Severely retarded people

But aren't we all just typing a bunch of words on a screen? Even if I said that I was 'X', would anyone believe me if they didn't want to? I can't prove anything that I am, but I can type words .......and if people can read them, then isn't that what this is supposed to be?

As to you having children ...I think your principles would be quite useful for others to follow. But, alas, that's like asking the sun not to come up in the morning, isn't it? People fuck because it's fun .....but out the "other end" comes something that might not be nearly so much fun. Then what???

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

THAT is propagation of the species???

Yup!
Propagation and nurture are two separate entities. See many bacteria taking their kids to the park lately?
No?
Lot of them about though.

BTW Nice to see your pro choice Max. Wouldn't have pegged you as the type.
Suprise suprise.
Dee Cee

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hmm, I'm not so sure that I've made up my mind on that one, either!

I'm leaning, however, toward having the pregnant girl and the guy who did the dirty deed stood up before a firing squad and shot!! I think that just might slow down the instances of unwanted pregnancies, don't you think?

Baron Max

 

Bells, I really, really wish you and your husband the very best in your endeavor. And, of course, that you heal up quickly so you can get back to the enjoyment of sex and not the "work" of it all!!

Baron Max

 

Still leaning toward shooting them. First, it takes care of the problem of abortion rights and all that crap. Second, it gets rid of people who can't control their emotions enough to keep their pants on.

Well, "society" decides many such things for us now, why should this one be any different or more difficult? People can't buy a house if they can't afford it, right? ...can't buy car if they can't afford it. So does that mean that a car or a house is more a important asset than a kid???

Oh, definitely NOT!!! As you can see by the statistics in the world, people who like to fuck just can't possibly have the brains to make such a decision!! In the heat of passion, I don't know about a woman, but the blood supply to a man's brain is diverted to his dick!! ...he can't do much thinking at all.

Oh, heaven forbid that to happen to ANYONE! And in your state, one must be careful of undue stresses and strain.

Baron Max

 

Answer mine first, idgit. "No, you answer mine first." Moron.

 

Huh, I wonder?! *smashes fist into likeness of barren.*

 

Hmm, exhibits violent attitude even on an Internet forum. Hmm, you must be black, Cotton!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Baron Max

 

And you MUST be a racist. Simple.

 

Well, that's pretty easy ...I don't consider it a child for a long, long time. I'm even leaning to the fact that it's not a child until it's birth!! So see, that ain't a hippo-critcal statement on my part.

Well, sure! But there are other ways that could be developed. As to how to keep "fucking" from making a baby, I'd suggest a birth-control implant into girls the minute they begin to produce eggs.

One thing that stands out in your post, Bells, is that, somehow, it seems that you feel that the right to fuck is so great and so important that ye're willing to subject all of those "accidental" children to a lifetime of abject poverty, disease, ill-health, hunger, poor housing, poor clothing and whatever else ....for all of their lives?!?! Surely you don't think that the "right to fuck" is that important, do you? ...to risk the lives of children? ..even one child?

No, Bells, my ideas would make it quite the opposite!! With a birth-control implant, kids and adults could fuck their little brains out anytime, anywhere they wanted to. Then, when they want AND can show that they can support a child, then the implant would be "turned off".

I just can't see anyone agreeing that it's a "right" to bring a child into a life of abject poverty, disease, ill-health and poor housing. Does the child have no "rights" after it's born? (And just for Cotton, that also includes little black babies, too. Until they become, say, teenagers, all babies/kids are wonderful!)

Baron Max

 

“I just can't see anyone agreeing that it's a "right" to bring a child into a life of abject poverty, disease, ill-health and poor housing.”

Exactly. Look at what couples have to go through to adopt a child; it takes about three years in Australia at least to finalise everything, and you have to prove in every possible way that you can and will care for, and love the child forever. So, why should just anyone, especially low income couples, be able to conceive a child and raise it in poverty? Just because you have the right to produce a child doesn’t mean you can provide for it adequately.

 

Contraceptives int the water and you have to pay for the antidote the only problem is that you have everyone taking the same drugs and dosage. Maybe an injection given with your paycheck? But who gets to decide who has no value? Homosexuals claim to be born that way should they be allowed? What about people who have negative tendencies?if someone will be prone to violence, insanity, depression,obesity should they be allowed to live?where do you draw the line? I oppose the dehumanization that results from assigning people value based on traits that are beyond their control.

 

Baron Baron Baron, your fascistic coments have finally come as no suprise, Hitler didnt die, he hid under a suedo name of 'Baron Max'!!Cock sucker

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

What the hell are you talking about????

We're not deciding a "person's value", but his/her ability to care for a child! There's a big difference.

But I can't help but think that you're saying that it's okay for a couple to have children even if they can't adequately care for it? Is that true? You'd actually allow a child to be born into a life of poverty and disease and starvation just for some ill-conceived "principle" that you hold?

The rest of your post is foolish and it's obvious that you haven't read the preceeding posts. The isn't about placing "value" on each person, but about having children. Please read the posts, perhaps it'll do you some good.

Baron Max

 

Alright then. Let's start with a test for RACISTS. I don't think racists should be allowed to have kids. Therefore, let's contrive a test that will determine if you are a RACIST or not. If you are, then no kids for you.

Poor people, I'll say you can have up to, but no more than, 3 kids.

Rich people, no more than one.

Idiots with an IQ of less than 90, none (knowing, of course, that this may include many of the previous.)

Corrupt politician, none.

Religious zealot, none.

How's this for a starting place?

Or, how about no more than three kids for anyone? Two? One? None (for a few generations, at least?)

 

This has nothing to do with race, Cotton (even tho' you turn every thread into a racist thread!). It has to do with the ability to care for the children. If a couple can't adequately feed, house and care for their children, they shoudn't be permitted to have them. I don't see how anyone can argue with that?!

Or are you saying that even if the couple is starving themselves and can't even afford their own medical care, then it's okay for them to have children ......and subject those children to those conditions?????

Baron Max

 

Going back to the original question on this post:

Killing people because they're retarded is unacceptable. By allowing it, u're allowing the "smart" (and therefore powerful) people decide arbitrarily who gets to live and who gets to die.

What would happen if all people except for a small few suddenly had IQs in the 1000s? People like you and me would have relatively little to contribute in a world like that, and even though we might not think ourselves stupid, we certainly would be compared to this superhuman race. With that in mind, how can you allow for the strong to annihilate the crippled?