₦airaland Forum

cornelboy:
Does it matter whether you're in embryo stage or an infant or a teenager or an old man?
A soul is a soul. A life is a life.

Notice I did not mention soul. I said human being. You said you consider an embryo a complete human being did you not? So when you eat a tree bearing seed you are eating a full tree? When you eat an egg you are actually eating a full chicken?

cornelboy:
What I know is that a soul is a complete being.
So I would say a person is a soul the moment he starts living. Right from conception.

So an embryo is a complete human being? An embryo that has no brain or any other organs is a complete human being?

budaatum:
What you call "societal control" could be seen as society organising itself.

Preventing or at least minimising conflict about who people choose to mate with, is a good thing. It reduces killings and death.

Allowing lineages to be properly recorded, is good, as lineages would know their line.

Allowing parents and children to be properly matched is good too, as parents would have the right children.

One more thing marriage does is ensure 4 hands bring up children, as opposed to only 2 hands, and that's a workload that's worth sharing if the intention is to do it right.

On reflection it seems control has a negative connotation when it actually shouldn't.

Jackanda1:
So i should visit a mental asylum?

Seeing a therapist is not synonymous with going to a mental asylum. Stop perpetuating this unhelpful stereotype.

kkins25:
I see. I understand the POV. When you say "societal control" it creates the impression that some "monk" with fore knowledge, sat in a temple to construct the institute of marriage.

Perhaps, "societal control" is an inadequate term: How about leaning towards "societal organization?"

Yeah that might be a better way to put it.

kkins25:
I don't think marriage is societal control. Because, some birds hold life long bonds, which is no different from marriage. Our children take 16-18 years to become adapt enough to survive this world. As records show, single parenting is devastating.

The benefits of marriage is ambigious because we think of life in terms of material wealth and not in terms of Energy which is the currency of life.
Where would a single parent see the energy to live a fulfilling life and carter for their child at the same time?

I agree with you that people are too focused on counting the material aspects of marriage but I will tell you how it is societal control.

1. It prevents or at least minimises conflict about who people choose to mate with.
2. It allows lineages to be properly recorded.
3. It allows parents and children to be properly matched.

These and others are some of the reasons why marriage is societal control. Can we achieve these without formal marriage ties, yes but quite unlikely given the present state of human interaction.

ogashman:
I was telling someone the other day that this is the root cause of generational/multi dimentional poverty in Nigeria.

Some people just give birth indiscriminately without recourse to how they are going to train these kids.

These kids end up being used and abused by others.

Some of them are already breadwinners of their families at a tender age. Doing all sort of things to make ends meet.


Give birth to the number of kids u can take care of. It's as simple as that. Nobody is saying u should not get married while earning a low pay but if u do, then u can give birth to one child and zip up. Train that one child to become someone who will be beneficial to u and society.

In saner climes, couples give birth to one and they are okay. In Nigeria, people would say "what if the child dies and you are left with no offspring ?" then so be it. Life is meant to be enjoyed. You can't be giving birth like rat because u feel if anyone dies, then u still a replacement.

Also in Nigeria, people give birth like rabbits because they are looking for a male child. 1st child female, 2nd child same, 3rd same....ahah..u no go stop? When ur salary or income can not support them.

And when u ask these set of people why they kept birthing even when they have reached their threshold, they would say that they need a male child to continue the family bloodline. So that their name could be remembered.

The question I ask them is "who knows ur family name?" can u remember the name of ur great great great grandfather ?

It is not by birthing multiple times that a man retains his name but by distinguishing himself in whatever he does. People like Albert Einstein, mendelev, socrates, plate, Isaac Newton, etc are relevant today because of their work which have improved our society. Their work outlived them and their families.

So it's time we change the mentality that children are a gift from God or u must birth a male child because of that u end causing problems for ursef and the society at large.

Illiteracy and superstition is another side to this. We have a large population of people to who the concept of family planning is either inaccessible due lack of literacy or active discouragement of family planning due to superstitious beliefs.

Searchingvictor:
If she’s 25+ and takes you to her family house and their last born is 4 years old, Na lie Na she born am.

Dude, I have uncle and aunties that I am 20years older than. Leave story, if you no wan do no do, no dey use story cover up.

Daisy101:
Keep up the good work.

