How Important is the Survival of Humanity?

Is rape justified if the survival of the human species is on the line?

  • Total voters


Staff member
Ok, here's a mind twister for you. To start, allow me to say for the record that I do not support and will not support rape no matter the circumstances.

Yeah, it's going to be one of those threads... Get out now if you can't think on a hypothetical level.

I just saw "Children of Men" the other day and got to thinking of a spin off scenario. It's the year 2050 and a worldwide virus epidemic has killed all but a handful of humans who were immune. The human species has never been at any serious risk of extinction, but it would now face that very real possibility.

The problem. The surviving females are either lesbian or simply don't want to reproduce with the surviving men. Could be the opposite too, to be fair.

It's safe to say that technology and medical labs have gone to ruins as the world has pretty much fallen apart. There is nobody who can perform in vitro, and really no specimens available anyway.

So, how important is the survival of humanity? What should be done in this situation? Let the human species die off for good or do what is necessary, something highly frowned upon in pretty much every society today?

Simply put, is rape justified if the survival of the human species is on the line?
Last edited:


Epic Gamer
Not rape. I'd try to make them understand that, as the last bastion of Humanity, it would be their duty to reproduce. That, or their race would die with them.

Besides, penetration isn't necessary for pregnancy. It's more likely to result in pregnancy, but it isn't necessary.


Staff member
You and your question dodging. :lol: The hypothetical scenario doesn't leave room for side solutions.

For whatever reasons the women simply don't want to get pregnant.

Humanity would be guaranteed to die off otherwise. I mean, obviously.

(For the record I voted no in the poll. I think humanity should die off before resorting to rape.)
Last edited:


Epic Gamer
To be honest, if a handful of people were all that was left of Humanity, it'd pretty much be doomed anyway. I mean, it'd likely eventually come to incest anyway, which isn't good for the genes, lol.

So, chances are, after a few generations, it wouldn't be Humanity as it is known today anyway. Evolution, adaptation, gene mutation; you'd maybe be left with a The Hills Have Eyes scenario. :hah:

Besides, how would you feel if rape had been required? It's all very good and well not knowing where Humanity came from, but what if you knew your species existed as a result of such a heinous act? So, I don't think the survival of a race should depend on a brutal, disgusting act, even if it was a necessity.
If the remaining women were that shallow that they would not, in some way, try to reproduce, then yea, I would say no rape, let humanity end. But... I'm a Christian, so in that situation I wouldn't even be worried. Not much has changed lol. Plus... that situation already happened once, but luckily the females knew what they had to do.


/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
Initially I'd say if being a rape victim means saving humanity, then why not? People don't like to be raped because it's a violation and it's part of self preservation. But I don't know how I'd be able to feel good about surviving at my own will knowing that it also means death sentence for organisms of my kind.

However, if women have to be forcefully engaged in sexual activities they don't like, that's just an initial battle. A woman has 9 months to fight against her situation. That means that not only you would have to condone rape, but you would be making the woman a prisoner for that at least that amount of time, a slave of the remaining members of the human race. With violations and slavery being the norm, who would want humanity to continue? Maybe we're all better off dead.


Staff member
Well let me play devil's advocate here for a bit.

We are asking everybody all the time to "save the planet, save the planet". Are we saving it for the future of humanity or just on the principle of letting the animals have a place to live once we are out of the picture?

I saw in another thread a while back somebody said something like "Rape is ALWAYS wrong and never justified." While naturally I will agree with that for obvious reasons, hypothetically there is at least one scenario where that very idea could be questioned.

Is one wrong, no matter how terrible so bad that we would condemn humanity to extinction? I mean, once we are extinct then what was the point of morals anyway. Doing the right thing in this situation wouldn't pass on positive morals to future generations because there wouldn't be any.

It could definitely be argued from both directions. If you are arguing it from a straight up moral or religious stance then no, it is never ok. But, what if you don't believe in that necessarily. What if this is it? Would our duty to humanity be to let it die out or would it be to literally "fight" to keep it alive?

Do people who believe strictly in evolution truly fight for the continuation of the earth in general or do they kind of expect humans to be a part of the future of the world and the universe?


Creeping On You
To me, rape is never okay. Call me chivalrous, but even if the remaining population came to a consensus to condone it, I still wouldn't partake. Sex to me is more than a biological function and to force it on someone would go against my very morals. Naturally in a situation like that, I'd change my mind about not having unmarried sex of course. It'd just have to be consensual.


Endangered Species
Those selfish women!!!

If humanity has got so dire that any women remaining does not want to procreate and it was the last bastion of human survivial and it was in **our interest to continue human existence, I would do everything in my power to change their minds, and if that fails everything in my power to change the outcome for the **better good.

If that means using force, rape, imprisonment and turning them into baby making machines so be it. I would not care to much for our current morals as this a whole new situation, I dont think we can even place our current ethics into that situation. It is a bit like the cannibalism verses starvation challenge people have to endure, sometimes we just have to throw the rule book out the window.

**This is where the tricky bit come in, whos right is it to say humanity should survive and why would it be better for it to survive than die out, is it mine, theirs or ours. Are we doing an evil task(rape) to spread good(humanity) ....or.... are we doing good(procreation) to spread evil(humanity) ...or... is their abstinence from procreation the true good because humanity is evil, evil enough to commit rape and force on others for its survival! or is that very act really a good!


Sally Twit
Rape is wrong no matter what. The men should just try and convince the women that humanity depends on them and if they don't reproduce then the world is doomed.