Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern
Nah. Stick it in the Arctic somewhere. Don't need guards then, as it's not as if they'll be able to escape very easily. Well. They could. Very easily. But the point is that it would do them bugger all good as they'd stumble out in a wasteland of ice and snow, and quickly freeze to death.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
MDG wrote:Nah. Stick it in the Arctic somewhere. Don't need guards then, as it's not as if they'll be able to escape very easily. Well. They could. Very easily. But the point is that it would do them bugger all good as they'd stumble out in a wasteland of ice and snow, and quickly freeze to death.
"Ugh! How do you manage to make even this boring!"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/10/07 22:08:23
Anuvver fing - when they do sumfing, they try to make it look like somfink else to confuse everybody. When one of them wants to lord it over the uvvers, 'e says "I'm very speshul so'z you gotta worship me", or "I know summink wot you lot don't know, so yer better lissen good". Da funny fing is, arf of 'em believe it and da over arf don't, so 'e 'as to hit 'em all anyway or run fer it.
wow....i was just showing you guys a man in a dress handing out justice to charv scum...it made my day that did...
*FYI i'm with the sterilisation idea *
quote=Horst]well no sane woman will let you crap on her chest, or suck off a donkey for you, and sometimes you just need to watch gak like that done by professionals.
<<< my hero
KingCracker wrote:
On a funny note tho, a family friend calls women like that rib poppers. Ya just slide it in until they start popping, then you know your there
If you are convicted of a violent crime, you are sterilised and your children taken into State care, thus preventing you turning innocent young minds into even more drooling, lawless scum.
Keep the sterilisation reversible just in case of a miscarriage of justice and BAM. Problem solved in a couple of generations.
You know that they did forceably sterilise people, right? Like, up until the 70s.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Why not? Think of some of the genetic diseases we could cure. Mongoloidism would be a thing of the past. Eugenics could work wonders for the (master) race of humans in general.
grizgrin wrote:Why not? Think of some of the genetic diseases we could cure. Mongoloidism would be a thing of the past. Eugenics could work wonders for the (master) race of humans in general.
You're joking, right?
Please tell me you're joking.
Mongoloidism -- or Down's Syndrome to give it the correct name -- wouldn't be a thing of the past because it is a genetic condition which arises from incomplete separate of part of chromosome 21 during meiosis.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The complexity of conditions that arise from Down's Syndrome and the success of modern techniques in rehabilitating sufferers should remind us; (A) genetic manipulation isn't as simple as it might seem, (B) genes do not necessarily determine the path of lives.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/10/08 16:36:42
Why not? Think of some of the genetic diseases we could cure. Mongoloidism would be a thing of the past. Eugenics could work wonders for the (master) race of humans in general.
I have a new best friend. One of my favourite movies, AND one of my favourite TV shows EVAR!!!
Why has no one yet mentioned the (theoretically) most potent weapon in the universe. No one has yet successfully made it yet. The mighty...
PIECE OF WOOD WITH A RUSTY NAIL POKING OUT OF IT!!! Dun dun dunnnnnnn!
Jimi supports METAL
We're outnumbered ten to one here. Still' I love the odds! - Free Will Sacrifice - Amon Amarth
Ketara wrote:To survive on the net requires that you adapt the attributes of a Rhinocerous to a certain extent. A thick skin, a big horn to stab people you don't like, and poor eyesight when certain images are linked from places like 4chan.
Does anyone else think the fight went something like this?
Anuvver fing - when they do sumfing, they try to make it look like somfink else to confuse everybody. When one of them wants to lord it over the uvvers, 'e says "I'm very speshul so'z you gotta worship me", or "I know summink wot you lot don't know, so yer better lissen good". Da funny fing is, arf of 'em believe it and da over arf don't, so 'e 'as to hit 'em all anyway or run fer it.
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern
Da Boss wrote:
grizgrin wrote:Why not? Think of some of the genetic diseases we could cure. Mongoloidism would be a thing of the past. Eugenics could work wonders for the (master) race of humans in general.
You're joking, right?
Please tell me you're joking.
Actually, Eugenics as a theory is perfectly fine. You breed the best to strengthen society. But sadly, putting it into practice requires someone to make an absolute judgement as to who/what quantifies as 'the best' and therein the population lies.
Eugenics in itself is no more evil or immoral than good old Evolution. One could go so far as to say it's the next logical step in terms of human evolution. But as I said, it's having to decide what is good and what is toot the it all falls apart.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Have to disagree with that - evolution requires natural selection, which has no conciousness - therefore no moral position. Whichever way you present it, eugenics is a fascistic concept - selective breeding based on arbitrary decisions on what constitutes a good genetic make-up.
It is in no way the next 'logical' step of human evolution.
