All males 14+ should consider a vasectomy.

[Chronoshock]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

Vasectomy's are VERY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to reverse (we're talking a good $10K that isn't covered by insurance), and has a good chance of not working. Stupid stupid stupid idea.

http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-cost.html

$ is no object.

WTF? If money is no object there are many other things you could do. Just give people free condoms

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Amused
He was either lying, or confused.

are you a mormon? ill ask my buddy again. i cant verify for sure.

One of my brothers is, and another brother has a Morman wife who was raised in a strict Morman family in Utah. Her sister just died of liver failure (a long illness) and recieved blood during her two transplants.

You are mistaken.

was it done in a mormon hospital?

RELIGIOUS FAITHS AND TRANSPLANTATION

 

[Calin]

Hell no...
This would be the first step, the second step would be to reverse the operation only when you are certified to be able to grow kids

Calin

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Amused
He was either lying, or confused.

are you a mormon? ill ask my buddy again. i cant verify for sure.

One of my brothers is, and another brother has a Morman wife who was raised in a strict Morman family in Utah. Her sister just died of liver failure (a long illness) and recieved blood during her two transplants.

You are mistaken.

was it done in a mormon hospital?

Yep.

 

[imported_nitrus]

"Jehovah's Witnesses. Blood transfusion is banned by Jehovah's Witnesses. However, provided that organs and tissues are completely drained of blood before transplantation, they do not oppose donating or receiving organs. Organ donation is not encouraged but is a matter of individual conscience."

i stand corrected.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: nitrus
"Jehovah's Witnesses. Blood transfusion is banned by Jehovah's Witnesses. However, provided that organs and tissues are completely drained of blood before transplantation, they do not oppose donating or receiving organs. Organ donation is not encouraged but is a matter of individual conscience."

i stand corrected.

I tried to tell you.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

Vasectomy's are VERY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to reverse (we're talking a good $10K that isn't covered by insurance), and has a good chance of not working. Stupid stupid stupid idea.

http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-cost.html

$ is no object.

That's retarded. If you can just go "money is no object" and it is suddenly so, why couldn't you just say "girls only will get pregnant if their mom fills out the proper forms" to solve this problem? You can't just remove a slice of reality from the equation like that. The 100% reverable thing was hard to accept but thats just bullsh|t.

 

[bugsysiegel]

Wow, this has to be in the top 10 stupidest posts I've ever come across.

Vasectomies usually can't be reversed, and when they are, the pain is considerable. I knew a guy who had it reversed, he said it felt like he was walking around right after someone kicked him in the junk plus a stabbing pain in that area. Fortunately, it only lasted about 3 months.

Right.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: nitrus
"Jehovah's Witnesses. Blood transfusion is banned by Jehovah's Witnesses. However, provided that organs and tissues are completely drained of blood before transplantation, they do not oppose donating or receiving organs. Organ donation is not encouraged but is a matter of individual conscience."

i stand corrected.

How exactly would you drain an organ completely of blood anyway? That seems like a physical impossibility, and you would likely kill the organ in doing so.

Edit: I'm also curious as to the reasoning that allows organs to be transplanted, but not blood...WTF?

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

Vasectomy's are VERY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to reverse (we're talking a good $10K that isn't covered by insurance), and has a good chance of not working. Stupid stupid stupid idea.

http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-cost.html

$ is no object.

Try and slip that whopper past the voting public and let me know if you still believe it.

 

[imported_nitrus]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

Vasectomy's are VERY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to reverse (we're talking a good $10K that isn't covered by insurance), and has a good chance of not working. Stupid stupid stupid idea.

http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-cost.html

$ is no object.

Try and slip that whopper past the voting public and let me know if you still believe it.

$ is no object to because i have my own funds to reverse it. i take nothing from uncle sam. they take from me.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

 

[Megadeth]

Originally posted by: bugsysiegel
Wow, this has to be in the top 10 stupidest posts I've ever come across.

 

[Amused]

I got it!!!!

Install a valve in every male child that can block or open the tubes!!!

"Wanna have a rugrat dear? OK, let me just flick this switch here..."

 

[imported_nitrus]

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

that would be nice. recalling "demolition man" with sly stallone and sandra bullock.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

Vasectomy's are VERY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to reverse (we're talking a good $10K that isn't covered by insurance), and has a good chance of not working. Stupid stupid stupid idea.

http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-cost.html

$ is no object.

Try and slip that whopper past the voting public and let me know if you still believe it.

