NationStates Jolt Archive

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Go away.

I see no reason why this would be the case.

Would the world be a better place if...

No. This has been another episode of brief answers to stupid questions.

oh sure then all the dislexics, hungovereds, those who missed their morning coffee, those on cold medicine and those who really really had to pee would be executed.

THEN who would greet you at walmart?

Go away.

And please note that expressing your hatred for me just because I disagree with the majority does not add any value to this thread at all. So please refrain from doing so.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

You can score average on an IQ test and still be pretty stupid or just a plain a**hole...

oh sure then all the dislexics, hungovereds, those who missed their morning coffee, those on cold medicine and those who really really had to pee would be executed.

THEN who would greet you at walmart?

Robots with nice happy smiley faces.

*twitches*

MWUAHAHAHAHAHAHA! :p

seriously though, what is the point of this?

This thread would get executed.

And please note that expressing your hatred for me just because I disagree with the majority does not add any value to this thread at all. So please refrain from doing so.

So noted. And why, exactly, would I want to 'add value', as you put it, so such a dull and flimsy topic?

seriously though, what is the point of this?

The point of what?

This thread would get executed.

so there would be something good about it after all

IQ doesn't measure intelligence.

So noted. And why, exactly, would I want to 'add value', as you put it, so such a dull and flimsy topic?

Whats so dull and flimsy about it?

The execution centres couldn't handle such a massive load.

Wait, you'd kill someone over a test that isn't that great anyway?

"Intelligence" doesn't necessarily mean a better species overall, you know... :)

Oh, isn't the scoring on the IQ adjusted so 100 is around average, like on a scale, so you'd be killing at least one fourth of the remaining population every year if the test is adjusted every year?

The execution centres couldn't handle such a massive load.

Yes they can, they just need to be modified.

Humans everywhere used to be masters at execution even before the renaissance, taking into consideration that we have better technology and are more advanced it should be easier.

NS would lose a lot of members....

The point of what?

This, and I greatly hesitate to call it such, "topic". Did you seriously think anyone would pay this....nonsensical discussion a bit of credence?

Ooh, I've seen these before!
They call them "trolls."
Customarily, by keeping their caloric intake to a minimum, they migrate to seek nourishment from other sources.

dont insult my kind b*tch:upyours::headbang::sniper::mp5::gundge::mad:

Ooh, I've seen these before!
They call them "trolls."
Customarily, by keeping their caloric intake to a minimum, they migrate to seek nourishment from other sources.

the sad part is, this line of thinking is nothing new to this particular OP. As much as I'd wish to simply dismiss him as a troll who is doing this just to get a rise out of people....i fear he really believes in it.

You win.

This message is hidden because South Lizasauria is on your ignore list.

I have no idea what you said, nor do I care. Have a wonderful day.

Every time somebody starts a thread with anything to do with intelligence, 90% of the posts in that thread are riddled with attempts to talk up.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

You'd be dead, so yes, I suppose the world would be a better place.

nice one

Death sentences are almost ALWAYS a bad idea. The only time they're acceptable is when the alternative (life in solitary without parole) is very likely to lead to a murder (and no, not murder of the prisoner) that wouldn't happen otherwise.

Yes they can, they just need to be modified.


You mean like large gas chambers where you can fit big groups of people in?

Death sentences are almost ALWAYS a bad idea. The only time they're acceptable is when the alternative (life in solitary without parole) is very likely to lead to a murder (and no, not murder of the prisoner) that wouldn't happen otherwise.

I didn't look carefully at your name at first and I thought the OP was arguing with himself....

nice one

i quoted myself

You mean like large gas chambers where you can fit big groups of people in?

Ooh, and they can be disguised as showers.

dont insult my kind b*tch:upyours::headbang::sniper::mp5::gundge::mad:

the sad part is, this line of thinking is nothing new to this particular OP. As much as I'd wish to simply dismiss him as a troll who is doing this just to get a rise out of people....i fear he really believes in it.

Originally Posted by Skips Old Friend Rick View Post
Ooh, I've seen these before!
They call them "trolls."
Customarily, by keeping their caloric intake to a minimum, they migrate to seek nourishment from other sources.

I never said I supported this hypothetical system, I just simply asked about it.

I demand you apoligze for false accusations.

i quoted myself

awesome!

I never said I supported this hypothetical system, I just simply asked about it.

I demand you apoligze for false accusations.

no

I never said I supported this hypothetical system, I just simply asked about it.

I demand you apoligze for false accusations.

And please note that expressing your hatred for me just because I disagree with the majority does not add any value to this thread at all. So please refrain from doing so.

This certainly implies that you agree with it.

jk

I never said I supported this hypothetical system, I just simply asked about it.

I am obligated to wonder what specifically compelled you to discuss this particular hypothetical system...moreover I will note that your statement:

And please note that expressing your hatred for me just because I disagree with the majority

certainly does suggest that you DO support this hypothetical system...unless, that is, you believe that the majority would...

I demand you apoligze for false accusations.

Ok...well...you keep at it.

