OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 30, 2014, 12:44:21 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Pleas pray for me - I am a drunk...  (Read 2738 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,960


black metal cat


« Reply #45 on: September 30, 2010, 03:17:20 AM »

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

I find your post to be intellectually dishonest, and frankly, libelous (not that GIC really cares, after all he tries to stir things up, but still...). What does your wife being black, or your children being multiracial, have to do with anything or anyone on this thread? To challenge him on what he would do with the mentally handicapped is, I think, a perfectly valid thing to do, but the other stuff is just silly.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 03:18:47 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #46 on: September 30, 2010, 03:22:54 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

I wouldn't call it hatred, on a personal level, I'm indifferent towards them. I am simply concerned about the impact their genes have on the human species.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #47 on: September 30, 2010, 03:25:23 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

"Lord have mercy indeed!"


Selam

Yeah, and this is one of the reasons why I am skeptical about what Bill Gates is trying to do with his nonprophit organization. It seems to be nothing more than one huge Eugenics front. He is spending billions on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUJMR3BUm2s&feature=related

Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,960


black metal cat


« Reply #48 on: September 30, 2010, 03:26:22 AM »

I see now that I didn't say anything before about the original topic. I meant to, but wondered if I should say anything, as what I have to say is personal (and I realise that I am sometimes too revealing of my personal life for the tastes of some here). However, I will say that my thoughts are with you Heorhij. Both my father and mother-in-law struggle with this issue, and I've seen up close how difficult a struggle it can be.
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #49 on: September 30, 2010, 03:28:58 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

I wouldn't call it hatred, on a personal level, I'm indifferent towards them. I am simply concerned about the impact their genes have on the human species.

And you call yourself a moral atheist? I'm sure there are some KKK that don't hate me, they just are indifferent towards people that look like me.

Also, what makes you different from the Communists that killed millions of innocent people through starvation and other means?
« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 03:36:48 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #50 on: September 30, 2010, 03:33:46 AM »

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

I find your post to be intellectually dishonest, and frankly, libelous (not that GIC really cares, after all he tries to stir things up, but still...). What does your wife being black, or your children being multiracial, have to do with anything or anyone on this thread? To challenge him on what he would do with the mentally handicapped is, I think, a perfectly valid thing to do, but the other stuff is just silly.

What do you know about the Eugenics movement? I think what he said was spot on!
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #51 on: September 30, 2010, 03:34:52 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

"Lord have mercy indeed!"


Selam

I have nothing against people on account of their race, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation and though I think all religions are absurd, I only take issue with a person's religious beliefs when they contradict scientific knowledge.

Now as for whether your daughter's 'mentally retarded' or not, I don't know...I do know that most parents of mentally handicapped children are quite offended by that term. However, I don't really care about that either. All that I suggest is an objective test of knowledge and intelligence and that those who score below the 50th percentile (cumulative for the past 5 years or so, to provide some stability to the system) not be allowed to reproduce. No gas chambers or death camps, nothing so dramatic as you people like to pretend, just simple sterilization then they can live their lives when they see fit.

This way, in 60-80 years when nature runs its course the human species will have been improved. Now some may argue that this is artificial, not natural, selection, which is true. However, we have allowed the stupid and ignorant to benefit from the advances of the intelligent...we give a person with an 80 IQ the same heart medication as the inventor of said heart medication; we have interfered with the processes of natural selection so if we want our species to continue to improve it would be reasonable to create a viable replacement.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #52 on: September 30, 2010, 03:38:59 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

I wouldn't call it hatred, on a personal level, I'm indifferent towards them. I am simply concerned about the impact their genes have on the human species.

And you call yourself a moral atheist? I'm sure there are some KKK that don't hate me, they just are indifferent towards people that look like me.

If you actually believe that, I can only assume you haven't met too many klansmen. But don't worry, under my proposal the majority of them would probably end up sterilized, so unable to reproduce.

Quote
Also, what makes you different from the Communists that killed millions of innocent people through starvation and other means?

While I may not express any sorrow over people dying as a result of their own stupidity, I haven't advocated killing anyone either.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #53 on: September 30, 2010, 03:41:42 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

"Lord have mercy indeed!"


Selam

I have nothing against people on account of their race, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation and though I think all religions are absurd, I only take issue with a person's religious beliefs when they contradict scientific knowledge.

Now as for whether your daughter's 'mentally retarded' or not, I don't know...I do know that most parents of mentally handicapped children are quite offended by that term. However, I don't really care about that either. All that I suggest is an objective test of knowledge and intelligence and that those who score below the 50th percentile (cumulative for the past 5 years or so, to provide some stability to the system) not be allowed to reproduce. No gas chambers or death camps, nothing so dramatic as you people like to pretend, just simple sterilization then they can live their lives when they see fit.

