ITT: Craigslist, Nazis, Atomic Bombs, Paradise Rakes in the Dough

[Jeenyuss]

YOU MIGHT AS WELL CALL ME JOHN THE BARBARIAN, ERIC IS MARX. fuuuuuuck chyea huxley bitches.

[Ara]

I should have more accurately quantified the word retarded as people who serve no value to society and instead cause harm to it. I would make a wonderful father, but I refuse to risk having my child subjected to the things I have in this world. And yes I would approve a law that would exterminate pregnancies if they were able to determine that the fetus would be born with extreme handicaps. It's my personal opinion as I believe choices like these would bring society closer to maximizing our potential, saving millions of lives in the long run. Every person's life has a specific monetary value whether we like the idea or not.

Your stupidity amazes me, but I will try to reply with something a bit more
thoughtful.

.. I tried but got tired and lost all hope, but I'll write something very short.


People who serve no value to the society and instead cause harm to it:

How do you measure value, and what do you mean by society, how do you
measure caused harm, have you thought of the reasons that there could be
behind desperate acts, shouldn't it be more important to work the problems
and not only the consecuences, why are there poor, unemployed,
uneducated, unfortunate people, criminals? Is every human supposed to serve
the the community he/she was born in by random in what ever way the
community tells him/her to? Read: Government wants you to fight in a war to
bring home more oil, or a multinational firm that doesn't care about it's
employees wants you to work in a tight box with no sunlight for the next 20
years until you have a burn out and they replace you. Are the things that you
value only valuable? Good life standards that are crystal clear to you may
have been fed to you your whole life and you've eventually started to think
like the most of the members in your community. That's when you also think
that submitting to power is an obligation. Read: Police, government, military.

I refuse to risk having my child subjected to the things I have in this world
And yes I would approve a law that would exterminate pregnancies if they
were able to determine that the fetus would be born with extreme handicaps:

How can you decide for your baby before he/she has even had a chance at
realizing how you've just given all your baggage to his/her shoulders without
asking him/her. People are different, life is about multiplying, learning and
passing on the knowledge to next generations, your child may very well be
stronger than you and be able to deal with the pressures your current society
creates, and decide to not make a decision on whether his/her child will have
a life or not. I'm not against abortion, but deciding to never have a child
because of personal experiences and illogical thinking is something I don't
understand. Some are good parents and try, some bad and don't even try.
Just because the parents haven't realized what a miracle they've created
doesn't mean the miracle isn't one.

Choices like these would bring society closer to maximizing our potential,
saving millions of lives in the long run. Every person's life has a specific
monetary value whether we like the idea or not:

I don't know where you're getting these kinds of thoughts from, but you're
now just dumping them simplified for us to read and it's really not even making
me think of the possibility that you might have a thought out, logical, fact
based arguement behind all of that bs. You're mixing genetics, economy and
talking of saving lives by killing lives. I'll answer in just as simple way, only
making the same kind of 5 second long logical thinking and here it is:
Difference and richness in genes is essential to the variety that makes it
possible to continue life. No human is in the position to say that certain
qualities in genes are not called for. I'll just ignore you last sentence because
it's just something you've been fed your whole life and you've started to
believe it with out questioning.

You do understand that the reason you might not appreciate someone's right
to live a good life could be because of the needs you've interpreted that your
current society has, and that your thinking is a victim of your surroundings?
Would you think in the same way in a world where overpopulation didn't cause
hunger and pollution, where poverty, violence and intolerance didn't exist and
people weren't held accountable for the community they were born in, but for
the community they actually joined themselves?

[Izor]

EiG is, for once in his life, right. You measure caused harm in the economy by the fact that they dont give anything back to it. That person sitting there in a coma theyll never wake up from for 6 years is just running up a bill that we as society have to pay off. A kid that you know is going to be born with serious defects is the same case. Not to say that there arent plenty of non-retarded people that are a burden to society, but you cant KNOW that right from the start about them.

Dont try and say that quality of life is in the eye of the eye of the beholder. Just because a retarded person is happy in their own retarded world doesnt mean that theyre ever going to be a productive member of a team. Name one scenario in which retarded people have contributed to the world, aside from tasteless humor that makes more fortunate people laugh at them to feel better about their own shortcomings.

[Scurvy]

Could you clarify that one for me Scurvy? Thanks.

i would approve a law that would allow you to exterminate a pregnancy 'just because.'

pro choice.

[Eric is God]

You know who else liked Eugenics?
Hitler.
You nazi.

