Breed LESS

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by Syzygys, Mar 19, 2007.

  1. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    You seriously think that ALL 7 billions people ENJOY life today? I bet it is safe to say that at least half suffer more than enjoy it.

    When the number of humans were counted only in the millions and the chance of reacing adulthood was less than 50%, breeding like rabbits made sense. Not anymore...

    We are already everywhere, so you could say the order from the Bible has been accomplished...
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Repo Man Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,955
    You're trying to use "reason" with someone who is "hopelessly insane", and learned all he needed to know by reading "Chick's Tracts".

    "Human suffering" is "irrelevant", because they will all live "forever" in heaven. Like the Jesuit missionaries in south America would who take indian infants away from their parents, baptize them, then dash their head against a rock, killing them; but saving their eternal souls from hell.

    I've noticed a pattern over the years with Pro. I think he forgets to take his "meds" periodically, and starts posting his "insane gibberish" again.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    You are right, I don't know what I was thinking. It won't happen again, I promise...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Pronatalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    750
    So many men, too few women. What an insane anti-people policy.

    post title: So many men, too few women. What an insane anti-people policy.

    BTW, why do I type in a Title, but then I see no post titles in the thread? Must be a server software glitch?

    Just what we don't need. 200 million restless soldiers with nothing to do but to get into trouble?

    But I hope that China's 1-child barbarism, can't possibly last. One obvious way to fight such abuses, and make the world more child-friendly, is to marry and breed, breed, breed. And crowd out into irrelevance, the backward commie views of the population phobics.
     
  8. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    A little unrelated but I found this video and pics of Senegal interesting. That's how people live in the 3rd world:
    http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/2448#more

    Population is only 12 million, but the transportation, electricity and other issues are typical...

    "Indeed, relatively speaking Senegal is doing pretty well. It's described as one of the most stable democracies in Africa. The economy has seen real growth in GDP averaging over 5% during the last decade and inflation of just 2%.

    Military spending is less than 2% of GDP (which I’m counting as positively low).

    Perhaps the biggest concern going into a resource constrained world is demographics though. The median age is 19.1, 41% of the population are aged 0-14 and the fertility rate is 4.4 children per woman."
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2007
  9. Pronatalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    750
    Breed more, and avoid the pain of being barren and childless.

    post title: Breed more, and avoid the pain of being barren and childless.

    Not to mention all the underreported side effects of nasty, awkward, unnatural contraceptives, and being used as a guinea pig for the latest fad contraceptive potion/device/poison.

    Yeah, why wouldn't it be painless? The reason to switch, is because something better was developed. You don't see Mr. George Jetson, in the futuristic The Jetsons cartoon, pumping gasoline into his flying car, do you? That's because it runs on "power pellets." Which I have determined must be code-words for having a nuclear reactor, because you don't expend that amount of energy, and rarely refuel, well unless it is nuclear. Chemical reactions don't pack energy that dense.

    Oh yeah, come to think of it, there is likely to be a little "pain" after all, when it dawns on the oil monopoly that their day of ripping us off with their gasoline price-gouging, is coming to an end. But then, why should we feel sorry for selfish greedy corporations again?
     
  10. Pronatalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    750
    Only God can say when the earth is "full."

    post title: Only God can say when the earth is "full."

    Well why hasn't the world been developed better? One obvious reason, is all the effort and money squandored on (anti)"family-planning." That could have went to better uses, rather than being diverted from reform and useful purposes. Why aren't economies and political systems developed more to benefit everybody, rather than the rich elite few? Because society isn't pronatalist enough. Because people don't value the sacredness of each and every human life, like they should. Because too many people don't even try, to love thy neighbor as thyself. And population "control" gives them a cop-out excuse, because they can just opine nonsense about there supposedly being "too many" people in the world, and use that as a handy rationalization to stall and avoid needed reforms. If human lives really mattered, then we might have to pay people a decent and living and family wage, for their work. Corporations might not be allowed to exploit the labor of the poor in cruel sweatshops so much. We might actually have to allow the poor, some way to establish title to their land, so that they can build themselves nicer homes. We might actually have to act more, like we care.