This way, in 60-80 years when nature runs its course the human species will have been improved. Now some may argue that this is artificial, not natural, selection, which is true. However, we have allowed the stupid and ignorant to benefit from the advances of the intelligent...we give a person with an 80 IQ the same heart medication as the inventor of said heart medication; we have interfered with the processes of natural selection so if we want our species to continue to improve it would be reasonable to create a viable replacement.

This is subjective and no different from the animal farm scenario. For what if those with an IQ of 170 want to kill or make sterile those with an IQ below 150?

It shouldn't be up to you or anyone to play god, to decide who lives and who dies....or who gets to reproduce vs who doesn't.
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,311

"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #54 on: September 30, 2010, 03:46:40 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

"Lord have mercy indeed!"


Selam

Yeah, and this is one of the reasons why I am skeptical about what Bill Gates is trying to do with his nonprophit organization. It seems to be nothing more than one huge Eugenics front. He is spending billions on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUJMR3BUm2s&feature=related




Exactly! I remember some years ago having a debate with my father because he couldn't understand why I wasn't enthused by the Warren Buffet donation to Bill Gates' foundation. I know what these people are up to in Africa, and I know the racist ideology behind it.


Selam
Logged

"Those who have nothing constructive to offer are masters at belittling the offerings of others." +GMK+
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #55 on: September 30, 2010, 03:49:10 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

I wouldn't call it hatred, on a personal level, I'm indifferent towards them. I am simply concerned about the impact their genes have on the human species.

And you call yourself a moral atheist? I'm sure there are some KKK that don't hate me, they just are indifferent towards people that look like me.

If you actually believe that, I can only assume you haven't met too many klansmen. But don't worry, under my proposal the majority of them would probably end up sterilized, so unable to reproduce.

Quote
Also, what makes you different from the Communists that killed millions of innocent people through starvation and other means?

While I may not express any sorrow over people dying as a result of their own stupidity, I haven't advocated killing anyone either.

Not every KKK person hate black folk or is a radical in that way. There are some who hang around black folk, hire black folk, work with black folk, have affairs with black folk, and actually help out black folk from time to time. And it's been this way for over a hundred years. At the end of the day most of them are just people. Your average everyday person.

Blacks were able to survive in the south for a reason. And no, I don't want them killed nor made sterile. They have every right to live and reproduce as me. I don't hate them and I feel in this country they should have the freedom to hate me with speech, but not with actions.

« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 03:55:37 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #56 on: September 30, 2010, 03:58:49 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

"Lord have mercy indeed!"


Selam

Yeah, and this is one of the reasons why I am skeptical about what Bill Gates is trying to do with his nonprophit organization. It seems to be nothing more than one huge Eugenics front. He is spending billions on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUJMR3BUm2s&feature=related




Exactly! I remember some years ago having a debate with my father because he couldn't understand why I wasn't enthused by the Warren Buffet donation to Bill Gates' foundation. I know what these people are up to in Africa, and I know the racist ideology behind it.


Selam

Do you have any resources? I would be more than happy to read it!
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #57 on: September 30, 2010, 04:21:51 AM »

BC I don't *assume* what someone means when they say they are a drunk. And sorry, seen too many people die of withdraw to be so cavalier to make assumptions as you do.

Goes back to experience.

Sounds like not a lot around here.

I guess you know more stupid people than I do,
Birds of a feather. Btw, most drunks have more than ample opportunity to pass on their genes. In fact, given the lack of responsibility that comes with addiction, perhaps more ample opportunity than most.  They just don't have the means to raise those carrying genetic predispositions they begot. If they bear instead, even better: fetal damage can be thrown in, which rarely if ever ends in infertility.

So it seems natural selection let you down. Or maybe not, given your views.

But back to the OP: Heorhij, you have survived communism, managed to immigrate and become established, remain married and raise and marry off a child. So you have more going than most drunks, and now you have the Church. Definitely possible to beat this, but I'd get help in person, not just on the net.

Lord have mercy!

I don't think you understand, it's not alcoholics that need to be weeded out via natural selection, it's stupid people, that is to say people with a low IQ or people without the intellectual motivation to learn and understand the sciences. I have nothing against alcoholism, as long as one can function and contribute to society.


I know what you said isn't racism, but it's some kind of "ism". Some kind of hate towards those in whom you feel have lower IQ's.

Lord Have Mercy!

JNORM, have you ever noticed how the atheistic naturalists want to weed out the religious, the mentally retarded, the unborn, the Africans (and other "dead weight of human waste" as Margaret Sanger called them), but they never want to weed out themselves? My family wouldn't stand a chance if Gic were in charge of the world. My wife is Black, our children are "half breeds," our infant daughter is mentally retarded, and we are all Christians!

"Lord have mercy indeed!"


