

They know what it is,they're over 18, so should they have it?  Tough question that I am not qualified to answer.

[The True Adonis]

10 years old was the original age of consent in the US

Yep.

[The_Leafy_Bug]

Nope.  Just don't see the point of that particular debate.

With regard to the developmentally handicaped...I don't know.  That's a tough one.  I worked with mentally handicapped adults for over 2 years while i was in college and volunteer with a program in my church that cares for them.  the mental reasoning abilities are not (in many cases) advanced enough to comprehend the meaning or consequences behind sex.  However, the hormonal triggers are there.  Within my company (8 homes, 6-8 clients per home), we knew there were certian clients that we had to keep a close eye on, or they would try to have sex.

They know what it is,they're over 18, so should they have it?  Tough question that I am not qualified to answer.

If both sides give consent then why not? The same logic could be applied to baby who feels the need to urinate. He feels the triggers telling him but should we let him urinate? Bad example but that same logic.

[The True Adonis]

Nope.  Just don't see the point of that particular debate.

With regard to the developmentally handicaped...I don't know.  That's a tough one.  I worked with mentally handicapped adults for over 2 years while i was in college and volunteer with a program in my church that cares for them.  the mental reasoning abilities are not (in many cases) advanced enough to comprehend the meaning or consequences behind sex.  However, the hormonal triggers are there.  Within my company (8 homes, 6-8 clients per home), we knew there were certian clients that we had to keep a close eye on, or they would try to have sex.

They know what it is,they're over 18, so should they have it?  Tough question that I am not qualified to answer.

What if you got into a car accident and were forver mentally debillitated in some form.  Should the government then deny you the right to have sex anymore?

[Triple-H_2005]

Ok... what is your point you are trying to achieve with that statement? It doesn't mean you have to participate in it. This isn't an all or nothing mentality.

I think that some people mature faster than others.  There are MANY girls that are, at 16, FAR more mature  than many 20 year old males.  so, in that case, they are probably better mentally and emotionally equipped to have sex than the guys.  does this mean that they should?

This could be arggued for ages as young as 12 or however yourn the arguer wanted to go.  I think their has to be a guideline, otherwise there are plenty that would take advantage of the younger and more emotionally immature.

Having the law say 16 or 18 isn't a cure-all, neither does it ensure that all having sex legally are ready to do so. what it does do is keep many that aren't ready from starting too soon.  Yes, I know that most lose their virginity before 16, but it will keep some wolves at bay.

[Triple-H_2005]

If both sides give consent then why not? The same logic could be applied to baby who feels the need to urinate. He feels the triggers telling him but should we let him urinate? Bad example but that same logic.

You're comparing sex to urination???

Involuntary vs. voluntary actions.

THAT was flawed logic.

[Triple-H_2005]

What if you got into a car accident and were forver mentally debillitated in some form.  Should the government then deny you the right to have sex anymore?

Again.  I'm not educated enough to support an answer for that question. 
I have never even considered such a scenario, actually.

[The True Adonis]

You're comparing sex to urination???

Involuntary vs. voluntary actions.

THAT was flawed logic.

Sex is as natural as Urination.  It is THE MOST POWERFUL natural instinct and is SOLEY responsible for the ENTIRE development of Life as we know it. It has been highly honed through Natural Selection.  Even parthogenetically .

[Triple-H_2005]

Sex is as natural as Urination.  It is THE MOST POWERFUL natural instinct and is SOLEY responsible for the ENTIRE development of Life as we know it. It has been highly honed through Natural Selection.  Even Parthogenically.

Right.  But you can decide not to stick it in a chick..Eventually, you HAVE to piss.  You have no option.

[The_Leafy_Bug]

You're comparing sex to urination???

Involuntary vs. voluntary actions.

THAT was flawed logic.

Let switch this around then. So basically you are saying sex isn't a human need. Human touch and contact with other humans isn't a need. Is this correct? Is sex really a voluntary action? Is it not built into every single living organism. Is the right to spread your DNA to insure continued success of your species not a need?