    Well when there were but mere millions of people, don't you think that some people might have trouble remembering all those names, and keeping track of everybody and whether everybody has paid their excessive taxes? So who's to say, that there wasn't "too many" people back then, if there is supposedly "too many" people in the world now? Did you know back then, people didn't use flush toilets. Gasp! Would you want to have very big cities where people don't even use toilets?

    Why do you think that God commanded people to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth? To prevent an "empty" planet? I don't think so, for then why didn't God start with more people, and seed people onto more planets? God commanded people to have dominion over nature and other creatures, and to be good stewards and to till the land. Why? For the benefit of man. When humans grow more numerous, more people benefit by being alive. So God's commandment to people to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, is still just as relevant today, as way back when before human populations naturally grew so huge. Let's say there are maybe 100 great reasons for people to procreate. We have lost one reason, that of filling an "empty" planet. Doesn't that still leave around 99 great reasons remaining, to keep on procreating? But then neither is the planet "full" either. There's lots more room most everywhere, for lots more people, if or as need be. Humans are even accused of adapting "too well" to the environment, such that maybe rather than people being able to live most anywhere, we start living most everywhere at once. Well that too is a practical reason why humans should continue growing more numerous, because we can adapt and benefit from growing all the more numerous.

    You say we are already everywhere? No, we are not. There are lots of places remaining where human populations are sparse. And often it isn't due to any reason such that it isn't a good place for humans to settle, but quite often, because not many people really want to live "in the middle of nowhere." In the middle of nowhere, is too far from the jobs and low wages always Wal-Marts, too far from the shopping malls and the excitement of the cities. Human population can increase further, by there coming to be more places with lots of people and fewer places far from many people. Cities could in fact, grow bigger and closer together. More cities and towns can in fact, be built in between the various growing cities and towns. What's a little "urban spawl" if it helps to accomodate all the more fellow human being coming alive?

    There are 3 perceptional dimensions that human populations can yet grow into, plenty of room for more people, for the forseeable future. Outwards, inwards, and upwards. Cities and various human settlements can spread over more land. Humans can expand their range and territory, and cities and countries can welcome their swelling populations to "merge" into one another, so that everybody can be welcome and have their place. I am against "globalization" of the form of political considation of power in the hands of corrupt globalist unaccountable dictators, but have no objection to the people themselves coming closer together, merely because there is so many of us, out of what is natural or necessity. Inwards of course means infilling underutilized land, adding more streets, or welcoming households to grow in numbers, or more people sometimes perhaps sharing rooms for a while until the housing stock can be expanded. Upwards of course means, that if everybody wants to live in the same place, well more people can be stacked into highrises, so that they may be both numerous and live where they want.
     
  11. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Not necesserily. The reason could be/will be not having the former anymore. Then we have to take whatever we have as a substitute, it is not a given it would be better...
     
  12. Pronatalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    750
    Lots of people know there is no oil shortage. It is a manufactured conspiracy.

    post title: Lots of people know there is no oil shortage. It is a manufactured conspiracy.

    Not the enviro wacko "we are going to run out" lies. Such deception only plays into the hands of the power-hungry government and the greedy oil corporations looking for excuses to jack up prices and oppress the poor.

    Look in author Julian Simon's book, The Ultimate Resource, for a graph of how long the oil is projected to last, versus what year the prediction was made. It's not a declining curve, but rather, a rocky mountain range. They keep finding more, and keep finding better technology to get at oil not so reachable before.

    They could even manufacture oil/gasoline/ethanol or whatever, sythetically. But then instead of producing energy, then it becomes merely a means to store energy, as the energy would have to be put in, to make fuel from scratch, one of the stupid things that the proponents of "the hydrogen economy" don't seem to like to fess up to. Want a "hydrogen economy?" Better build some nuclear power plants or something, because there is no ready supply of hydrogen, except we put lots of energy in, to liberate hydrogen from water. But what for? For gas-guzzling rocket engines? Hydrogen is not a practical fuel for cars, because it is not naturally a liquid at room temperature, nor is it energy-dense enough. I think they like hydrogen for rocket engines, because hydrogen can be chilled to ridiculously cold temperatures without freezing up. They actually use the fuel as coolant, otherwise the rocket engines would melt.
     
