Premarital Sex

[ElemenoPQ]

<p>Is it in any way possible to discuss premarital sex without bringing religion into this? BTW religion =/= morals.</p>

[meadow36]

<p>

The vast majority of random mutations either kill or handicap the creature. Natural selection then eliminates them.

</p>

<p>Oh dear. Have you studied biology? Not all mutations are lethal. If you believe that, you are very much mistaken. The redundancy of the genetic code allows that. Meaning that the change of base, could simply be silent. Meaning the amino acid it codes for stays the same. resulting in change of the DNA sequence but the actual protein product remains the same. In addition, you can also have missense mutation in which the amino acid changes. Depending on which amino acid it changes in to, it could or could not be detrimental. If the amino acid it changes stays polar it could still be functional, but the active site might possibly have more of an affinity. It really depends. And of course there are nonsense mutations in which you have a premature stop codon. In those cases yes it would be bad. (That would be so sad if we eliminated all mutations for most of the time they are very useful. They provide genetic variety.)</p>

<p>

If we had a magic “trait machine” that dropped a new allele into the gene pool every so often that’d be great. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. Mutations happen when something causes a copy error in the DNA. Unless the copy error is useful, it won’t stick. Unless it is actually a vastly unlikely set of copy errors, it won’t be useful.

</p>

<p>Once again vastly mistaken. You don’t know about transposons. They jump around your genome and provide a lot of mutations. In fact there was this time way back in history when they had a massive transposon jumping incidence where transposons jumped around like crazy in your genome to provide a lot of mutations after some really bad event, and organisms were desperate to survive. That’s just one example.</p>

<p>Of course common examples include crossing over, genetic drift, genetic flow, and mutations.(And actually DNA replication mutations are often eliminated). Google those concepts if you don’t know what they mean. Or ask me for clarification.</p>

<p>

BTW, meadow, did you see my answer about why I believe we have souls? It’s on page 22.

40 ppp. Post number pl0x.</p>

<p>EDIT: OH btw, common example for advantageous mutations. The hemoglobin protein. Have you heard of that before?</p>

[ElemenoPQ]

<p>Yes we can! </p>

<p>… have sex before marriage!</p>

[MosbyMarion]

<p>^ Was that directed at me?</p>

[ElemenoPQ]

<p>No, at TrueLove.

@TrueLove

“Yes, we can!” is our motto around here, babes.

</p>

[brndname]

<p>this is a very popular thread, i must say, and so is pre marital sex lol</p>

[meadow36]

<p>I call ■■■■■ on TrueLove.</p>

[Baelor]

<p>pquote]Argh! Circular logic.</p>

<p>I am asking…what is the problem with that, meaning 1) and 2)? (And in your mind, any form of contraception that isn’t abstinence is artificial?–So you support teaching abstinence-only to students?)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>OMG. I already replied to this. Read my posts or Google “Humanae Vitae” for a complete answer.</p>

<p>

How in the hell is morality tangible.

</p>

<p>How is it intangible? Do you see the problem with asking inane questions? </p>

<p>

That marriage only ends with the death of a spouse? I didn’t respond to it because I think it’s just dumb. But of course that’s my own personal opinion.

</p>

<p>You’re right, that is your personal opinion. </p>

<p>

What happens if a spouse becomes abusive, does drugs, drinks, and refuses to rehabilitate. Do you take the beating, or do you leave? What if a spouse cheats on you and does not want to touch you ever again. You do not believe in divorce or extramarital sex. Do you just suck it up and stay with him/her? There are too many possibilities to be black and white about these things.

</p>

<p>Actually, there aren’t, and the issue is black and white.</p>

<p>For the only two exceptions to the rule, read the following sources:</p>

<p>[Pauline</a> privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_privilege]Pauline”>Pauline privilege - Wikipedia)
[Petrine</a> Privilege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrine_Privilege]Petrine”>Petrine privilege - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>Otherwise, it doesn’t matter. The marriage is SACRAMENTAL. It’s DONE. It can never be UNDONE (except in the two cases). You have to put yourself in the shoes of someone who believes that there is a supernatural component. If you are doing this, you would understand why earthly circumstances are totally irrelevant.</p>

<p>

It is so only because God says it is so. If God did not say something was so, you would not be following it or recognized it as so even if it was so.

</p>

<p>God says what is so, so your point is irrelevant.</p>

<p>

You can reproduce, start a family, and do anything and everything normally without getting married as well…

</p>

<p>Not in a sacramental context.</p>

<p>

The thing with the whole religious argument…I mean, last time I checked we had separation of church and state. And that religious ideals should not be imposed onto others.

</p>

<p>Actually, separation of Church and State is nowhere codified. The First Amendment clearly does not address religious bases for legislation, unless you reject originalism as a Constitutional philosophy (which would be rather stupid).</p>

<p>

Second point: What about parents that aren’t responsible enough to deal with that? School is about education, and this is one part. Not teaching about contraceptives (safe sex) is naive and ineffective: kids will have sex, no matter what.

</p>

<p>Not really, if you consider contraceptives intrinsically bad. For example, I would rather all sex be unprotected, extramarital or not.</p>

[TrueLove]

<p>Now you’ve done it, fairy! You have now resorted to personal attacks on my feeble self worth. For that I shall bid you adieu (I had to spel chek that last word)! I am insensed and downright outraged. Actually, gotta study for that darn Chem, UShist sub 2 test and that sucky Calc. Bye y’all. And buy y’all selves a chastity belt, if you can’t control yourself. Try Ebay for some good used ones. Eeek!</p>

[meadow36]

<p>

For that I shall bid you adieu (I had to spel chek that last word)!