Sigh. Eugenics, like everything in this world, is relative. The Nazis wanted a pure Aryan race and advocated the extermination of an entire race of people that was politically motivated and had nothing to do with Jews being evil or unproductive members of society.

I will debate any issue as logically as I can but calling me a Nazi is just plain wrong, beyond the obvious reasons. In grade 6, we gave presentations about our heritage and when kids found out I was German they decided to start calling me a Nazi and drawing swastikas on all my stuff for 3 years which basically turned me in a 12 year old with 2-3 anxiety disorders I continue to deal with 15 years later. I don't expect pity for stating this, but I'd suggest you watch what you say to some people because had you said that to me in real life I would either be in jail right now facing a manslaughter charge or in the hospital facing assault charges. I say that as a person who has never even received a speeding ticket. Now I'll explain my point of view as calmly as possible but again, watch what you fucking say to people, online or in real life.

But still, that's not for us to determine. We, as individuals, have no right to impede on another person's right to have that kid if they wanted to. That invades SOO many privacy laws, and rights to privacy, that I can't even fathom how that would stand up as a decent argument outside a fucking Klan meeting.

Once you step on that line, you go into the area of aborting pregnancies based on fetal development, and that's a whole 'nother can o' worms. Just because you think the "gene pool" would benefit from such an action (here's a hint, it wouldn't. and even if it did, AND IT WON'T, you would not see the benefits from it, for you will be dead for a LONG LONG time.) does not mean that we have to sacrifice inherent individual rights.

Individual rights and freedoms are not be followed in America and all over the world as we speak so it's fairly ignorant to take a moral high ground on this topic. Here is what I see when I look at North American demographics:

Financially successful, highly educated individuals are having fewer children than people with low paying jobs and little education. I would not go as far as to suggest that children born from low income families deserve few rights or are less intelligent than children from wealthy families. My concern is that society is moving in a direction that will only accentuate the disparity between the have and the have nots. Does anyone out there truly feel that we will reach anything near a utopian society without drastic measures being taken? A world without crime, starvation. A world where every child has the same opportunities to succeed based on their individual abilities. It can't happen the way society is moving because too much money is being wasted on areas like the military and redistribution of wealth through various social programs is also highly inefficient.

Now onto the issue of terminating fetuses. If the technology one day exists where we can determine that an unborn child is destined to spend their entire life costing a government millions of dollars in educational and medical support how does that help society as a whole? Call me immoral even call me evil, but if terminating just one fetus would save a government enough money to save 100 lives through better health care or homeless programs, which is the morally superior choice? It's not so clear to me because I value those 100 lives above the life of an unborn child. I look at the cold hard facts of economics and I've studied population demographics. Parents who would choose to raise an extremely mentally or physically handicapped child rather than abort a pregnancy are not making the decision for the child's well being, but for their own.

You know what? Why don't we just kill off those that fail mandatory NCLB tests? For the betterment of knowledge, god damn it!


the reason is because you would probably be mistaken as a retard and executed for the betterment of this nation. You know people with Down Syndrome don't think they have Down Syndrome? They just think they are acting normally. Maybe?

I would never advocate killing mentally or physically handicapped people currently alive (my original post was more a statement of shock at just how messed up some individuals can be). There is no question such steps would take us down a slippery slope, but I still believe it's a road worth researching at the very least. Attacking my intelligence is probably not the best route as I qualify as gifted base on IQ. However, I have ADHD, multiple anxiety disorders and have suffered from depression. For many years I was not contributing to society so I will concede that if we lived in a society that decided to kill anyone who was unproductive (which again is not what I advocate) then I may have been executed and so be it. A better approach would be to invest large amounts of money to analyze a child's potential at an early age and if their potential is high but it is discovered they are more susceptible to certain disorders later in life, then steps should be taken to deal with those disorders before they manifest.

My grandmother works every day with people with learning disabilities, and some of the kids are mentally retarded. I see the love she has for those kids, and I see the joy she brings those kids, and it makes me CRAZY to hear things like this. Normal people (if you guys can even be considered that) saying things like this makes me more scared for humanity than Joe Schmo having a retarded baby.

Again you are taking the moral high ground based on second hand feelings from a woman that works with these children, not a woman who has experienced what they have first hand. Your last argument is at least partly based on the fact that certain things I have proposed would rob your grandmother of something she enjoys which is such a selfish and depressing thought.

