[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Human Population Control (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 4/3/2014 5:33:30 AM EDT
 So, an old friend of mine posted this on facebook, and well I kind of kept my mouth shut, I basically stated that this is socialistic behavior. The persons response is that it was not socialistic behavior but common sense.  You may even agree with controlling the growth of the population, whatever, but to say it is common sense to destroy human rights is a joke. I haven't written a response yet and am more or less just probably going to delete the person, but if I got something good here, I might throw it out there. It almost sickens me to realize this is how "they" think. |
|
Population control starts with YOU.
If he thinks it's such a great idea let him and his family step up and take it for the environment. It's all fun and games until it's your shit on the line. Same fucking people who are so generous they'll give you the shirt off my back. Fuck him and everyone like him. |
|
Quoted:
In theory this sounds like a good idea, but in practice it means deeply infringing on basic rights at best, and mass murder at worst. Things that are "good in theory but bad in practice" are bad in theory. If your theory cannot help but be bad in practice, it's a shitty theory, probably because it's based on bullshit premises. |
|
Being 100% honest, I think it's time we as humans start looking heavily at Eugenics. Bad decision makers breed and raise more bad decision makers. Stupid people bear and raise more stupid people. Good people bear and raise more good people, typically. It's just a shame that the only way to do that would be intervention from those who we don't want intervening in our lives. I wouldn't trust the government to decide who should and shouldn't breed. It's just too bad people don't make this decision for themselves. Think about all those starving shitholes in Africa. "Gee, we don't have enough food to feed ourselves, maybe we should pop out a few kids, that will solve our problem". |
|
Quoted: Population control starts with YOU. If he thinks it's such a great idea let him and his family step up and take it for the environment. It's all fun and games until it's your shit on the line. Same fucking people who are so generous they'll give you the shirt off my back. Fuck him and everyone like him. Liberal college female from Madison
 ...But I like the cut of your jib. |
|
Quoted:
Liberal college female from Madison ...But I like the cut of your jib.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Population control starts with YOU. If he she thinks it's such a great idea let him her and his her family step up and take it for the environment. It's all fun and games until it's your shit on the line. Same fucking people who are so generous they'll give you the shirt off my back. Fuck him her and everyone like him her. Liberal college female from Madison ...But I like the cut of your jib.
Fixed Edit: For more fixed! |
|
Quoted:
http://www.tickld.com/cdn_image_thing/747395.jpg So, an old friend of mine posted this on facebook, and well I kind of kept my mouth shut, I basically stated that this is socialistic behavior. The persons response is that it was not socialistic behavior but common sense. http://
You may even agree with controlling the growth of the population, whatever, but to say it is common sense to destroy human rights is a joke. I haven't written a response yet and am more or less just probably going to delete the person, but if I got something good here, I might throw it out there. It almost sickens me to realize this is how "they" think. Note, don't fucking do what I just said |
|
Quoted:
Being 100% honest, I think it's time we as humans start looking heavily at Eugenics. Bad decision makers breed and raise more bad decision makers. Stupid people bear and raise more stupid people. Good people bear and raise more good people, typically. It's just a shame that the only way to do that would be intervention from those who we don't want intervening in our lives. I wouldn't trust the government to decide who should and shouldn't breed. It's just too bad people don't make this decision for themselves. Think about all those starving shitholes in Africa. "Gee, we don't have enough food to feed ourselves, maybe we should pop out a few kids, that will solve our problem". The right answer is for good people to have more than 1.5 kids. If you want more people like you in the world, then be fruitful and multiply! This is the answer to the problem you rightly recognize that doesn't involve the horrors of sterilization and murder. ETA: Obviously ending the govt incentive for those who refuse to work to have kids would be great also, but if we want to change this, we have to have the numbers! |
|
Quoted:
Being 100% honest, I think it's time we as humans start looking heavily at Eugenics. Bad decision makers breed and raise more bad decision makers. Stupid people bear and raise more stupid people. Good people bear and raise more good people, typically. It's just a shame that the only way to do that would be intervention from those who we don't want intervening in our lives. I wouldn't trust the government to decide who should and shouldn't breed. It's just too bad people don't make this decision for themselves. Think about all those starving shitholes in Africa. "Gee, we don't have enough food to feed ourselves, maybe we should pop out a few kids, that will solve our problem". Right there with ya. We know so much about evolution and genetics, yet allow the weak, defected, and impaired to continue overpopulating and even reward them for doing so (handouts). 
