Extraterrestrial Marriage

[BeFell]

Black men have been marrying white women for several years now despite the opinions of those who watch NASCAR (Any sport that doesn't have at least one black man who dominates over all others isn't sport) and gays are already tying the knot in some parts of the country meaning it's only a matter of time before it's a nationwide phenomonem. Then of course there is the recent excitement about plural marriage, or good ol' Mormon fun as we call it in Idaho, and it's only a matter of time before those of Scottish descent and their sheep get their way. So my question is this, if we do mannage to prove the existance extraterrestrials and are able to interact with them, then should human and alien be able to join in holy matrimony?

There is of course the negative sexual associations with aliens primarily of which involve some form of date rape as in kidnapping, druging and anal probing but I am of the mind that as long as it's cosential why the hell not? There are those who pay good money for that sort of thing within their own species.

Perhaps the debate would evolve around what form are outworldly visitors are in, if they're humanoid like Klignons or Vulcans I don't think anyone would have too many complaints but what if they are something completely different, like Jabba the Hutt? Cetainly the thought of a Jabba/human hybrid is too disturbing to fathom anything but a complete ban on such nonesense. There is the possibility of only banning marriage in certain forms meaning Leia could go down with spock and probably Chewie but not Jabba, the pit monster or that green guy Han capped but where does Jar Jar fit into this? Perhaps Leia isn't the best example given her tendency to make nooky with just about anything including Han, Chewie, the Empororer, General Mar Tok and her brother (which is prohibited in most cultures exluding the Romans as my understanding of the movie Gladiator goes).

My point is this though, if a man can love a woman, if a man can love a man, if a woman can love a woman and a Mormon can love a woman and a woman and a woman and a woman... and Curt Kobain could be married to that evil shebitch demon from hell then is there any reason why a woman can't choose to be with an oversized slug with a speach impediment and an deoderant intolerence just because a few of us might find it unsightly? I certainly hope not, not if America truly is the land of the free where people can be whatever they want to be (exluding drug dealers, murderers, pedophiles and rap singers, Tupak's murder was a government conspiracy it's all online) by God I say go for princess, have Jabba, have Lando have a Gungan and that freaky dude who was cruising around with Lando in the Return of the Jedi but for the love of Pete please leave Luke out of it... or don't who am I to tell you what to do.

[troubles1]

LOL; , and it's only a matter of time before those of Scottish descent and their sheep get their way.
BAAAAAA

[MortifiedPenguins]

Nice fun thread.

Though the question stands, his was three pages full of shit, while yours was one of humour.

[ImmoralLibertarian]

Oh, I see what he did.

He replaced the word ‘message’ with ‘marriage’.

How clever.

[BeFell]

Um... guys, I wasn't going for a parody, this topic stemmed from a thought process that started when I misread the title of the other guys thread, so yeah...

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 9/7/06 04:29 PM, BeFell wrote: Um... guys, I wasn't going for a parody, this topic stemmed from a thought process that started when I misread the title of the other guys thread, so yeah...

Fo' real.

[JudgeDredd]

Fo' real.

Fo' chopizzle.

[stafffighter]

At 9/7/06 04:50 PM, Judge_Dredd wrote:

Fo' real.

Fo' chopizzle.

You just know it's going to be the alien men taking all our white women. Call me closed minded but I think going that far for a thrill dirtys a chick permanently.

[rockizzy]

i dont see why a white woman shouldnt be allowed to get married to jabba the hut. i mean, there are humans closely ressembling jabba the hut, and they are allowed to get married to white women, so why not him?

[Onizero]

That's the most disturbing pic I've seen on NG.

[The-Dran]

At 9/7/06 05:11 PM, stafffighter wrote:

At 9/7/06 04:50 PM, Judge_Dredd wrote:

Fo' real.

Fo' chopizzle.

You just know it's going to be the alien men taking all our white women.

White women? most of the white women are hidious. Got no ass or got way too much fat. As seen in the picture above.

Now I'm not saying that Black and Asian women are better looking overall to that of white women. But you are more likely to find an attractive Black or Asian woman than to find a hot white woman, unless she's a red head with blue or green eyes and an ass like that of a typical black/asian woman.

Call me closed minded

Closed never came close.

but I think going that far for a thrill dirtys a chick permanently.

What thrill?

[No-one-inparticular]

Princess Laia is an alien. I'd marry her!