You probably wouldn't guess this, but I have spent 2 summers working one on one tutoring children who have down syndrome, turrets, ADHD and other learning disabilities. I am in the process of writing articles for high school and university students meant to provide them advice on how to recognize the signs of anxiety, depression and ADHD and how best to deal with each. I have helped write formal proposals to the Minister of Education asking that ADHD be officially recognized as a learning disability in elementary and high schools so children with ADHD are diagnosed earlier and given the help they need to allow them a chance to become successful and happy. I have been asked to attend conferences to speak about my experiences in these areas and be interviewed for educational videos and documentaries, but I'm too shy for these things. I say none of this to suggest I am morally or in any way superior, only to suggest people are often more complex than first impressions suggest.

You called me a Nazi and I have been called a humanitarian by others. I am neither. Just someone who has dealt with a lot of shit that no one should have to go through. I'm a realist and I see this world degenerating one day at a time. I may be wrong, but argue with my theories, leave the personal attacks for another topic.

[Eric is God]

People who serve no value to the society and instead cause harm to it:

How do you measure value, and what do you mean by society, how do you
measure caused harm, have you thought of the reasons that there could be
behind desperate acts, shouldn't it be more important to work the problems
and not only the consecuences, why are there poor, unemployed,
uneducated, unfortunate people, criminals? Is every human supposed to serve
the the community he/she was born in by random in what ever way the
community tells him/her to? Read: Government wants you to fight in a war to
bring home more oil, or a multinational firm that doesn't care about it's
employees wants you to work in a tight box with no sunlight for the next 20
years until you have a burn out and they replace you. Are the things that you
value only valuable? Good life standards that are crystal clear to you may
have been fed to you your whole life and you've eventually started to think
like the most of the members in your community. That's when you also think
that submitting to power is an obligation. Read: Police, government, military.

I completely agree that the issues I raised are extremely complex touching or many areas all with a multitude of possible solutions. My point was that many of these solutions are not even looked into because they are "morally objectionable". As just one example, the cost to a government to keep an individual incarcerated for a year is somewhere around $25,000 I believe. So let's say you have serial murderer Jon and serial rapist Bob who will be in prison for the rest of their lives or 100 years between them. There is no chance of reform since they will never be released. I believe that $2.5 million would be better spent feeding starving children, hiring doctors etc so I'm in favor of putting such people to death. Another slippery slope to tread down, but I personally believe it's worth looking into as the possible benefits greatly outweigh the costs.

I believe in free health care, intelligently implemented welfare programs (the ones we have are a joke as they do not motivate people to get off of welfare), low cost university education for every single citizen. These are all impossible in our current economic state unless personal income tax rates are raised above 60%, which would collapse the economy anyways. War is the most inefficient facet of government spending and I'm completely against it, but I don't have time to comment of every possible solution I have considered for every single problem facing the world today. Nor am I arrogant enough to believe my solutions are the correct ones, only that most people would refuse to consider them as some may offend their morality, a concept by the way which is extremely relative and also instilled by a person's upbringing and the society in which they live.

I refuse to risk having my child subjected to the things I have in this world
And yes I would approve a law that would exterminate pregnancies if they
were able to determine that the fetus would be born with extreme handicaps:

How can you decide for your baby before he/she has even had a chance at
realizing how you've just given all your baggage to his/her shoulders without
asking him/her. People are different, life is about multiplying, learning and
passing on the knowledge to next generations, your child may very well be
stronger than you and be able to deal with the pressures your current society
creates, and decide to not make a decision on whether his/her child will have
a life or not. I'm not against abortion, but deciding to never have a child
because of personal experiences and illogical thinking is something I don't
understand. Some are good parents and try, some bad and don't even try.
Just because the parents haven't realized what a miracle they've created
doesn't mean the miracle isn't one.

I'm not sure I stated that I will never have children, only that I refuse to have them subjected to the things I have. Even then I should probably edit this statement to "I am scarred to death of having my child subjected to the things I have". I am certain my child would be stronger as coping with the world given my experience and hell I believe myself to be a very weak person in certain areas of life so he/she would have to be stronger in this than I was.

Choices like these would bring society closer to maximizing our potential,
saving millions of lives in the long run. Every person's life has a specific
monetary value whether we like the idea or not:

I don't know where you're getting these kinds of thoughts from, but you're
now just dumping them simplified for us to read and it's really not even making
me think of the possibility that you might have a thought out, logical, fact
based arguement behind all of that bs. You're mixing genetics, economy and
talking of saving lives by killing lives. I'll answer in just as simple way, only
making the same kind of 5 second long logical thinking and here it is:
Difference and richness in genes is essential to the variety that makes it
possible to continue life. No human is in the position to say that certain
qualities in genes are not called for. I'll just ignore you last sentence because
it's just something you've been fed your whole life and you've started to
believe it with out questioning.