|
|
Quoted:
Being 100% honest, I think it's time we as humans start looking heavily at Eugenics. Bad decision makers breed and raise more bad decision makers. Stupid people bear and raise more stupid people. Good people bear and raise more good people, typically. It's just a shame that the only way to do that would be intervention from those who we don't want intervening in our lives. I wouldn't trust the government to decide who should and shouldn't breed. It's just too bad people don't make this decision for themselves. Think about all those starving shitholes in Africa. "Gee, we don't have enough food to feed ourselves, maybe we should pop out a few kids, that will solve our problem". No, this is 100% wrong. We as a species need to stop intervening in natural selection. When we stop subsidizing stupidity and lose the 'helmet laws' this shit will work itself out. Edit: On a roll today with grammar! |
|
Quoted:No, this is 100% wrong. We as a species need to stop intervening in natural selection. When we stop subsidizing stupidity and lose the 'helmet laws' this shit will work itself out. I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. |
|
Most babies here are fed soy milk. 90% of soy grown here is GMO. Studies have shown lab animals fed GMO soy are sterile by the 3ed generation.
Summary: Your grand children and great grand children might have fertility issues. All part of the plan........................................................... 
|
|
Quoted: The right answer is for good people to have more than 1.5 kids. If you want more people like you in the world, then be fruitful and multiply! This is the answer to the problem you rightly recognize that doesn't involve the horrors of sterilization and murder. Quoted: Quoted: Being 100% honest, I think it's time we as humans start looking heavily at Eugenics. Bad decision makers breed and raise more bad decision makers. Stupid people bear and raise more stupid people. Good people bear and raise more good people, typically. It's just a shame that the only way to do that would be intervention from those who we don't want intervening in our lives. I wouldn't trust the government to decide who should and shouldn't breed. It's just too bad people don't make this decision for themselves. Think about all those starving shitholes in Africa. "Gee, we don't have enough food to feed ourselves, maybe we should pop out a few kids, that will solve our problem". The right answer is for good people to have more than 1.5 kids. If you want more people like you in the world, then be fruitful and multiply! This is the answer to the problem you rightly recognize that doesn't involve the horrors of sterilization and murder. The problem is that a lot of us "good people" know when to stop having kids... i.e. we understand that the money we bring in has to be greater than or equal to the money that goes out. Wife and I are planning on 2 kids, and even that is a stretch for us. Meanwhile we have people who "breed for a living" popping one out every year while they are fertile, and teach them to do the same. |
|
Quoted:
Most babies here are fed soy milk. 90% of soy grown here is GMO. Studies have shown lab animals fed GMO soy are sterile by the 3ed generation. Summary: Your grand children and great grand children might have fertility issues. All part of the plan........................................................... Most parents there give their kids soy milk?
Florida wins again. 
|
|
Quoted:
I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. Quoted:
Quoted:No, this is 100% wrong. We as a species need to stop intervening in natural selection. When we stop subsidizing stupidity and lose the 'helmet laws' this shit will work itself out. I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. I completely understand eugenics. We absolutely intervene in natural selection. We pass laws to protect the stupid, who would otherwise eliminate themselves with their own derp, allowing them to reach breeding age and polluting the world with their shit crotch fruit and then provide for them because they cannot provide for themselves. We create medications to prolong the lives of people who are genetically deficient, again allowing them to reach an age where they can procreate. We prolong the lives of people to the point where they have a tube in every orifice for months to years on end wasting substantial amounts of resources on otherwise dead people for the benefit of the families 'feelings'. If we as a collective society put an end to this bullshit natural selection would weed out the undesired traits. |
|
This article is very spot on with regards to the thinking of the enviro-commie.