[ImmoralLibertarian]

At 9/7/06 10:43 PM, SteelReserve wrote: Princess Laia is an alien. I'd marry her!

Laia's human....

But then she's from another world... what exactly is the definition of ET?

[IllustriousPotentate]

I think the morality of the marriage would depend on how closely the extraterrestrial beings resembled humans. If they were very near humans, I think people would be more likely to accept it (with the exception of the religious right) than they would if the extraterrestrials are as they are typically depicted.

[The-Dran]

At 9/7/06 10:56 PM, o_r_i_g_i_n_a_l wrote:

At 9/7/06 10:43 PM, SteelReserve wrote: Princess Laia is an alien. I'd marry her!

Laia's human....

Nope she's not a human. She's a humanoid.

But then she's from another world... what exactly is the definition of ET?

Not being from the Earth.

Extraterrestrial = Not from the Earth

If you were born on the Moon and you were a human, you would be an extraterrestrial human.

But you need to study star wars, becaus Leia isn't a human.

They are considered to be humans, because they are biologically identical to modern human beings. But it's like finding humans on two completely different worlds. Certainly humans could not have actually evolved on two seperate worlds or realities? Because then humans wouldn't be a significant species to this planet... we would just be some sort of a virus extracted and infected by cosmic similarities.

So in true terms we are humans and they are just some species that has evolved under similar aspects as our own.

But then again they aren't even real people, so that's another reason why you can't associate them as humans.

That's why the term humanoid fits more closely, because it is a term used to identify a human like extraterrestrial race of (always) fictional origin.

[SkunkyFluffy]

At 9/7/06 11:58 PM, Anti_Noob wrote: But you need to study star wars, becaus Leia isn't a human.

No needs to study Star Wars.

But it's like finding humans on two completely different worlds. Certainly humans could not have actually evolved on two seperate worlds or realities?

The civilization in Star Wars spread to other planets. They didn't evolve there. That's the basic premise of the majority of science fiction universes. So if anyone needs to study Star Wars, it's you.

There's a tendency in your posts and in the IMs you insistently send me to slap together incongruous words and concepts in what appears to be an attempt to sound learned or deep. You consider yourself to be witty, which leads me to believe you may be deluded. Or perhaps a sufferer of Asperger's.

You fail to understand the concept of Occam's Razor, and overlook the simplest solution to a problem. Not everything needs to be complicated.

[The-Dran]

At 9/8/06 12:22 AM, SkunkyFluffy wrote:

At 9/7/06 11:58 PM, Anti_Noob wrote: But you need to study star wars, becaus Leia isn't a human.

No needs to study Star Wars.

But it's like finding humans on two completely different worlds. Certainly humans could not have actually evolved on two seperate worlds or realities?

The civilization in Star Wars spread to other planets. They didn't evolve there. That's the basic premise of the majority of science fiction universes. So if anyone needs to study Star Wars, it's you.

Shut the fuck up, you egotistical bitch.

You have no idea as to how evolution works. If you went from one planet to another and those people lived on that planet for roughly a thousand or so years. Don't you think some form of evolution would occur to make them different from their true ancestors?

It is the dynamics of why people look so different across this whole planet and yet we all have the same ancestor.

In fact there is a scientific theory, a promising theory, which explains the origin of life to be similar to a virus spreading from world to world from meteors.

If the first bacterial to emerge on Earth was actually an extraterrestrial, than certianly that would debunk your intelligent remark as being nothing more than utter stupidity.

There's a tendency in your posts and in the IMs you insistently send me to slap together incongruous words.

Seems more like a miscomprehension on your own part.

and concepts in what appears to be an attempt to sound learned or deep.

"learned."

Did you just mocked me by doing the very same thing you had said that I do?

You consider yourself to be witty.

And you consider yourself to be a professional of the English language and yet you've failed to understand the importance of unintentionality in one's own message.

which leads me to believe you may be deluded.

"deluded"

Oh wait, delusional? Oh... well that makes sense... no not really...

Or perhaps a sufferer of Asperger's.

Whatever makes you feel special, babe...

You fail to understand the concept of Occam's Razor.

"Occam's razor (also spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as a heuristic maxim that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity in scientific theories."

"Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off", those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. "

Well babe, I don't make THAT many assumptions to fail to understand a heuristic maxim that advices the simplicity of my own theories.

and overlook the simplest solution to a problem.

