• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Hardcore morality of todays society, will be our downfall.

Status
Not open for further replies.
yeah but actions speak louder than words, and the actions you guys are taking speak far louder than the words im typing. You guys are the ones who not only practice what you do but preach it like its right too. The reason AIDS is affecting so many people today is because of the mentality that YOU guys are displaying, not mine.

And sorry to disapoint you but all of this shit im typing is coming from a sober person.. well, i smoke a joint now and then but thats about it.
 
^ You propose to kill others as though you have authority over that.

What "actions" do you expect us (me) to do?

I preach empathy. I practise it too - but those with big egos (like you) are not conductive to my empathy. There is little I can empathize with. Here we have a megalomaniac (probably a highschool kid) who thinks he has the right to decide who lives and who dies.

I can only feel sorry for him.
 
^ You propose to kill others as though you have authority over that.

What "actions" do you expect us (me) to do?

I preach empathy. I practise it too - but those with big egos (like you) are not conductive to my empathy. There is little I can empathize with. Here we have a megalomaniac (probably a highschool kid) who thinks he has the right to decide who lives and who dies.

I can only feel sorry for him.

Thats a super over simplification of what im saying and i cant make super bold enough in saying that.

You could over simplify self defence resulting in death down to what you just said, too.. so does that mean defending your own life resulting in the death of the attacker(who was going/trying to kill you) is wrong too? Does that make the defendant an egotistical murderer too?

What im proposing, is that some people need to die if we want to stop the cycle we have got ourselves in, and that if we dont kill x amount of people now, then xxxxx amount of people are gonna die later as a direct result. Which is a direct comparison too 'Would it be wrong to kill 10 people if it meant the millions of people now infected with AIDS would be free of such a disease' which is why i kept stressing it(and which is also funnily enough the reason everyone avoided it)

And what does AGE have anything to do with all of this? I could be 80 for all you know, or 12 years old.. its not anything to do with the matter tbh and it seems pretty judgemental and prejudice to judge someone based on an uncontrollable factor such as age. Shouldnt you be asking if im black or white aswell? 8)
 
Last edited:
And what I am saying is that you are not better than me or the other guy, and have no more authority than we do to decide who lives and dies. I don't give half a flying rat's ass about why you think your life/death authority is legitimate, all I know is that I have this other, equally pitiful human being, trying to act like he "has the answer".

Sorry kiddo, but you're not better than any of us.
 
Did i say i am better than you? Did i say im better than the next guy? No, i never said such a thing. Do cops and prime ministers think they are better people than others? Do they think they are superior beings just because they take authority on who lives and dies? 8)
 
You dictated who should live or die.

As you say, "actions speak louder than words".

This is getting very boring.

I'm done here.

I guess if you can't annoy people with your argument, then you bore them with it!
 
And i guess if you cant stand people using logic and rationale then you just run away. Typical god believer i must admit.
 
Do cops and prime ministers think they are better people than others? Do they think they are superior beings just because they take authority on who lives and dies? 8)

As far as I know prime ministers and cops in NZ and Aus DON'T have the authority to say who lives and dies. This is pretty much why we abolished the death penalty.

Another point I'd like to add (and I'm sorry if it's already been raised) is that I don't know of any diseases which were eradicated by genocide. Do you?

Anyway, this thread actually makes me sick, and the problems with your original post have been addressed by other people, so I doubt I will open this again.

Without a doubt one of the worst threads I've ever read on BL.
 
I think the problem is that you only think of human fitness in physical terms. Let's say that the world's brightest, and most promising medical doctor, who is only 20 and is already making breakthroughs, had contracted HIV through an accident at the hospital. You would kill this person who obviously has a great potential to help, simply because they have a disease?

If you only think of terms of survival of the fittest (physically) then you are an animal, and not part of the human race. Part of being human (to me at least) is being able to treasure someone not because they're the biggest man-muscle thing i've ever seen, but because they're intelligent, creative, empathetic, etc. In fact, most of the people I've met that are primarily concerned with their physical features aren't very interesting.

And going back to the Nazi term, I know you can't possibly see the connection 8) but it's the underlying principle. Hitler was discriminating against a people of a certain religious faith (jewish people), homosexual people, and others that I don't care to look up right now. The point is, he took a group of people, and just said they needed to be exterminated.

You are taking a group of people (basically anyone who isn't 100% perfect in your eyes) and saying they need to be exterminated. You are discriminating (that means judging before you know them, btw) against a group of people.

Now you tell me, how are these radically different? Because you're not advocating the killing of Jewish people? No, you're doing something "good" for humanity. You're perfecting the human race, right? Well, believe it or not, Hitler believed he was doing something good for humanity too....
 
I agree that overpopulation is a serious issue that needs to be dealt with. But why is killing people the way to do this?

This is generally the way population geography works: You'll typically see that as death rates rise in most places, so do birth rates. This is because the more people you see dying of causes other than old age, the more kids you're going to have, to ensure that at least some of them make it to childbearing age. This effect often more than offsets its cause -- when the death rate jumps, the birthrate will jump several fold higher, and will often take a while to come down, even after the death rate drops and pretty much everyone starts living long enough to have their own kids.

So what do we need? We need below-replacement-level fertility. Only one, with a wince I say MAX two, kids per woman, across the earth.

The only statistic that consistently correlates with lowered birthrates is the rate of female education. In places where almost all women have completed the society's most basic level of education needed for most jobs, you see below-replacement-level fertility. No other incentive, disincentive, plan, or policy has succeeded in producing this effect. It probably isn't hard to see why. If women CAN work, many WILL work. Working women have an avenue for existential fulfillment besides motherhood, and just won't likely have the time or energy to raise more than one or two kids. If they live in a city, like most people in low-birthrate countries do, then nor will they have the SPACE to raise more than one or two.

If every woman had a maximum of one child, the world population would halve in a 2~3 generations. The only way this will be achieved is by equitable educational opportunities for all people, but especially all girls, across the world. This is why I believe in poverty eradication and education oriented causes, as a balm for the world.

I also believe in finding a way to close income distribution gaps. High GINI coefficients (a measure of inequality) correlate strongly with violent crime rates, which obviously push up death rates, and therefore birthrates, among affected populations. This is because when people see what others have and have far less, this makes enough of them willing to resort to violent means to get what they're jealous of.

There now. A plan to combat overpopulation, without a single untimely death. Enact this plan, and there'll be plenty of resources left to care lovingly for that quadrapleigic AIDS patient on a ventilator.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top