To my story.
I have been married for twenty years and it has been blissful with four children. I and my husband adopted a child years before we got married. It happened that while we were dating, a neighbor who was a single man had a daughter, whose mother ran away to another man after giving birth and life was so difficult with them, she left the man and the baby to another man. The man brought the baby to me and I was the one caring for the child when the man goes to work then he helps people in carrying loads in the market. Even at night the baby sleeps with me. I took this baby everywhere and people believe she is my child. Tragically the man died one day while carrying loads, he fell off the staircase and was badly injured. It was my husband who took care of the hospital bills even after he died. During his burial just few people came , his brother he always talked about came and buried him. We thought he would demand for the child, or maybe on the burial day the wife would come to take her child. Janet, I prepared the baby, packed few of her things that was in my house and was ready to hand her over to whoever would come for her from the man's family. But no one came. They only carry her and gave her back to me. Her mother did not come. After the burial everyone left. I came back with my boyfriend, now my dear husband. We took the baby to his brother when he came to pick some of his things, he said he doesn't even have a house of his own and he's not married. He gave us two thousand naira and said we should continue caring for the child. Janet that was how we cared for the child date. We got married when she was four years and my husband said, before she's five years and no one comes for her we would adopt her legally. She clocked five years and Janet no one came, no one ever asked of her. No message from anyone to us. We adopted her legally. She is our first daughter, our ada whom we adore so much, very brilliant. And is in a private University.

she introduced her boyfriend to us two years ago. And now they are fully ready to get married. We do not have contact of any of her father's family, not even her father's brother, because there was no phone then, he refused telling us his address. And even her father was buried in the cemetery, which the service was also conducted there.

My husband is not bothered about any of this, he said he adopted her and would not go looking for anyone. He has already given the boy's family list. But I am worried. We have never mentioned any of these to our daughter, she believes we are her biological parents. Do you think it's time we let her know the truth, though my husband is not in support of this? Personally I wouldn't want to do this, but for the sake of tradition. I need to hear others opinion. Should we go ahead with the marriage or look for her family? Is there any need to tell her anything? I love my daughter so much and wouldn't want to do things that would affect her later. Please advise me.

I think it is irresponsible to not let the child know she is adopted especially as she is old enough to understand and reflect on the love you have shown. What if there is a major health issue and she finds out she doesn't share DNA or blood-type with you both? Tell her and be confident that your love will shine through.

On the marriage issue I see no problem, her biological parent and their families have shown no interest in her welfare or progress in life so why get bothered now?

She dey psych herself. LoLz.

budaatum:
Marry or not?

And what do you think would make one write the above?

I actually agree with 2 parts of that post.

1. Marriage is societal control.
2. There is nothing in marriage that you can't achieve without it.

The rest of it seems to be fueled by subtle misogynistic sentiments that seeks to belittle the contribution of the opposite sex to the enterprise.

jaephoenix:
Exactly

And till now he still hasn't.

basilico:
Trump was the CinC. Happy?
That's very soothing and important to you, instead of wanting to know why cctv failed, while the jackass was under suicide watch.
Better still, Epstein trafficked children. To who?

*** photos now😗😗😗

The same CinC that was a pal of Epstein? LoLz.

Freksy:
CHANCE

How is CHANCE the ultimate source of energy?

Freksy:
There is an ultimate source of energy that is inherent in every objects.

What is this ultimate source of energy?

BornAgainCow:
Lol. I don’t understand these liberals making a mountain over this Boebert story. So the fact that someone is conservative means they are infallible? And the fact that ONE conservative does something silly in her personal life means the entire party must be held accountable for it? Because she’s a child right? Lol. I can’t get the logic.

They are just desperate for any type of republican scandal to distract from the fact that their president is currently imploding all over the place.

And for the last time not every conservative is religious. There is a religious wing of the party no doubt but I have explained it many times before that the Republican Party is a multi-faction party. There are Many non-religious and even socially liberal Republicans.

Is Lauren Boebert religious or not?

BornAgainCow:
They have let this mental patient out again 😂😂 long time.

She was never an escort; that rumor has been debunked but even if she was, so? We should now crucify people for their past? So very liberal of you 😂😅

Obama was once a cocaine sniffing pot head who visited gay clubs and partook in gay orgies. He admitted some of these in his own book! That’s the kind of Trash and filth on your own side! So if you want to go down that road then let’s do it.

