-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It Takes A Man And A Woman To Create Life.
- Thread starter Jimmy
- Start date
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
It seems an odd idea to call reproduction 'creating life' but if you insist on that, then there are plenty of other species that do it too, and by no means do all of them require a male and female to do it.
So, no, it doesn't take a man and a woman to 'create life', even in the sense of reproduction.
Tamino
Active Member
But your title is not correct.
It does not take a man and a woman to create the life of the next generation. Two mice manage just fine. Several species of animal can switch between sexual and asexual reproduction, and bacteria recreate themselves all the time.
"Life" is not just humans. We live in a large and complex world teeming with different forms of life.
Female mammals who reproduce typically have a higher investment... they invest a lot of time and resources, and risk their own health and sometimes their life in pregnancy. That's the difference you were looking for, I believe.
I would not call that "being closer to God", though.
Change man and woman to male and female and you're right for animals that use sexual reproduction.
Looking at this and some of your previous threads, you seem to have an unfavorable opinion toward Judaism.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Reproduction is not creating life, is is just continuing the process.
Life is dependent on reproduction for it's continuation.
Sexual reproduction is just one of the mechanisms available.
Dolly the clone sheep was not the creation of life, it was reproduction.
As yet we do not have the ability to create life.
Life is dependent on reproduction for it's continuation.
Sexual reproduction is just one of the mechanisms available.
Dolly the clone sheep was not the creation of life, it was reproduction.
As yet we do not have the ability to create life.
Then, to facilitate a meaningful discussion, you should have no problem citing your sources.
(I'll check back later.)
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
Looking at his most recent threads, he also appears to be on an evangelistic mission, proselytizing and preaching his favored version of Christianity.
Fascinating!
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, if science continue to advance then one day you could also do it with techology and 2 women.
Ignatius A
Well-Known Member
So you're saying that technology would just replace the man and eventually we would have ovens to cook the manufactured eggs thereby eliminating the need for women.
Who are you talking to?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, yes. If you can actually make the DNA and eggs, then that could be the next step.
But if that is your fancy, then a computer so house human cognition is also a way to go.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, squirrels are life as per the OP.
You insinuated that it takes a man and a woman to create life. Squirrels have/are life. So it is.
I was hoping for an answer. Instead I got a deflection.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That won't help, because defintions are not facts as such.
And all life is not human.