It is, rather, the twisted brain-wrong of a one-off man-mental.
grizgrin wrote:Why not? Think of some of the genetic diseases we could cure. Mongoloidism would be a thing of the past. Eugenics could work wonders for the (master) race of humans in general.
You're joking, right?
Please tell me you're joking.
In that degree, yeah. I thought the "(master) race" bit was pretty evocative of the Nazi party. I am in favor of genetic counciling and treatments for diseases and conditions as a concept. To some, this smacks of eugenics. But am I seriously for the mass-elimination of people who do not measure up to the genetic line? Wow, hell no. Talk about your slippery slopes and who gets to draw the line where! Ugh.
Kilkrazy wrote:Mongoloidism -- or Down's Syndrome to give it the correct name -- wouldn't be a thing of the past because it is a genetic condition which arises from incomplete separate of part of chromosome 21 during meiosis.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The complexity of conditions that arise from Down's Syndrome and the success of modern techniques in rehabilitating sufferers should remind us; (A) genetic manipulation isn't as simple as it might seem, (B) genes do not necessarily determine the path of lives.
Not that I am srsly advocating it, but if you were to kill every person with trisomy 21 then you would still have some further occurance since it is a genetic mutation and you have not wiped out the source of the mutation, but you would have taken the percentage of population with the condition down to such a meager level that it would be effectively nil for any realistic purposes.
Albatross wrote:
Why not? Think of some of the genetic diseases we could cure. Mongoloidism would be a thing of the past. Eugenics could work wonders for the (master) race of humans in general.
Way to go, Adolph!
Dude, seriously....
Way to go? Which way DO we go? I am hoping by your reference that you actually got the joke.
Albatross wrote:Have to disagree with that - evolution requires natural selection, which has no conciousness - therefore no moral position. Whichever way you present it, eugenics is a fascistic concept - selective breeding based on arbitrary decisions on what constitutes a good genetic make-up.
It is in no way the next 'logical' step of human evolution.
It is, rather, the twisted brain-wrong of a one-off man-mental.
Eugenics is not necessarily based on arbitrary decisions. You can actually make your selections based on something other than random dart-throwing. Agreed it is facist, although I don't think it is solely fascist so then not. And I would hardly call the practice of eugenics any kind of a one-off. I would think that's it's been practiced more than one time.
And I challenge your assertion that natural selection has no conciousness, please present your proofs and evidence.
Natural selection is unaware of itself, and of it's actions. It is non-sentient. It has no wider plan, nor goals. It does not know why some are selected, whilst others are not - nor does it 'know' anything or make decisions of any kind... It's a concept. This is pretty much self-evident.
I put it to you to provide evidence that it IS concious.
The arbitrary decisions I mention are the ones which define genetic 'goodness'. the 'one-off man-mental..' thing is a quote from Brass Eye, a British satire show (check it out - really funny!).
And yes, I got the joke - maybe I should have made that clearer...
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Actually, Eugenics as a theory is perfectly fine. You breed the best to strengthen society. But sadly, putting it into practice requires someone to make an absolute judgement as to who/what quantifies as 'the best' and therein the population lies.
No, it's a completely horrible idea. At it's core, and as you've typed here, it relies on the idea of controlling breeding for improvement of society. Giving up control over fundamental personal freedoms like breeding for the sake of a dream of a future utopia of perfect people is about as wrong as things get.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/10/12 09:40:02
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Albatross wrote:Natural selection is unaware of itself, and of it's actions. It is non-sentient. It has no wider plan, nor goals. It does not know why some are selected, whilst others are not - nor does it 'know' anything or make decisions of any kind... It's a concept. This is pretty much self-evident.
I put it to you to provide evidence that it IS concious.
Actually, I was taking a bit of a shot at some of the wilder Creationists out there. But still, you made the assertion, not me. I wasn't even disagreeing with you, more just wanting to see what you could put in the mix to support the assertion.
Albatross wrote:The arbitrary decisions I mention are the ones which define genetic 'goodness'. the 'one-off man-mental..' thing is a quote from Brass Eye, a British satire show (check it out - really funny!).
And yes, I got the joke - maybe I should have made that clearer...
So many others didn't. I had to nuke you from orbit, just to be sure.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Actually, Eugenics as a theory is perfectly fine. You breed the best to strengthen society. But sadly, putting it into practice requires someone to make an absolute judgement as to who/what quantifies as 'the best' and therein the population lies.
No, it's a completely horrible idea. At it's core, and as you've typed here, it relies on the idea of controlling breeding for improvement of society. Giving up control over fundamental personal freedoms like breeding for the sake of a dream of a future utopia of perfect people is about as wrong as things get.
This is another crazed instance of Sebbie and I on the same page. All I have to say now is:
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
*