Selam

I have nothing against people on account of their race, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation and though I think all religions are absurd, I only take issue with a person's religious beliefs when they contradict scientific knowledge.

Now as for whether your daughter's 'mentally retarded' or not, I don't know...I do know that most parents of mentally handicapped children are quite offended by that term. However, I don't really care about that either. All that I suggest is an objective test of knowledge and intelligence and that those who score below the 50th percentile (cumulative for the past 5 years or so, to provide some stability to the system) not be allowed to reproduce. No gas chambers or death camps, nothing so dramatic as you people like to pretend, just simple sterilization then they can live their lives when they see fit.

This way, in 60-80 years when nature runs its course the human species will have been improved. Now some may argue that this is artificial, not natural, selection, which is true. However, we have allowed the stupid and ignorant to benefit from the advances of the intelligent...we give a person with an 80 IQ the same heart medication as the inventor of said heart medication; we have interfered with the processes of natural selection so if we want our species to continue to improve it would be reasonable to create a viable replacement.

This is subjective and no different from the animal farm scenario. For what if those with an IQ of 170 want to kill or make sterile those with an IQ below 150?

Again, I don't advocate killing anyone, but as for making people sterile, I would think that making the cutoff the 50% percentile would be more logical than the 99.9% for no other reason than we want to control the rate of change. If we didn't allow 99.9% of the population to reproduce the change in population would probably be too rapid for us to deal with, but if we merely cut the birth rate in half that would be more manageable. Furthermore your recommendation would lead to issues related to genetic diversity. It doesn't seem like you thought this out too well. What I'm suggesting really isn't that radical, if you have under a 100 IQ you're already too stupid to hold a conversation with, I have a sister who probably has an IQ in the 90's, I'd rather pull a tooth out with a pair of pliers than try to have a conversation with her about anything more sophisticated than her social life...she got short-changed with the chromosomes, I sill love her, but she doesn't have any business reproducing. Fortunately, she's at least smart enough to not want kids.

Quote
It shouldn't be up to you or anyone to play god, to decide who lives and who dies....or who gets to reproduce vs who doesn't.

Fine, then they shouldn't get the benefits derived from smart people. No cars, no internet, no modern medicine, no modern agriculture, no modern industrial infrastructure. They get sick, unless they can treat themselves, they die; if they can't figure out how to farm or they can't acquire the land to farm, they die.

Others have already played god by giving air travel to people who can't even solve a differential equation and heart medication to those ignorant of even basic biochemistry. So, its not unreasonable that those ignorant of such basic things have artificial limitations imposed on their reproduction by those who have removed the natural ones. They're still free to live their lives as they please, have whatever partners they want, and so forth, just not reproduce.

And even those who could reproduce should not be without limits. Those who are more intelligent should be allowed to reproduce more than those who are less intelligent (though the reality is that they most likely won't), and overall our the birth rate should be controlled so that we average no more than one child per two adults (two children per two adults allowed to reproduce, the upper 50 percentile)...at least until we get our population under control. The United States has about 2-3 times as many people as we need, most of Europe and Asia is MUCH worse.

So stop overreacting, I'm not proposing something absurd and radical, I'm just proposing common sense.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,960


black metal cat


« Reply #58 on: September 30, 2010, 06:39:31 AM »

What do you know about the Eugenics movement? I think what he said was spot on!

No, but I've been looking around the last couple hours for books that I can buy to learn more, and have been following the thread with interest.
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
NorthernPines
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 934



« Reply #59 on: September 30, 2010, 11:03:08 AM »

All that I suggest is an objective test of knowledge and intelligence and that those who score below the 50th percentile (cumulative for the past 5 years or so, to provide some stability to the system) not be allowed to reproduce.  No gas chambers or death camps, nothing so dramatic as you people like to pretend, just simple sterilization then they can live their lives when they see fit.

But who are YOU to determine who gets to reproduce and who doesn't? This is a radically unscientific and quite Fundamentalist approach and worldview to have.

Quote
This way, in 60-80 years when nature runs its course the human species will have been improved.

Apparently Carl Sagan was wrong. The art of prophecy is not lost as you seem to have it.

The problem with your statements is that they must be taken on,  for lack of a better word, on faith. You have no idea what the outcome of such breeding control would lead to. If someone like Sam Harris or Richard Dawkins was reading this he would be ashamed of what you are writing. What you are proposing is no different than when some ultra right wing Catholics says outrageous things like "we better breed more because if we don't the Muslims will out number us!"

GiC certainly you, an intelligent person can see that such population control such as you are proposing is in a sense  Fundamentalist in nature. You have the whole of the world, evolution, the future of humanity all figured out, and you're going to tell us in an attempt to "save us". You have answers to questions that no one has the answers to. You are in fact proving the very point that many of the New Atheists often make, that Communism, Stalin and places like North Korea commit evils not because they are atheist, or in the name of atheism, but because the "atheism" is really but a cover for a weird sort of pseudo-scientific, pseudo-religious world view.

