>>13052219>Sounds a lot like eugenicsIt's the science of animal husbandry. It's a 4,000 year old science and the backbone of all modern agriculture. Humans are animals. The science of animal husbandry applies just as much to humans as it does cattle or dogs. The benefits reaped by applying animal husbandry to humans would be even greater than in dogs, because humans produce profoundly more value than dogs.
>If some bugchaser is looking to get pozzed, is that really your concern? It's my concern for the same reason that a farmer tries to prevent his cattle from getting sick. The amount you respect "freedom" is a bit disgusting. There's no other domesticated animal given "freedom" other than humans, and this is because "freedom" significantly lowers the yield and value of the animal. Clearly, since humans are animals, freedom is equally as harmful to the yield of the human population as it would be to chickens, cattle, or horses.
>Adultery is a good example of a previously amoral thing that is now seen in a more positive way, showing how societal morals can fluctuate. The point is not that "God punishes you", the point is that these produce needless convolution of the system. These produce more opportunities for problems to arise. This is contrary to Ocam's Razor.
>Having multiple partners>Having non-reproductive (pointless) sex>Having multiple wives>Having children with different womenThese are added complications to the system, thus are more than likely in error and cause problems. There's nothing of value to be gained, but plenty of risk involved with this. That's the problem.
