"I'm going to blow your mind here so brace yourself: somebody can be in a PhD program and disagree with the premiss of same sex marriage."
Woah, like, dude. That's heavy, man. My mind is, like, totally blown, man.
"Someone can be smarter than YOU (absit omen) and disagree with same sex marriage."
Yes, and conversely, they can be dumber than I am and disagree with same sex marriage.
What's your point?
"Eugenics necessarily isn't a bad thing."
Which has what to do with the topic of discussion?
"Women having a lot of sex partners is a prima facie violation of the naturalistic values which evolution has imposed upon humanity."
1: No, it doesn't. The more partners, the more potential genetic diversity of her offspring, thus the greater chance that at least one will have traits that will allow successful survival to pass on both her genes and the genes of the father. That would be the "naturalistic values" that evolution works by. Society has imposed a particular structure on us--that of monogamy, typically--which we abide by, thus having many sexual partners tends to be looked down upon.
2: Studies have been done. Women overwhelmingly have fewer sexual partners throughout their life than men. I believe the average for women was three sexual partners over their entire life, while men averaged five. So, if it's a "violation of the naturalistic values which evolution has imposed upon humanity" for women to have "a lot of sex partners", what about for men?
"Bonus fact: you cannot have (legitimate) values outside the ones which are naturally imposed."
So, you're an anarchist or what?