1-2 paragraphs of mangled concepts is the result of Friday night posting, for which I apologize. I have spent many years, probably thousands of hours of philosophical thought into these areas and it's not something I've ever formally written out as my mind generally switches focus too often to even remember my original thoughts, let alone put them on paper (a flaw I have learned to accept as part of my ADHD). Even rereading these long posts I make I can see how I jump off topic constantly and often forget to completely finish a thought...

Not to sound glib, but how on Earth would you know what I've been fed my entire life? I come from an amazingly supportive family, I couldn't imagine better parents or friends. All those around me tend to have a positive outlook on life and the world in general. I have viewed the world through these eyes since I was 10 years old. Your statement that "No human is in the position to say that certain qualities in genes are not called for" is really amusing. I don't even disagree with the statement since no ONE person should make these decisions, but I wish such a person did exist. The ideal form of government is a benevolent dictatorship. Democracy (and the United States is more a Republic than a Democracy) is the best we have and it is still extremely flawed.

Did you know that when a government faces a terrorist hostage situation they calculate the monetary value of the hostages lives and compare it against the demands of the terrorists? Bring in a risk assignment of casualties based on an assault team going in and that is how decisions are made. If I generate more income than someone else (along with other factors including my age, gender, family) my life is more valuable than theirs to society and . I don't really like that fact, but it's the most logical way to deal with certain situations.

You do understand that the reason you might not appreciate someone's right to live a good life could be because of the needs you've interpreted that your
current society has, and that your thinking is a victim of your surroundings?
Would you think in the same way in a world where overpopulation didn't cause
hunger and pollution, where poverty, violence and intolerance didn't exist and
people weren't held accountable for the community they were born in, but for
the community they actually joined themselves?

Where have I ever suggested that I want to deny anyone the right to live a good life? Everything I've said and believe is in support of the exact opposite. I want as many people as possible to be given the opportunity to live good lives. If killing one serial murderer or aborting one unborn child that will save a society millions in health care allow 100 additional people the opportunity to lead a good life has society as a whole not benefited? Morality is a line that is necessary, but it is also constantly moving as time passes. Sometimes a change in moral standards has to be forced upon society for the common good.

Of course I wouldn't think these things if I lived in a world where overpopulation didn't cause hunger and pollution, where poverty, violence and intolerance didn't exist. I normally wouldn't say this, but that is a stupid question. I believe the things I do because we live in a world suffering from all these problems, ones so horrible that my logic (which is admittedly far from perfect) has lead me to conclude that solutions that most consider unthinkable, deserve at least some investigation.

[Saturn V]

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that "all men are created equal"

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it, as a final resting place for those who died here, that the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow, this ground-- The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have hallowed it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here; while it can never forget what they did here.

It is rather for us, the living, to stand here, we here be dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that, from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here, gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have died in vain; that the nation, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people by the people for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

[dads revenge]

Yeah what he said

[Squeezer]

No offense intended, but I think sometimes EIG is a little too smart for his own good.

[Eric is God]

No offense intended, but I think sometimes EIG is a little too smart for his own good.

None taken. I know I have a "unique" view on things and I am always completely forthright with my opinions. Some find it annoying, some find it refreshing, but pretty much everyone finds it odd. I also love to debate, a combination of character traits that often get me into trouble. I do need to learn when to shut up though. It's on my to do list, which currently spans a couple hundred lines <_<

[Kolar]

I was going to say something that Jerome would probably jerk off too but Saturn V said it best, even though he will probably get a warning or at the very least his post modified.

Edit: And since someone brought up learning disabilities I have a mild to moderate learning disability. A learning disability does not affect your intellectual capacity or your ability to learn, as opposed to children with intellectual, mental and sometimes physical disabilities. My mother works with children with intellectual disabilities like autism and many of them can be very productive given the proper support. And I think I am a "productive member of society", I am a stable person, I am in college planning on university and have a full time job at a financial institution. And I've never asked for anything or to be treated special. So who should decide if I lived or died before being born? A Government agency? My parents? society at large? Some douchebags with a sense of moral superiority bent on purifying the human race so they can have more. From my point of view Eric, and I am sorry if this bothers you but they're not too far off on the analogy.

