Does the Politics section have a purpose?

cannabineer said:
For abortion to be eugenics, it would have to be systematic with criteria. China tiptoes on that boundary with its selective and somewhat retroactive abortion of newborn girls. But to me, eugenics smacks of improving the breed, which would require selective and systematically encouraged abortion of fetuses with undesirable characteristics beyond the random, like Down's. cn
Click to expand...

You mean undesirable like future welfare drains?
 
cannabineer said:
No. "Future welfare drain" is an economic concept but not a eugenic one. cn
Click to expand...

ah yes, I'm with you now.

I didn't mean to imply they were the same, just similar. Not abortion and Eugenics, just being pro-abortion. I find it a similar concept.
 
cannabineer said:
But to me, eugenics smacks of improving the breed, which would require selective and systematically encouraged abortion of fetuses with undesirable characteristics beyond the random, like Down's. cn
Click to expand...

Isn't that what Darwin and Natural Selection were all about? Could abortion just be another interference with Natural Selection like medical cures are?

Then we have this to consider here in the States.....
Will the stupid outbreed the clever?


http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/latest-questions/question/2304/

This may just be the outcome of the 60's/70's
 
ginwilly said:
ah yes, I'm with you now.

I didn't mean to imply they were the same, just similar. Not abortion and Eugenics, just being pro-abortion. I find it a similar concept.
Click to expand...

I haven't met an outright pro-abortionist. I am pro-choice and I am pro-concealed carry, but in both cases I would like to see that sort of deadly force used as minimally as possible. cn
 
cannabineer said:
I haven't met an outright pro-abortionist. I am pro-choice and I am pro-concealed carry, but in both cases I would like to see that sort of deadly force used as minimally as possible. cn
Click to expand...

I haven't met anyone who claims to be such but some of the arguments lead me to believe that way about them. Especially the future welfare argument. If you would rather abort someone because they MIGHT end up on welfare then I can't help but feel you are pro-abortion.
 
ginwilly said:
I haven't met anyone who claims to be such but some of the arguments lead me to believe that way about them. Especially the future welfare argument. If you would rather abort someone because they MIGHT end up on welfare then I can't help but feel you are pro-abortion.
Click to expand...

Makes sense to me. It seems a disproportionate correction.
I can see an argument raised that the globe is populated past its carrying capacity. But to address that using abortion as a major means of population control strikes me as morally unsound. To effect such a policy, voluntary abortions would not suffice. At that moment, eugenics seem inevitable.
I would like to think that at that moment, revolution becomes inevitable. Perhaps not right away, but every régime that has been that harsh with its subjects has fallen fairly quickly. China is an interesting border case: it's patronistic enough to have a population policy that includes forced abortion, and yet has just enough of a liberal core that it might yet evolve past that sort of nastiness without a revolution. But my money is on a violent realignment of some sort in our lifetimes. cn
 
Wilksey said:
Yes.

Reading a thread or two, or actually trying to participate in any thread in the politics section, leads one to realize there is absolutely no point wasting time there.
Click to expand...
you mean here..you are actually posting and wasting time in the political section.
 
londonfog said:
you mean here..you are actually posting and wasting time in the political section.
Click to expand...

This section has no purpose if everyone agrees with the trolls. If it is just the sycophants preaching to the Choir.

But, if you are giving high humor monologues to an empty chair....that is funny. And funny to see how many people fell for the Animal Farm talking points of distaste.

If you think Clint Eastwood would risk his new movie for a halting rambling, pointless, unscripted old fartery,. you are stupid.

Just go read the transcript. Then review his priceless presentation. Most of the dogs that have a manufactured and swollowed opinion about this have never seen it.

No tele-prompter? No script? Of course! They can't edit what is in our brain, babies. This guy has been memorizing entire movie scenes, since he was a kid. You fools. Read the transcript.

That's what this Politics section means to me. Thinking.
 
It is a point of International communications. Only the Names have been changed to protect the retarded. Oh Wait I didn't change my name so I am not one of the retarded.
 
ginwilly said:
I think I've had my mind changed on capital punishment, maybe.

I'm waffling but I've been presented with strong arguments against when I was positive at one time that it was appropriate.

If I could accomplish anything arguing on these boards it would be to educate people on the evils, ignorance and conceit of Keynesian economics. Those that read Krugman are too far gone to use logic instead of feelings though, so it's almost fruitless.

edit: what hurts the cause for me to be totally against capital punishment is the same people against are generally in the camp that it's cool as long as Obama is doing it and are pro-abortion.
Click to expand...

If it makes you feel better, I'm: anti-state (government) capital punishment, pro-life, and anti-Keynesian. I'm also not cool about inviting Obama with me camping.
 
It's a big pissing match and it's hilarious to watch people get mad and go back n' forth.

My 2 cents,

SB.
 
Ernst said:
It is a point of International communications. Only the Names have been changed to protect the retarded. Oh Wait I didn't change my name so I am not one of the retarded.
Click to expand...
Oh you're definitely retarded, back to licking windows you go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top