Hypocrite liberals. You in particular have the intellectual capacity of a housefly so I’m not really surprised by your shallow thinking.

Go fvck your mother bro.

Ah I love this. So yall should shut up about the Virginia lady running for office that yall have been gargling about, yes?!

basilico:
More or less smelling like a political hit.

A grandma at 36 going through a divorce after 18 years of marriage goes out on a date.
Her date is Democrat who owns a bar. Bar is pro gay and is known to host drag shows.
I doubt she knew much about her date Or maybe twas one of those days when people just decide to do crazy things.

Footage focus on her would be triggered if she had attempted to use a camera in the theatre, which she did.
Footage of her and her date is quickly released and is top news.

We are yet to see any footage of cameras outside the cell Epstein epsteined himself. We are yet to see relevant footage of the Steve Paddock who killed 58 people fand injured hundreds others rom the balcony of a high end hotel.

Yeah remind me, who was CinC when Epstein epsteined himself.

Freksy:
You have answered the question you asked. You are not different from me.

Then what facts did you gather to know it?

Freksy:
How you know the things you know.

By gathering facts. So now can you answer my question?

Freksy:
The earth's maker.



Because it's programmed to regenerate like a factory on auto.

How do you know this?

gisevak:
Is this proof or a joke? Is this a proof of what causes the natural process? So all scientific principles, according to you, such as Isaac Newton's first law of motion, started the natural process.

Still waiting for you to show how nature is evidence for creation.

gisevak:
Is this proof or a joke? Is this a proof of what causes the natural process? So all scientific principles, according to you, such as Isaac Newton's first law of motion, started the natural process.

You asked me what causes natural processes, I said interaction of energy and matter. You then ask what proof I have of that and I responded with every scientific principle and observation. I never said scientific principles and observation are what cause natural processes rather they are proof that natural processes are a result of interaction between energy and matter. Get it?

gisevak:
What proof do you have for the bolded?

Every scientific principle and observation you can think of.

gisevak:
A simple analogy is this: I saw a mansion at a place. And I couldn't see the builder. Does it just make sense to say there is no builder? Is it logical to conclude that the builder of such a mansion doesn't exist? What cause the natural process?

I know mansions have human builders because I have observed that and the evidence abounds therefore it is mundane to assume that any mansion I see was built by a human. However if the claim is there is a specific human who built this mansion or all mansions then we need evidence to substantiate such a claim. You have provided no evidence that some creator did anything and since we have not observed any creators creating any universes then the claim is not mundane enough to be assumed. You can't logic things into existence.

Natural processes are caused by the interplay between matter and energy.

gisevak:
See, I do not claim certainty about nonexistence of a creator or creators because i don't have enough facts to rejects its existence. Can you provide provide that fact?

Dude you are the one making the claim, you need to show how nature and it's laws are evidence for a creation. You can't switch it and be asking me.

jmoore:
https://answeringenesis.org/big-bang

Your link is faulty. Here is the proper link: https://answersingenesis.org/big-bang/

gisevak:
"Natural creation" typically refers to the process by which entities, or others come into existence through natural means.

If we are only focused on natural means then yes according to your definition the Earth is a "natural creation".

gisevak:
Evidence refers to information, facts, data, or observations that support or justify a claim. So, by observation, we can say nature is evidence of creation. What is your definition of evidence?

Still no. Our observations do not lend credence to the notion that nature was created. What our observations reveal is natural things in this universe come about by natural processes, not by the actions of a "creator".

Evidence in addition to what you have said needs to show a claim to be true.

gisevak:
Is the Earth a natural creation?

What does "natural creation" mean?

gisevak:
Is Earth nature?

You mean is the Earth natural. Sure, it is.

gisevak:
Natural creations that include mountains, ecosystems, and even living organisms; Are this not evidence of creation to you? Or Are these not natural creations?

You said creation didn't exist! Are you kidding yourself or someone else?

Where did I say "creation didn't exist"?

No they are not evidence of creation since we know how they formed and there was no "creator" involved.

Meanwhile you are yet to show how nature and it's laws are evidence of a creation.