[Triple-H_2005]

Let switch this around then. So basically you are saying sex isn't a human need. Human touch and contact with other humans isn't a need. Is this correct? Is sex really a voluntary action? Is it not built into every single living organism. Is the right to spread your DNA to insure continued success of your species not a need?

In the sense of continued survival of the specis, yes it is a need.

In the sense of continued survival of an organism, i.e. a particular human being, no.  I am not saying it would be pleasant, but a human being can survive a normal lifespan without ever having sex. 

[The_Leafy_Bug]

In the sense of continued survival of the specis, yes it is a need.

In the sense of continued survival of an organism, i.e. a particular human being, no.  I am not saying it would be pleasant, but a human being can survive a normal lifespan without ever having sex. 

Mentally do you think that can survive? Sure physically they can sustain life... sure they won't live as long and as healthy but mentally do you think they can survive? If we were to supress all of our other emotions could we? Which ones should have a cap placed on them?

[Triple-H_2005]

Mentally do you think that can survive? Sure physically they can sustain life... sure they won't live as long and as healthy but mentally do you think they can survive? If we were to supress all of our other emotions could we? Which ones should have a cap placed on them?

Yes.  It can be done.  To suggest that in all of human history, nobody has ever dies a virgin, and an old one at that, is more than a bit naiive.

For propogation of the specis, sex is a need.
For the individual organism, sex is a want.

[The_Leafy_Bug]

Yes.  It can be done.  To suggest that in all of human history, nobody has ever dies a virgin, and an old one at that, is more than a bit naiive.

For propogation of the specis, sex is a need.
For the individual organism, sex is a want.

So the individual is not an organism? Is it not the sole task of an individual organism to replicate itself? It is genitically ingrained into us. You are saying we should simply ignore this urge? We should ignore certain emotions? Which emotions and urges should we ignore then?

[The True Adonis]

In the sense of continued survival of the specis, yes it is a need.

In the sense of continued survival of an organism, i.e. a particular human being, no.  I am not saying it would be pleasant, but a human being can survive a normal lifespan without ever having sex. 

The organisms make up the species.  Extinction occurs when the death rate would exceed the birth rate.  In some countries in Scandanavia this is already happening.  On a long enough time line,   the population would be negatively biased and be ill-fated for recovery, thus leading to extinction.

We have the technology and the wherewithal to prevent that, but that is only recent. VERY RECENT.  For Hundreds of thousands of years, humans were teetering on extinction and many genus of Homo completely died out as a result.  Homo erectus, Homo habilis just to name two of many.  Keep in mind these species overlapped with Homo Sapien which is modern man.

What does this mean?  This means that sexual desire is hard wired and so prevalent due to the neccessity of surival.  It is Evolutionary beneficial that the organisms with the highest sexual urges and desires are more often than not, the most destined for the longest survival.  Sheer numbers will ensure survivability.  Sexual urge and desire are very important and arguable THE MOST important in any species for survival.

Given the long gestation period of human reproduction, and the few offspring we can produce at a time, sexual desire is quite strong as this promotes the species to have more, thus ensuring survival.

If any trait in humans made it this far, it is soley because in some way it is Evolutionary beneficial.

[The_Leafy_Bug]

Yes.  It can be done.  To suggest that in all of human history, nobody has ever dies a virgin, and an old one at that, is more than a bit naiive.

For propogation of the specis, sex is a need.
For the individual organism, sex is a want.

Although this may be true can you assure me they never once masterbated? Has there ever been a recorded case of an individual who lived to be a an old age with physical evidence that proves they never had sex in any for or fashion including masterbation?

[Triple-H_2005]

So the individual is not an organism? Is it not the sole task of an individual organism to replicate itself? It is genitically ingrained into us. You are saying we should simply ignore this urge? We should ignore certain emotions? Which emotions and urges should we ignore then?

Not 'should?'.  This issue was 'could?'.  The individual is the organism, that was my point. 

The individual wants.
The specis needs.

[Triple-H_2005]

The organisms make up the species.  Extinction occurs when the death rate would exceed the birth rate.  In some countries in Scandanavia this is already happening.  On a long enough time line,   the population would be negatively biased and be ill-fated for recovery, thus leading to extinction.