Ah huh... I sense jealousy in this portion of your statement.

Not everything needs to be complicated.

http://encarta.msn.c..168/complicated.html

True, but I perfer to remain difficult for your pea sized brain to understand. Perhaps you are overlooking my true qualities... and that is why I appear to be so complicated.

[ImmoralLibertarian]

At 9/7/06 11:58 PM, Anti_Noob wrote: Nope she's not a human. She's a humanoid.

Bullshit. I’m not particularly familiar with the new trilogy, but I specifically remember a line where Princess what’s-her-face (Natalie Portman’s character) exclaims surprise at the fact that humans are still being used as slaves.

[JMHX]

At 9/8/06 12:56 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:
You have no idea as to how evolution works. If you went from one planet to another and those people lived on that planet for roughly a thousand or so years. Don't you think some form of evolution would occur to make them different from their true ancestors?

It's like...I want to respond by pointing out that any evolution takes hundreds of millions of years...but I just know you're not going to listen to me, because I believe there is a strong chance you might be the Pope. Now, adaptive radiation is a process that can be done in the area of hundreds of thousands of years, and in very, very unique situations some genetic mutation can occur over ten thousand years, but a thousand years is so insignificant as to be meaningless.

If the first bacterial to emerge on Earth was actually an extraterrestrial, than certianly that would debunk your intelligent remark as being nothing more than utter stupidity.

Except that the entire life-by-meteor theory is debunked because the original study created basic amino acids and basic life in an oxygen-free environment. At the time of life's origins, there was oxygen in the atmosphere, rendering the idea null, since the results could not be replicated in an oxygenated environment. But I won't let that get in the way of you spouting on.

You fail to understand the concept of Occam's Razor.

You know, the philosophers aren't always right. Just because the simplest way to stop you from babbling is to go away from NG doesn't mean I don't contemplate chucking you from an airplane.

True, but I perfer to remain difficult for your pea sized brain to understand. Perhaps you are overlooking my true qualities... and that is why I appear to be so complicated.

Because the one word I think of when I think of Anti_Noob is complex. It's the complexity to misspell prefer, because it's simpler than going back and editing before posting. Of course, Occam always said simple is right.

[The-Dran]

At 9/8/06 01:12 AM, JMHX wrote:

At 9/8/06 12:56 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:
You have no idea as to how evolution works. If you went from one planet to another and those people lived on that planet for roughly a thousand or so years. Don't you think some form of evolution would occur to make them different from their true ancestors?

It's like...I want to respond by pointing out that any evolution takes hundreds of millions of years...but I just know you're not going to listen to me

Evolution can takes just a few million years or a few thousand years. Evolution can be insignificantly minor and as great as the diversity between plants and animals. It doesn't matter, even a generation is a part of evolution, because it takes many many many generations for evolution to work.

But you see... it is not like I don't want to listen to you. You just don't want to think logically of what you are talking about. But that's quite common. Skunky_Ass didn't want to do the same thing either.

because I believe there is a strong chance you might be the Pope.

LOL... now that's a good joke.

Now, adaptive radiation is a process that can be done in the area of hundreds of thousands of years

I guess that doesn't make the whole human family-tree a work of evolution.

and in very, very unique situations some genetic mutation can occur over tens of thousands of years.

They all occur in a manner that cannot be explained other than by the conditions that allowed them to occur as they have had. Obviously you don't know what causes evolution.

but a thousand years is so insignificant as to be meaningless.

Evolution works by adaptions that are brought upon a species through each generation, which are indeed extremely insignificant, that later produce a completely different organism without the confounds of several hundred million years or whatever.

But most people, including scientists, do not understand how evolution works. I understand how evolution works, vaguely, but much better than whoever taught you.

If the first bacterial to emerge on Earth was actually an extraterrestrial, than certianly that would debunk your intelligent remark as being nothing more than utter stupidity.

Except that the entire life-by-meteor theory is debunked

And the reason behind such, still remains a mystery.

because the original study created basic amino acids

Wow I didn't know that the first study of evolution created the basic amino acids.

and basic life in an oxygen-free environment.

Yep... oxygen-free environment... No oxygen whatsoever... like the early Earth in what was similar to planet Venus, so very long ago.

At the time of life's origins, there was oxygen in the atmosphere.

