Run over to CVS and get your pregnancy test now! You've jinxed yourself! :D

Great idea but someone would cheat.

I saw this a few years ago. I think it's cool.

its aim, philosophy, and how it reduces several urges and justifications of human reproduction to mental diseases. Additionally, how it claims that the human urge to reproduce is analgous to the squirrel's urge to plant trees - both essentially being besides the point to the instinctive preceding act (sex and foraging) - is misleading. The immediate physical and natural purpose of sex is the procreation of species as the immediate physical and natural purpose of foraging is feeding. In sum, I dont agree with the premises nor conclusion of the arguement either. :D

But then again, I won't be reproducing anytime soon anyway. ;)

There is humor written into parts of it, especially when it starts going through analogies to discourage the idea that sex is in any way related to procreation. But its point is still that its possible to use birth control, and our ability to invent the means to have sex without procreating is part of our intelligence that we can use to reverse what our accelerated intelligence has done to scar the earth. It is physically possible for us to have sex without procreation. You of all people should understand that, DC ;)
I can understand disagreeing with some of its analogies and justifications, but whats wrong with its aim and philosophy? Why would phasing out humans be bad for the earth or anyone who is alive?

"Why would phasing out humans be bad for the earth or anyone who is alive?"

Over the years, I have grown fond of humans. I dunno, maybe its just a thing I have. ;) I find it puzzling someone would advocate the value of nature over the existence of humans who assign aesthetic value to nature and hold its preservation moral imperative. I understand preservation; that's all good and well to like trees and flowers and such. But voluntary extinction would seem to assign some inherent overarching value in the existance of a plant over a human being, when it is the human that assigns these and other objects their value.

And, I wasn't disputing that there are other reasons for sex. I was disputing that the author disassociates it wholly from reproduction with his squirrel analogy as an example. The act of planting trees is incidental from the squirrel's act of collecting walnuts (or whatever they like). Its not in the squirrel's instinct or intent to plant trees. Pregnancy cannot be said to be incidental from the act of sex. In fact, it seems to be a direct and sometimes intentional result unless I'm missing something.

And I obviously didn't get the humor. As we all know, I am a very sober and restrained person. ;)