We have the technology and the wherewithal to prevent that, but that is only recent. VERY RECENT.  For Hundreds of thousands of years, humans were teetering on extinction and many genus of Homo completely died out as a result.  Homo erectus, Homo habilis just to name two of many.  Keep in mind these species overlapped with Homo Sapien which is modern man.

What does this mean?  This means that sexual desire is hard wired and so prevalent due to the neccessity of surival.  It is Evolutionary beneficial that the organisms with the highest sexual urges and desires are more often than not, the most destined for the longest survival.  Sheer numbers will ensure survivability.  Sexual urge and desire are very important and arguable THE MOST important in any species for survival.

Given the long gestation period of human reproduction, and the few offspring we can produce at a time, sexual desire is quite strong as this promotes the species to have more, thus ensuring survival.

If any trait in humans made it this far, it is soley because in some way it is Evolutionary beneficial.

All correct.  And at no point did I ever say that all members of a specis should stop procreation.  I didn't even suggest some of them.  The issue was one.  One person.  The WANTS of one member of a specis.

The specis needs.
The individual organism wants. 

If one individual organism fails, voluntarily or otherwise, to procreate, the specis will (barring catastrophe) survive.

[The_Leafy_Bug]

Not 'should?'.  This issue was 'could?'.  The individual is the organism, that was my point. 

The individual wants.
The specis needs.

There is evidence of babys masterbating in the womb. To say sex isn't a need is absurd. It would be equivelant to saying males have erections on command or at will. Children get erections before they know what they are just as they shit and pee all over themself before they know how to control it. Hell, even some adults pee and poop on themselves.

[The True Adonis]

Not 'should?'.  This issue was 'could?'.  The individual is the organism, that was my point. 

The individual wants.
The specis needs.

Not true.  

A species survival is based solely off individual performance.  Homo Sapien`s sexual urge has developed strongly in order to ensure more offspring.  

It has been a necessity given the long gestation period and the few offspring produced.

Right now as we speak, with all the medical technology available 10-50 percent of pregnancies end up naturally aborted.

Without any technology, this number skyrockets and the failure rate for fetus survival increases.

In order to overcome this, sexual urge and desire has been honed to "keep on trying and producing" no matter what.

This is the fate of all organisms.  The ones that did not genetically have this desire, have been obliterated forever.  The entire DNA lineage purged from the earth.

[Triple-H_2005]

There is evidence of babys masterbating in the womb. To say sex isn't a need is absurd. It would be equivelant to saying males have erections on command or at will. Children get erections before they know what they are just as they shit and pee all over themself before they know how to control it. Hell, even some adults pee and poop on themselves.

Orgasm may very well be a mental health 'need'.  But to suggest another must be present in order to ensure the survival of said organism is naiive and absurd.  There is no science to support this theory.

[Triple-H_2005]

Not true.  

A species survival is based solely off individual performance.  Homo Sapien`s sexual urge has developed strongly in order to ensure more offspring.  

It has been a necessity given the long gestation period and the few offspring produced.

Right now as we speak, with all the medical technology available 10-50 percent of pregnancies end up naturally aborted.

Without any technology, this number skyrockets and the failure rate for fetus survival increases.

In order to overcome this, sexual urge and desire has been honed to "keep on trying and producing" no matter what.

This is the fate of all organisms.  The ones that did not genetically have this desire, have been obliterated forever.  The entire DNA lineage purged from the earth.

Again, all true statements.  but you still hve not proven that ONE member of the specis MUST be actively attempting to procreate in order for the SPECIS to flourish.

[The True Adonis]

Again, all true statements.  but you still hve not proven that ONE member of the specis MUST be actively attempting to procreate in order for the SPECIS to flourish.

The number that HAVE to procreate is solely based upon the birth/death rate and number of organisms.  Sexual desire and urges helps keeps the Birth rate higher than the death rate.

You can`t view an entire species without looking at the bigger picture.  Organisms are sum of the parts that make up the whole.

For example, If abstinence was practiced until lets say 30 or 40, we would then see a rapid decline and a possible extinction in our species even.