The World's Fair to Earth Hour marks the journey of a civilization across the sky from light into darkness. In our new post-civilizational time, we no longer celebrate human accomplishment by seeing a vision of the future, instead we turn off the bright lights of civilization and sit in the dark for an hour to atone for our electrical sins. Earth Hour stigmatizes human accomplishment as the root of all evils and treats the lack of accomplishment as an accomplishment. For all the pretense of activism, environmentalism celebrates inaction. Don't build, don't create and don't do-- are its mandates. Turn off the lights and feel good about how much you aren't doing right now. Humanity is what is wrong with the world. It began with fire, then the wheelbarrow, the lever and the ax, the mason, the carpenter, the scientist, the visionary. It can end with you. Just turn out the lights. <snipped> It is a religious ritual for a secular religion that has no god, but whose devil is the gear and the microchip, the milk cow and the imported banana, the skyscraper and the lathe. The WWF, Earth Hour's godmother, has learned that shrill attention seeking is a reliable fundraising method. One of the WWF's more memorable fundraising methods was an ad showing hundreds of planes headed toward the World Trade Center, to highlight just how much more important their work is than fighting terrorism. Franny Armstrong of Age of Stupid, which was promoted by the WWF, ran a 10:10 campaign in the UK, whose ads featured environmentalists murdering dissenters, including a group of schoolchildren. The ads are just ads, but London's leftist former mayor, Ken Livingstone had said of Age of Stupid, "Every single person in the country should be forcibly sat down on a chair and made to watch this film." That is the dark side of environmentalism. The most active non-Muslim domestic terrorist group is environmental. The undercurrent of violence finds easy purchase in environmentalism's creed that the only real problem with the world is people. Rest at link, definitely worth the read. http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2014/03/night-falls-on-civilization.html TXL |
|
So, an old friend of mine posted this on facebook, and well I kind of kept my mouth shut, I basically stated that this is socialistic behavior. The persons response is that it was not socialistic behavior but common sense. http:// You may even agree with controlling the growth of the population, whatever, but to say it is common sense to destroy human rights is a joke. I haven't written a response yet and am more or less just probably going to delete the person, but if I got something good here, I might throw it out there. It almost sickens me to realize this is how "they" think. Scary mofos running this country.
|
|
Quoted:
I completely understand eugenics. We absolutely intervene in natural selection. We pass laws to protect the stupid, who would otherwise eliminate themselves with their own derp, allowing them to reach breeding age and polluting the world with their shit crotch fruit and then provide for them because they cannot provide for themselves. We create medications to prolong the lives of people who are genetically deficient, again allowing them to reach an age where they can procreate. We prolong the lives of people to the point where they have a tube in every orifice for months to years on end wasting substantial amounts of resources on otherwise dead people for the benefit of the families 'feelings'. If we as a collective society put an end to this bullshit natural selection would weed out the undesired traits. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:No, this is 100% wrong. We as a species need to stop intervening in natural selection. When we stop subsidizing stupidity and lose the 'helmet laws' this shit will work itself out. I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. I completely understand eugenics. We absolutely intervene in natural selection. We pass laws to protect the stupid, who would otherwise eliminate themselves with their own derp, allowing them to reach breeding age and polluting the world with their shit crotch fruit and then provide for them because they cannot provide for themselves. We create medications to prolong the lives of people who are genetically deficient, again allowing them to reach an age where they can procreate. We prolong the lives of people to the point where they have a tube in every orifice for months to years on end wasting substantial amounts of resources on otherwise dead people for the benefit of the families 'feelings'. If we as a collective society put an end to this bullshit natural selection would weed out the undesired traits. We're on the same page, I agree 100%. I was trying to make the point that we don't interviene in natural selection in positive ways to improve our species. |
|
Quoted:
I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. Quoted:
Quoted:No, this is 100% wrong. We as a species need to stop intervening in natural selection. When we stop subsidizing stupidity and lose the 'helmet laws' this shit will work itself out. I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. No, you apparently have a paradigm that prevents you from seeing that govt. subsidies, in the form of welfare, already drive population growth and behavior in a detrimental direction. No need for eugenics; just have the govt. quit paying lazy people to produce more lazy unmotivated people. |
|
^ (old fart in pic, not OP)  |
|
If humans are using too much of our environmental resources then we should use those resources more efficiently to benefit our growing population.