  13. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    Older people should have thought of that and took better care of their kids.
     
  14. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    If humans exist mainly to destroy other humans, and other lifeforms, and the environment, how does creating unlimited numbers, make anything better?

    Obviously, we are horrible at mating. The most intelligent among us have the least kids. Most people still have kids with whoever has the sexy ass, paying no attention to the most important organ, the brain.

    We might be better off if people required a license to have more than 2 kids. Say you get your bachelors, then you should have the ability to have one more kid, say you get your masters? one more kid, say you get your PhD? one more kid.

    But if you let a hopeless, uneducated, unambitious, and all around mediocre individual, have 10 kids with another hopeless, uneducated, unambitious, all around mediocre individual, what do you think the result will be?

    So what? Even if they have beautiful bodies it does not improve the species if we mate ignorantly.I'm just saying we should mate smart. The smartest should pair up.

    I'm not really saying breed less, I'm saying breed intelligently, and slowly, and precisely. Don't breed stupid.
     
  15. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    Cancer can. So can brain parasites, and airbone Ebola.

    Research BSE, no human has survived BSE.

    Just admit it, you don't care about the survival of the species.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2007
  16. Pronatalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    750
    What you say, sounds too much like Nazi eugenics theories.

    Not everybody is attracted by sexual appearance. Many people like me, are attracted to personality and intelligence. And people who love their children, likely tend to have more, so I think it largely works itself out. And not everybody gets children, for their much copulation. Some things still are very much in the hands of God.

    Humans aren't really of "unlimited" numbers so much as of "lax" restraint on numbers. But isn't that a lot of what freedom is about? Be grateful to God that God allows/causes us to be so numerous. Otherwise, how could you and I have come to be born?
     
  17. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Would you feel the same about all animals on Earth? Say, let the wild horses on the American plains breed until they eat all of the grass, then begin to die of starvation? Or do you approve of humans "thinning" the herds as we do now?

    And likewise the wolf population in the American west? Just let them breed until they kill all of the dear and elk, then starve to death?

    Baron Max
     
  18. lucifers angel same shit, differant day!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,590
    ok, just so that i know how many children do you guys think one family should have? i have 3 is that to many?
     
  19. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Everyone on Earth should have just one child until the population, relative to the people starving to death, is finally stabilized. As it is, in most poverty-stricken nations, the birth rate is horrendous ...even counting the number that starve to death.

    We thin the herds of the wild horses, deer and elk in the western plains states to keep them from overpopulating and over-grazing, and thus starving to death. Yet we do nothing to stop the same from happening to humans. Geez, we're a really sad specie, ain't we?

    Baron Max
     
  20. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    If everyone in the UK has 3 kids, how soon will the UK run out of room for them all? ...and food for them to eat? ...and jobs for them all? ...and gasoline for all those cars? ...and housing for them all?

    Baron Max
     
  21. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    No more than you can give attention to. Are you giving the 3 all the attention they need?

    My opinion on this remains : Let people do what they want on this or there will be consequences.

    Basically I think the answer is morality. When children cease to be, or at least rarely seen as ego extentions by the parents communities in general have the upbringing of children at least somewhat injected in the collective conscience, then birth rate will drop rapidly. Oh ya, birth control in the shit holes of the world will help too.
     
  22. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Breeding less is tantamont to suicide. Western Europe will soon cease to exist as we know it due to insufficient breeding.
     
  23. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Anthony, you are ignorant, as usual. The problem is that the world is overpopulating in places where there is not enough infrastructure, food, job, eletricity.

    Also, philosophically speaking, who cares if human society evolves and old Europe is going to change due to different population patterns??

    Not having 7 kids in your family is not suicede. It is responsible planning...
     

Share This Page