[Eric is God]

I find the The Gettysburg Address to be one of the great shinning examples of how ignorant people can be. One great man made a speech a long time ago at a pivotal time in American history. What a bastion of freedom the United States is these days. It must be so comforting to be able to turn a blind eye to what is going on in the world by turning to a handful of words spoken 145 years ago. "Everything in the world must be great because we have all these catch phrases that prove it!"

That speech has nothing to do with anything I've said.

"All men are created equal"

I agree with the main point of Ab's speech: everyone deserves the same basic rights the moment they are born into this world. But aborted fetuses aren't born into this world so they don't have those rights be definition do they? Also, when you commit certain acts against society you forfeit some of those rights don't you? The United States government doesn't even follow it's own laws so how on Earth can you feel comfortable quoting that speech when your government is more or less spitting in the face of all those people who died to create your "glorious" country and all the young men and women still dying to "protect" you from the evil people who happen to have oil?

Come up with an original thought. Don't use a speech that doesn't even apply to current times because your government ranks slightly below a South Korean brothel owner when it comes to moral integrity.

[Kolar]

But aborted fetuses aren't born into this world so they don't have those rights be definition do they?

I wouldn't disagree with you on that point. But the right to terminate a pregnancy extends only to the personal choice and privacy of a single person, not to any social group or Government agency. Coercing a person into it based on the idea that that life is somehow worthless because they won't generally excel academically and socially fundamentally violates everything the United States and the West was founded on and that's why Abe's words 145 years later still hold some water.

And again I don't disagree with you that the current political climate in the United States does not allow for a free functioning and open democracy (I don't think the majority of Americans on this board would disagree either) but I think it's dishonest to characterize the United States historically and culturally based on seven and a half years of Bush and the neocons at the helm. When you're talking about such massive cultural and social changes you can't get caught up in short term political failures and set backs caused by a minority within their country.

[Eric is God]

I was going to say something that Jerome would probably jerk off too but Saturn V said it best, even though he will probably get a warning or at the very least his post modified.

Edit: And since someone brought up learning disabilities I have a mild to moderate learning disability. A learning disability does not affect your intellectual capacity or your ability to learn, as opposed to children with intellectual, mental and sometimes physical disabilities. My mother works with children with intellectual disabilities like autism and many of them can be very productive given the proper support. And I think I am a "productive member of society", I am a stable person, I am in college planning on university and have a full time job at a financial institution. And I've never asked for anything or to be treated special. So who should decide if I lived or died before being born? A Government agency? My parents? society at large? Some douchebags with a sense of moral superiority bent on purifying the human race so they can have more. From my point of view Eric, and I am sorry if this bothers you but they're not too far off on the analogy.

The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities uses the term "learning disability" to refer to a discrepancy between a child’s apparent capacity to learn and his or her level of achievement.

One could make a strong argument that by their very definition, learning disabilities affect your ability to learn, but I'll let the point slide as there are many types of learning disabilities that have widely varying impacts on an individual's ability to function and learn.

Everyone is missing the entire point of my argument, which is to question where society has currently drawn the line for "the ends justify the means". My personal opinion on who deserves to live and die (or be born for that matter) is meaningless as I am one person who will never have the power to make such decisions. The world is going to run into a number of serious problems within my lifetime and at what point does a society choose to institute drastic measures? Would you kill 1 person to save 2, 10, 100, 1,000? The moral line is constantly being pushed back and isn't even drawn straight these days. Morality isn't as simple as a set of rules carved in stone, they are general guidelines for human behavior meant to improve the quality of life in societies. If you kill a million people to save a billion are you doing a moral or immoral thing? Both I would think.

[Kolar]

The National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities uses the term "learning disability" to refer to a discrepancy between a child’s apparent capacity to learn and his or her level of achievement.

One could make a strong argument that by their very definition, learning disabilities affect your ability to learn, but I'll let the point slide as there are many types of learning disabilities that have widely varying impacts on an individual's ability to function and learn.

My understanding of it is that while a learning disability can effect your ability to learn there is no hard "cap" in terms of intellectual potential given the proper support in any environment to make up for that failing.

I would say the less society collectively has control over what we choose to do with our lives the better off more people will be. Once we get involved in the game of selectively choosing who's of more value to the whole, who dies and lives in a systematic and organized fashion, subjectivity, human error, whatever you call it will do an injustice to far too many and eventually kill us all or turn us into a society so far removed of what we cherish of humanity today.