Atheists are supposed to be rational and compassionate. Most in fact are. Probably more rational than most religious people. I'm sure you are too. As you said you're not suggesting anyone be killed, but yet here you are suggesting irrational things, like how you somehow know population control will in fact "improve" humanity. In reality you have no idea how such a thing would in fact play out. Chaos theory pretty much guarantees that. for all you know it could split off humanity into two species and we could destroy one another. And even if you're scenario worked and in fact humanity got a whole lot "more intelligent", if we lose our compassion in the process is the cost of that loss actually worth it?



Quote
Now some may argue that this is artificial, not natural, selection, which is true. However, we have allowed the stupid and ignorant to benefit from the advances of the intelligent...we give a person with an 80 IQ the same heart medication as the inventor of said heart medication; we have interfered with the processes of natural selection so if we want our species to continue to improve it would be reasonable to create a viable replacement.

We also  "allow" you to benefit from the stronger and more fit, from the inventor of new medications etc. Farmers, who likely don't have as high of an IQ as you do, "allow" you to eat their food and not starve to death. Could you fend for yourself if tomorrow all our technology came crashing down around us? The farmer or the woodsmen certainly could but could you? In such a scenario all of a sudden your IQ might mean absolutely nothing. All the book learning in the world would mean nothing. You claim you want to advance humanity but how is humanity advanced if we begin to so the exact same thing Religious fanatics have done for thousands of years, but we simply substitute "heretics" with "stupid people!" What makes a "stupid" person anyway? Where do you draw the line between someone who "contributes to society" and one who doesn't? And on who's authority do we then decide someone who is "contributing" enough and someone who is not? What about all the geniuses in the world, who for all their brilliance and intellect contributed absolutely nothing to society but horror, death and mayhem. Geniuses invented the atom bomb. So should we now take all "geniuses" and sterilize them? Or maybe just all physicists?

And again, who determines who is contributing and who is not? You? What gives you that authority? Maybe I should be the authority? How do we determine this? By the evolutionary model? Okay. The classic expression of that would be if I kill you with my bare hands I choose, if you kill me with your bare hands then you get to choose! But that doesn't seem like a very rational or intelligent way of solving problems or the dangers our species may face in the future.

Oh yes, you said you're not in favor of killing anyone. conceded. Only for sterilizing. Well maybe our fight to the death can merely be a fight and if I rip off your testicles I win. And vice versa. Chimpanzees our closest relatives do it. Why not us? Of course you're suggesting something painless, with medication and doctors. But it's still the dominance hierarchy. You're still the "alpha male" trying to impose your will upon an "out group". For you the "out group" is people with low IQs. But it's the imposition of one will over another weaker group all for a "cause" of bettering humanity in the far future. Dialogue, discussion about ethics, reproduction, and genetics doesn't get us very far, so why not go with the old stand by; my way or the highway?



Quote

 and overall our the birth rate should be controlled so that we average no more than one child per two adults (two children per two adults allowed to reproduce, the upper 50 percentile)...at least until we get our population under control. The United States has about 2-3 times as many people as we need, most of Europe and Asia is MUCH worse.


Please don't conflate the very real topic of population control with breeding control. They are two very different things and you will do no good to anyone by confusing the two subjects.



Quote
So stop overreacting, I'm not proposing something absurd and radical, I'm just proposing common sense.

First, what you are proposing is quite radical. Many atheists would find you to be on the extreme end of the spectrum here. And some like Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris would probably even suggest that you were proposing a new form of "religious thinking" in the guise of science. This really surprises me actually because while I find I disagree with you often enough, I find your arguments to be sound and quite convincing. But this is just a bit out there.

You seem to be looking for a future "golden age" of humanity where everyone is really, really smart. But at what cost? And what if in fact tomorrow, an alien species came here and decided to sterilize ALL of humanity because they deemed we were all just too stupid to reproduce. Would that be something you'd be in favor of? Maybe you would actually. At least that would be consistent. However it still seems to me just as another form of a dominance hierarchy, which most atheists find to be deplorable in religion, but superimposed upon science. For me the question boils down to "who decides"? By what authority? Science has no "authority" so it(or something) would essentially need a dictator to determine who gets to reproduce and who doesn't, but all for the betterment of humanity of course!

 This reminds of the movie I-Robot where the mother computer reprograms all the robots to turn the world into a dictatorship (with her in charge of course) all so that humanity would be "better off". She doesn't advocate violence or killing anyone either. But most people intuitively "know" that she is the villain, not the hero.  I suppose you would side with the computer though and not Will Smith, which is sci-fi heresy to go against Will Smith! Wink


« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 11:09:20 AM by NorthernPines » Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.118 seconds with 42 queries.