"And the ancestors of those plantation owners a few generations before them used to do some funny things, like put animals on trial. They would literally bring pigs into a courtroom and uphold them to the same standards of morality and justice as they did to their fellow men (and hang them if found guilty of serious crimes!)."
They should totally bring this back.
And you blame all that on your mental disorders that were never really diagnosed? Maybe you really are all those things. Where does one's own personality end and one's "mental illness" begin? Where's the line where we should "excuse" behavior and be more tolerant to it because it's due to "mental issues", as opposed to it being due to character flaws that everyone has? That thread you made to "crazy bitch", lmao. Telling title. You didn't sound too tolerant about that person in it, nor were you to Raven when you mistook her as that person.
Your first line made me believe this section was not worth my time and therefore to be honest I did not read the rest.
This is very ignorant, not all cancers are because of genes. Go get irradiated you'll get cancer, even if your kids would never have it. The thing with people being defective and dead without modern medicine is such a shitty excuse. Where do you think you are, the jungle? Hell you could have died yourself from a childhood cold if not for modern medicine. What about accidents, let's not heal people because they would have died anyway without modern medicine?
And from what I know most people with genetic flaws and diseases can't reproduce or are strongly advised against it. What they choose to do in the end is their business, they could have a healthy kid for all you know.
This however is something that interests me and I will reply to you.
I believe modern medicine treating children that would have normally died (cancer, heart problems, whatever). Yeah, I'm sure a 2 year old has leukemia because they ate too much fatty food and smoked too much. and also assisting people with artificial reproductive methods is toxic to our species. These people are defective. Their genes are not suppose to be in the gene pool.
I am in support of letting them live of course but they should not reproduce. It is irresponsible. Modern medicine has got into the routine of curing people of ridiculous things and then they go on to make little chitlins, continuing to put bandaids on things instead of working to weed them out.
More likely you don't want to reply because you'd have to think a bit to answer my questions. And also because you can't making a thread talking about tolerance for mental illnesses after foaming at the mouth because of a "crazy bitch" that you mistook Silkthread for.
More than fair a statement. I don't want to waste time replying and thinking to a conversation I am especially not interested in (so therefore I will not)
So getting cancer because of smoking and eating fatty foods is more acceptable that getting it at 2? Those people have genetic predisposition to both cancer and smoking and eating fatty foods. Why let them reproduce? A 2yo with leukemia will only reproduce if they get healthy. They can lead normal lives after that, as could their own children.
That's correct. The person that smokes and eats fast food would have not died before reproduction age in the wild, therefore they are acceptable. And again...I do not mind if a person gets cancer at a reasonable age post normal reproduction age (which I believe to be about 30 +/- 5.
I just do not believe in children/teens going on to reproduce after illness. 2 year olds with leukemia are genetic flaws and their genes should die out.
Lmao at people "not supposed to" contribute to the gene pool and being "defective". By what standards? Jungle standards? You sound like a religious nutter here, "god didn't want them to reproduce so man should not interfere". Artificial insemination is "toxic to our species" you say. People can have trouble making babies because of an accident or some other affection that's not genetic. Are you against helping them make kids too? I know kids made this way and they are very normal and healthy, and don't seem any less worthy of life than other kids.
I am not a religious nutter...I am not religious at all. It is simple science. If a person needs TECHNOLOGY to live before reproduction age and/or reproduce they should not reproduce because EVOLUTION says they should have died. EVOLUTION is trying to get rid of them.
What kind of accidents would you be referring to?
You say you have Tourettes and Autism and whatnot. Do your parents have any genetic problems for which they should have been forbidden to reproduce? Should you be forbidden to reproduce because you are defective? Lmao. Is that smart guy in a wheelchair defective and should not have had any kids, or should not have been born?
Yes, I'd imagine they do. As do I as well. No, I should not be forbidden to reproduce because my defects are not fatal and I don't need modern medicine to survive.
Seriously, how much time did you spend thinking about all the implications of this shit you say with so much conviction? XD
Not much time at all. These ideas seem very basic to me. I have no idea why you cannot understand where I am coming from
Probably because you worship Frankenstein science. COOOOLLL. I do not.
by Pink01Your first line made me believe this section was not worth my time and therefore to be honest I did not read the rest.
More likely you don't want to reply because you'd have to think a bit to answer my questions. And also because you can't explain* making a thread talking about tolerance for mental illnesses after foaming at the mouth because of a "crazy bitch" that you mistook Silkthread for.
I believe modern medicine treating children that would have normally died (cancer, heart problems, whatever). Yeah, I'm sure a 2 year old has leukemia because they ate too much fatty food and smoked too much. and also assisting people with artificial reproductive methods is toxic to our species. These people are defective. Their genes are not suppose to be in the gene pool.
I am in support of letting them live of course but they should not reproduce. It is irresponsible. Modern medicine has got into the routine of curing people of ridiculous things and then they go on to make little chitlins, continuing to put bandaids on things instead of working to weed them out.
So getting cancer because of smoking and eating fatty foods is more acceptable that getting it at 2? Those people have genetic predisposition to both cancer and smoking and eating fatty foods. Why let them reproduce? A 2yo with leukemia will only reproduce if they get healthy. They can lead normal lives after that, as could their own children.
Lmao at people "not supposed to" contribute to the gene pool and being "defective". By what standards? Jungle standards? You sound like a religious nutter here, "god didn't want them to reproduce so man should not interfere". Artificial insemination is "toxic to our species" you say. People can have trouble making babies because of an accident or some other affection that's not genetic. Are you against helping them make kids too? I know kids made this way and they are very normal and healthy, and don't seem any less worthy of life than other kids.
You say you have Tourettes and Autism and whatnot. Do your parents have any genetic problems for which they should have been forbidden to reproduce? Should you be forbidden to reproduce because you are defective? Lmao. Is that smart guy in a wheelchair defective and should not have had any kids, or should not have been born?
Seriously, how much time did you spend thinking about all the implications of this shit you say with so much conviction? XD
Genetic diversity in the human race keeps us resistant to diseases which are arguably the greatest threat. Now what should we view as a desirable gene/trait, often times what is desirable depends as much on the environment as anything.
I don't follow any moral codes but genetic hygiene arguments tend to be weak.