Vaguely...

rendering the idea null

Umm... I must missed something. Because you said the very first study of amino acids being created was done in an oxygen free environment and then you said life's origin occured when the planet surrounded in an atmosphere with what I guess to be a considerable trace of oxygen.

http://sciencebullet..40301/essays/2_1.php

http://www.geocities..0tf12b.html#Section3

According to these sources life had emerged regardless of the conditions of there being any oxygen and established oxygen into the atmosphere by photosynthesis.

since the results could not be replicated

So since the vast majority of today's scientists are morons, you think that life couldn't come from meteors or comets. Even though some comets comprise of organic chemicals.

:: in an oxygenated environment.

Well there aren't any planets in the solar system or any that we know of to have oxygen. So I don't understand what you are talking about.

But I won't let that get in the way of you spouting on.

Whatever makes you feel special.

You fail to understand the concept of Occam's Razor.

You know, the philosophers aren't always right.

I concure.

Just because the simplest way to stop you from babbling is to go away from NG doesn't mean I don't contemplate chucking you from an airplane.

I would have used a different analogy, but oh well...

True, but I perfer to remain difficult for your pea sized brain to understand. Perhaps you are overlooking my true qualities... and that is why I appear to be so complicated.

Because the one word I think of when I think of Anti_Noob is complex. It's the complexity to misspell prefer, because it's simpler than going back and editing before posting. Of course, Occam always said simple is right.

Hey I'm a human. Aren't I entitled to be imperfect? And by the way that was a typo, but everyone makes mistakes. You made a mistake, she made a mistake, and I made a mistake. Making mistakes, regardless of how dumb and common they can be, is just a way to say, "Hey I'm human." Right?

[JMHX]

At 9/8/06 01:38 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:

At 9/8/06 01:12 AM, JMHX wrote:

At 9/8/06 12:56 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:

even a generation is a part of evolution, because it takes many many many generations for evolution to work.

I think...nevermind...

But you see... it is not like I don't want to listen to you. You just don't want to think logically of what you are talking about. But that's quite common. Skunky_Ass didn't want to do the same thing either.

Course not, it's a conspiracy against your ineffable wisdom, monsieur crab.

I guess that doesn't make the whole human family-tree a work of evolution.

Well, that really depends on what you're talking about related to the "human family tree."

Evolution works by adaptions that are brought upon a species through each generation, which are indeed extremely insignificant, that later produce a completely different organism without the confounds of several hundred million years or whatever.

Quick, someone ship him the PhD.

But most people, including scientists, do not understand how evolution works. I understand how evolution works, vaguely, but much better than whoever taught you.

Scientists don't understand. Anti_Noob does. All glory to Anti_Noob.

Wow I didn't know that the first study of evolution created the basic amino acids.

Yep... oxygen-free environment... No oxygen whatsoever... like the early Earth in what was similar to planet Venus, so very long ago.

He says one thing...

At the time of life's origins, there was oxygen in the atmosphere.

Vaguely...

And then another...

rendering the idea null

Umm... I must missed something. Because you said the very first study of amino acids being created was done in an oxygen free environment and then you said life's origin occured when the planet surrounded in an atmosphere with what I guess to be a considerable trace of oxygen.

Not a fan of Stanley Miller's work?

According to these sources life had emerged regardless of the conditions of there being any oxygen and established oxygen into the atmosphere by photosynthesis.

since the results could not be replicated

So since the vast majority of today's scientists are morons, you think that life couldn't come from meteors or comets. Even though some comets comprise of organic chemicals.

zOMG kkkonspirasy

You know, the philosophers aren't always right.

I concure.

What can you cure, Dr. PhD?

Hey I'm a human. Aren't I entitled to be imperfect?

I don't know, are not you?

[The-Dran]

At 9/8/06 01:51 AM, JMHX wrote:
I think...nevermind...

You think nevermind? Well nevermind then...

Course not, it's a conspiracy against your ineffable wisdom, monsieur crab.

Not at all... I'm just a witty bastard. And sensitive people hate bastards, especially the witty kind.

Well, that really depends on what you're talking about related to the "human family tree."

That depends really on what you are talking about in relations to the "human family tree."

Quick, someone ship him the PhD.

LOL!

Scientists don't understand. Anti_Noob does. All glory to Anti_Noob.

Notice I said some scientists, but you like to exaggerate now don't you?

He says one thing...

Who?