</p>

<p>i c wat u did der.</p>

[fairy_dreams]

<p>I was merely observing the workings of this thread.</p>

[AeroEngineer3141]

<p>At this point True is just antagonizing people. He was doing that before, but since we’re not even on the original subject anymore, his actions are more pronounced. </p>

<p>Back to the topic of evolution. I personally believe in the theory, but I’ve just realized that I have no legitimate knowledge of or arguments for it, besides the most basic of fundamental points. Someone teach me lol. I’d like to see the arguments on both sides.</p>

[TrueLove]

<p>“I call ■■■■■ on TrueLove.”</p>

<p>Meadow, stop with the name calling, you bleepedy, bleep, bleep You could hurt my feelings, ya know!</p>

[fairy_dreams]

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/high-school-life/862540-what-■■■■■■-2.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/high-school-life/862540-what-■■■■■■-2.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

@meadow

■■■■■■ are so cute!

As quick as usual to make judgments True.</p>

<p>(God, I have such a creepy memory haha)</p>

[meadow36]

<p>They are amusinggg :]</p>

<p>Thus, the reason I wrote in some other thread(that got deleted?), that TrueLove’s posts made me lol.</p>

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>

If the mutations aren’t useful individually, then there’s no reason for them to be kept. The next step is just as likely to be backwards as forwards. The chances of a new trait appearing are beyond astronomical. Then the new trait is far more likely to doom the creature than aid it. With so many tries required, we would expect WAY more fossil record, and WAY more time before the theory seems reasonable. And even then we are left with problems like the cleanerfish and lichens.

</p>

<p>But mutations aren’t rare. Everyone has a number of mutations, and if they mate the mutations are passed on. And again, we’re dealing with multiple people. The odds of any single mutation making paradigm changing difference is astronomical. The odds of an astronomical number of mates leading to a major change is not.</p>

<p>And the incompleteness of the fossil record? Is that your PhD in Biology talking? Very very few organisms are preserved as fossils. Due to the nature of punctuated equilibrium, very few organisms are “transitional.” Naturally, very few fossils are “transitional.”</p>

[ElemenoPQ]

<p>Baelor, the sources you provided me with on Petrine Privilege and Pauline Privilege had nothing to do with my scenarios. So you should suffer on earth (if you are the mistreated spouse in my scenarios) because God’s reward (whatever it may be) will make up for it?</p>

<p>Anyway, it is nice to know that there are exceptions. The Petrine Privilege is a revision of canon law though. Why did they revise it? Did God tell them to? The Pauline Privilege is taken from Paul. Not from God, himself. To me it looks like Paul’s opinion. Why should you follow it if it did not come from God himself? (Please correct me if I am totally off and if Paul was indeed told by God that that kind of divorce is allowed)</p>

<p>

@Baelor

God says what is so, so your point is irrelevant.

</p>

<p>Lets make concept X “so”. God never said concept X is so, for whatever reason. Is concept X still “so”? Play devil’s advocate for just a moment here. Don’t say something like “God WOULD say concept X is so because it is so, therefore he will say it is so”</p>

<p>No, just pretend even for a second that God will not say something is so, even if it is. Or are you arguing that God is completely incapable of doing that?</p>

[meadow36]

<p>

If the mutations aren’t useful individually, then there’s no reason for them to be kept.

False. They don’t know yet. So why would they eliminate it? Your genes can’t predict the future.</p>

<p>The rest TCBH actually replied quite adeptly.</p>

[MosbyMarion]

<p>

Oh dear. Have you studied biology? Not all mutations are lethal. If you believe that, you are very much mistaken. The redundancy of the genetic code allows that. Meaning that the change of base, could simply be silent. Meaning the amino acid it codes for stays the same. resulting in change of the DNA sequence but the actual protein product remains the same. In addition, you can also have missense mutation in which the amino acid changes. Depending on which amino acid it changes in to, it could or could not be detrimental. If the amino acid it changes stays polar it could still be functional, but the active site might possibly have more of an affinity. It really depends. And of course there are nonsense mutations in which you have a premature stop codon. In those cases yes it would be bad. (That would be so sad if we eliminated all mutations for most of the time they are very useful. They provide genetic variety.)

</p>

<p>Yes, I’ve studied biology, to some extent. And as I understand it, there are three possible results of a mutation:</p>

<p>1: Bad. Natual selection takes care of these.
2: Good. Natural selection keeps these. Not aware of any examples.
3: Neither bad nor good. natural selection does nothing to these. They just sit around.</p>

<p>

Once again vastly mistaken. You don’t know about transposons. They jump around your genome and provide a lot of mutations. In fact there was this time way back in history when they had a massive transposon jumping incidence where transposons jumped around like crazy in your genome to provide a lot of mutations after some really bad event, and organisms were desperate to survive. That’s just one example.</p>

<p>Of course common examples include crossing over, genetic drift, genetic flow, and mutations.(And actually DNA replication mutations are often eliminated). Google those concepts if you don’t know what they mean. Or ask me for clarification.

</p>

<p>Hmm… <em>casts “summon wikipedia”</em></p>

<p>Huh, I guess I did know about those things. Just not by those names, I guess.</p>

<p>As I understand it, crossing over, genetic drift, and genetic flow are all ways in which existing alleles recombine to form new combinations. This is observable, and obviously true. However, none of them involve the appearance of new traits. They only recombine existing ones. They would not cause an increase in the gene pool, rather they would separate an existing, homogenous gene pool into a number of specialized populations.</p>

<p>The transposon thing is great, but what do they do? How are they more useful than normal mutations?</p>

<p>My reasons to believe we have souls are [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1064746658-post329.html]here[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1064746658-post329.html]here[/url</a>].</p>

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>Mutation quality is a misconception.</p>