$ is no object to because i have my own funds to reverse it. i take nothing from uncle sam. they take from me.

I didn't realize that you surreptitiously changed your post - it originally implied that all young males were REQUIRED to get one.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

that would be nice. recalling "demolition man" with sly stallone and sandra bullock.

Or "Brave New World".

 

[imported_nitrus]

Originally posted by: Amused
I got it!!!!

Install a valve in every male child that can block or open the tubes!!!

"Wanna have a rugrat dear? OK, let me just flick this switch here..."

lol, most amusing response. reminds me of data from ST: NG and how he could turn off his emotions.

 

[imported_nitrus]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

Vasectomy's are VERY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to reverse (we're talking a good $10K that isn't covered by insurance), and has a good chance of not working. Stupid stupid stupid idea.

http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-cost.html

$ is no object.

Try and slip that whopper past the voting public and let me know if you still believe it.

$ is no object to because i have my own funds to reverse it. i take nothing from uncle sam. they take from me.

I didn't realize that you surreptitiously changed your post - it originally implied that all young males were REQUIRED to get one.

that was a laspe in thought, i never ment to suggest that it was mandatory. that would be unconstitutional, and something outta sci-fi. i would use the latest and greatest tried and true methods
with my kids. along with lectures and info.

 

[lokiju]

It wouldn't stop STD's and probally increase them since there would be no worry of getting someone pregnant.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

that would be nice. recalling "demolition man" with sly stallone and sandra bullock.

No, you'd still have sex, but sex would only transfer genetic material for storage for a later fertilization of the egg when the female was ready to have children.

As for Brave New World, it's poor science and SF (why do high schools ignore good SF and require books like BNW?). Try Cyteen by CJ Cherryh for a better written and more realistic portrayal of such a world.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

that would be nice. recalling "demolition man" with sly stallone and sandra bullock.

No, you'd still have sex, but sex would only transfer genetic material for storage for a later fertilization of the egg when the female was ready to have children.

As for Brave New World, it's poor science and SF (why do high schools ignore good SF and require books like BNW?). Try Cyteen by CJ Cherryh for a better written and more realistic portrayal of such a world.

How technically accurate the work may be was not my chief concern, after all it was first published in 1932.

Edit: It would be nice if I could spell worth a crap in the morning.

 

[imported_nitrus]

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

that would be nice. recalling "demolition man" with sly stallone and sandra bullock.

No, you'd still have sex, but sex would only transfer genetic material for storage for a later fertilization of the egg when the female was ready to have children.

As for Brave New World, it's poor science and SF (why do high schools ignore good SF and require books like BNW?). Try Cyteen by CJ Cherryh for a better written and more realistic portrayal of such a world.

why is utopia so hard to reach? i love the US and Earth. though not alot people share my enthusiam(some politicians, some lawyers, and all criminals)

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: K1052
As for Brave New World, it's poor science and SF (why do high schools ignore good SF and require books like BNW?). Try Cyteen by CJ Cherryh for a better written and more realistic portrayal of such a world.

How technically acurate the work may be was not my chief concern, after all it was first published in 1932.[/quote]

I agree that there arereasons for it not being accurate, but that's no reason to ignore modern SF that is accurate and better written.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus

Originally posted by: cquark

Originally posted by: nitrus
think about it no teenage pregnancy. no abortions. no "accidents". planned parenthood to the extreme. this is assuming that a vasectomy is 100% safe and 100% reversable.

It might be a good idea in certain countries like Bangladesh, China, India, and Nigeria that have serious immediate population problems, but it's overkill for the U.S.

In the long term, I'd like to see us genetically engineer homo sapiens to separate sex (the exchange of genetic material) from reproduction (which is the case for most organisms on Earth), which would solve the problem, but we're a long way from knowing enough about our biology to do that.

that would be nice. recalling "demolition man" with sly stallone and sandra bullock.

No, you'd still have sex, but sex would only transfer genetic material for storage for a later fertilization of the egg when the female was ready to have children.

As for Brave New World, it's poor science and SF (why do high schools ignore good SF and require books like BNW?). Try Cyteen by CJ Cherryh for a better written and more realistic portrayal of such a world.

why is utopia so hard to reach? i love the US and Earth. though not alot people share my enthusiam(some politicians, some lawyers, and all criminals)

Because people can, and do think for themselves. The commonly thought of "Utopia" requires worker bee like egalitarianism and mindlessness. "Utopia" can't work for the same reasons communism cannot work.