At the time of life's origins, there was oxygen in the atmosphere.

Vaguely...

And then another...

You're point is?

rendering the idea null

Umm... I must missed something. Because you said the very first study of amino acids being created was done in an oxygen free environment and then you said life's origin occured when the planet surrounded in an atmosphere with what I guess to be a considerable trace of oxygen.

Not a fan of Stanley Miller's work?

I'm not a fan of any work done without actual science.

zOMG kkkonspirasy

JEEPERS!

What can you cure, Dr. PhD?

Jealous now aren't we? Or has sarcasm become so much fun?

I don't know, are not you?

Yeah, but it seems as though I know more about what it means to be a human than most people that criticize me. It seems as though the harm I do is display just how little everyone else knows.

[JMHX]

At 9/8/06 02:05 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:

At 9/8/06 01:51 AM, JMHX wrote:

Not at all... I'm just a witty bastard. And sensitive people hate bastards, especially the witty kind.

Wit requires you to be clever. You're just incomprehensible.

Well, that really depends on what you're talking about related to the "human family tree."

That depends really on what you are talking about in relations to the "human family tree."

Excellent way to abandon your point. How witty

He says one thing...

And then another...

You're point is?

My point is you took two different positions less than an inch apart from each other without any noticeable loss of brain cells.

Not a fan of Stanley Miller's work?

I'm not a fan of any work done without actual science.

Yes, because what would biological science and genetics have to do with science? The mere idea that one would lump them in with "science" is laughable. Or was that wit?

Yeah, but it seems as though I know more about what it means to be a human than most people that criticize me. It seems as though the harm I do is display just how little everyone else knows.

Yeah, that's exactly it.

[The-Dran]

At 9/8/06 02:11 AM, JMHX wrote:

At 9/8/06 02:05 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:

At 9/8/06 01:51 AM, JMHX wrote:

Not at all... I'm just a witty bastard. And sensitive people hate bastards, especially the witty kind.

Wit requires you to be clever. You're just incomprehensible.

And being incomprehendible means you are super mysterious and clever. Thanks for pointing that out, I couldn't have done it without ya.

My point is

you like balls?

you took two different positions

Only one actually.

less than an inch apart from each other

There was only one.

without any noticeable loss of brain cells.

Well that's because it wasn't me that was losing brain cells.

Yes, because what would biological science and genetics have to do with science?

Everything... but that's not what I was talking about.

The mere idea that one would lump them in with "science" is laughable. Or was that wit?

I don't know... it doesn't seem like wit or does it?

Yeah, that's exactly it.

Well go to a psychologist then, bonehead.

[JMHX]

At 9/8/06 02:20 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:
And being incomprehendible means you are super mysterious and clever. Thanks for pointing that out, I couldn't have done it without ya.

Oh, you wit master, you.

My point is

you like balls?

Oh stop, it's too much wit for one conversation.

Yes, because what would biological science and genetics have to do with science?

Everything... but that's not what I was talking about.

So Bio-Sci and Genetics are scientific, but Miller is somehow not because his experiments contradict your idiocy?

At least you've got wit

[The-Dran]

At 9/8/06 02:22 AM, JMHX wrote: Oh, you wit master, you.

Touche...

Oh stop, it's too much wit for one conversation.

Touche again...

So Bio-Sci and Genetics are scientific, but Miller is somehow not because his experiments contradict your idiocy?

No they profound my idiocy, but they do contradict my own conducted theories.

At least you've got wit

At least you've got that fondness of wit.

[JMHX]

At 9/8/06 02:24 AM, Anti_Noob wrote:

At 9/8/06 02:22 AM, JMHX wrote:

So Bio-Sci and Genetics are scientific, but Miller is somehow not because his experiments contradict your idiocy?

No they profound my idiocy, but they do contradict my own conducted theories.

Your "theories?" Not according to any accepted definition of theory in philosophy or the sciences:

Theory

A systematically organized and well accepted body of knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, especially a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena.

What you've got are the conjectures of one person.

[Demosthenez]

At 9/8/06 12:22 AM, SkunkyFluffy wrote: the IMs you insistently send me

Oh God please tell me what he says. PLEASE. I HAVE TO KNOW.

[No-one-inparticular]

At 9/8/06 12:22 AM, SkunkyFluffy wrote:

Or perhaps a sufferer of Asperger's.

I have that!