A perfect way to do this would be widespread use of nuclear power instead of burning fossil fuels in gas/coal power stations. |
|
Quoted:
Once population gets big enough everyone will find they have the right to dehydration and starvation. Quoted:
Quoted:
In theory this sounds like a good idea, but in practice it means deeply infringing on basic rights at best, and mass murder at worst. Once population gets big enough everyone will find they have the right to dehydration and starvation. Which will, in turn, lower the population. Nature will do its job when the time comes if needed. |
|
Quoted:
We're on the same page, I agree 100%. I was trying to make the point that we don't interviene in natural selection in positive ways to improve our species. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:No, this is 100% wrong. We as a species need to stop intervening in natural selection. When we stop subsidizing stupidity and lose the 'helmet laws' this shit will work itself out. I don't think you understand eugenics. Currently, we don't intervene in natural selection, and that's the problem. I completely understand eugenics. We absolutely intervene in natural selection. We pass laws to protect the stupid, who would otherwise eliminate themselves with their own derp, allowing them to reach breeding age and polluting the world with their shit crotch fruit and then provide for them because they cannot provide for themselves. We create medications to prolong the lives of people who are genetically deficient, again allowing them to reach an age where they can procreate. We prolong the lives of people to the point where they have a tube in every orifice for months to years on end wasting substantial amounts of resources on otherwise dead people for the benefit of the families 'feelings'. If we as a collective society put an end to this bullshit natural selection would weed out the undesired traits. We're on the same page, I agree 100%. I was trying to make the point that we don't interviene in natural selection in positive ways to improve our species. If natural selection were actually allowed to occur we wouldn't have to. |
|
Quoted:
Which will, in turn, lower the population. Nature will do its job when the time comes if needed. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In theory this sounds like a good idea, but in practice it means deeply infringing on basic rights at best, and mass murder at worst. Once population gets big enough everyone will find they have the right to dehydration and starvation. Which will, in turn, lower the population. Nature will do its job when the time comes if needed. Or a war will break out, restoring balance that much faster. |
|
Quoted:
http://www.tickld.com/cdn_image_thing/747395.jpg So, an old friend of mine posted this on facebook, and well I kind of kept my mouth shut, I basically stated that this is socialistic behavior. The persons response is that it was not socialistic behavior but common sense. http://
You may even agree with controlling the growth of the population, whatever, but to say it is common sense to destroy human rights is a joke. I haven't written a response yet and am more or less just probably going to delete the person, but if I got something good here, I might throw it out there. It almost sickens me to realize this is how "they" think. so how exactly is that inherently "socialistic?" |
|
I keep telling people to read this book, The Bridge, by Keith Mano. It was written in 1973 and covers what the author thought the end result of the environuts ideas would lead to.
Human Extinction Project. More 
|
|
Quoted:
http://www.tickld.com/cdn_image_thing/747395.jpg So, an old friend of mine posted this on facebook, and well I kind of kept my mouth shut, I basically stated that this is socialistic behavior. The persons response is that it was not socialistic behavior but common sense. http://
You may even agree with controlling the growth of the population, whatever, but to say it is common sense to destroy human rights is a joke. I haven't written a response yet and am more or less just probably going to delete the person, but if I got something good here, I might throw it out there. It almost sickens me to realize this is how "they" think. Tell him that is a great idea and we will start with him. |
|
Quoted:
A bug will eventually come along and thin the herd. This is closer than you think. Antibiotic resistant strains of various killer bacteria are occurring more and more frequently. I see this working in a hospital, the types of medication needed to kill some of these bugs are almost enough to kill you outright. Some are 1-2 mutations away from being completely untreatable. |