This certainly implies that you agree with it.

I knew he/she was only doing it because of past posts and not the ones on this thread which is why I pointed out that it added no value whatsoever.

Something's lowering the average maturity in this thread. I wonder what?

???:confused::confused::confused::confused:

Something's lowering the average maturity in this thread. I wonder what?

I'm guessing the thread itself does that quite well.

:rolleyes:not on my shoes please

i was just saying we with a lot of e's

I am obligated to wonder what specifically compelled you to discuss this particular hypothetical system...moreover I will note that your statement:



certainly does suggest that you DO support this hypothetical system...unless, that is, you believe that the majority would...



Ok...well...you keep at it.


1) my random thoughts are not all bizzare and weird like the rubber one. Some of them are ideas for new types of military RP weaponry and government systems. I also once came up with the idea of the police using tanks instead of copcars for my IC nation. Some however I just use for discussion because I wonder what people will think about it.

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

:rolleyes:

i was just saying we with a lot of e's

Then explain the yellowie substance on my shoe

Every time somebody starts a thread with anything to do with intelligence, 90% of the posts in that thread are riddled with attempts to talk up.

what does "talk up" mean?

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

\begin{devils advocate}
Would it not be better to use such criteria to allow people to reproduce ?
One can do it Larry Niven style: only the people that have superior bodycharactaristics (perfect vision, excellent teeth, brilliant mind etc) OR have made a significant contribution to society OR are able/willing to pay a significant amount of money OR get lucky enough to win a lottery get permission.
\end{devils advocate}

Edit: added the ORs. Must be fair to Niven.

\begin{devils advocate}
Would it not be better to use such criteria to allow people to reproduce ?
One can do it Larry Niven style: only the people that have superior bodycharactaristics (perfect vision, excellent teeth, brilliant mind etc) OR have made a significant contribution to society OR are able/willing to pay a significant amount of money OR get lucky enough to win a lottery get permission.
\end{devils advocate}

Edit: added the ORs. Must be fair to Niven.

or we could to it DAVID niven style and only the truly suave would survive.

I just use for discussion because I wonder what people will think about it.

And that is exactly my point. What exactly did you think would be said here? What discussion did you think would go on here? Did you expect debate? Did you expect arguments? Did you expect people would weigh the pros and cons and argue their positions about the merits of executing dumb people?

How could you NOT know what people would think about this? What, truly, did you expect to come from this?

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell.

suuuuuuure they do. People all want christians dead, but they're real sneaky and would never actually say it, but you just know, right?

And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

Find three.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Would the world be a better place if the Nazis had won WWII and those who scored lower than a certain amount on "German-ness" tests were all sentenced to death to make sure only the ubermenschen survived?

Discuss.

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

Such beliefs say a lot more about the person who believes it. Why? It's called 'projection'. Basically, you think in one way and assume, wrongfully, that others think in the same way. For example, if you know that you're not trustworthy, you will have an extremely difficult time trusting others.

Likewise, if you think that all communists and stupid people ought to be executed, you are likely to think that they think the same of you.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Even though I have no doubt you'd be in the first group to get shot, I would oppose this.

*waves bye bye to OP*

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

well at least you didnt do that rush limbaugh thing and claim that that IS what the majority of us would want and then cut us to shreds for being hypocrits.

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

I admit I have toyed with the thought how much better the world would be without the lying and deceiving Christians, yes. The ones that spread lies, promote falsehoods and use reasoning they know to be flawed just to trick others into following their beliefs.
I however have no problem with honest Christians. Just with the liars.

And that is exactly my point. What exactly did you think would be said here? What discussion did you think would go on here? Did you expect debate? Did you expect arguments? Did you expect people would weigh the pros and cons and argue their positions about the merits of executing dumb people?

How could you NOT know what people would think about this? What, truly, did you expect to come from this?



suuuuuuure they do. People all want christians dead, but they're real sneaky and would never actually say it, but you just know, right?



Find three.

1) This is NSG people come in variety and support or condemn various things here.

2) Throughout history they did, and many posters here slipped up and revealed their secret bloodlust.

3) I would but that'd fall into defamatory. Just take a look at the conservapedia threads and note that even though conservatives are backing down and making a safe haven for their beliefs (without forcing them on others) the lefties are attacking them and saying that they're dillusional and that everyone should become a lefty that way they'd be sane even though if everyone became a lefty it'd make people just the opposite. And also note that mentioning Christianity is like waving a red flag in front of a bull here and that encourages tons of violent and brutal comments aimed at Christians. I also have a hunch that you know all this but are pretending not to.

Copypasta!
Would the world be a better place if there were yearly political compass tests and those who scored a certain distance from the center were all sentenced to death to make sure only the moderates survived?

Discuss.

1) This is NSG people come in variety and support or condemn various things here.

2) Throughout history they did, and many posters here slipped up and revealed their secret bloodlust.

3) I would but that'd fall into defamatory. Just take a look at the conservapedia threads and note that even though conservatives are backing down and making a safe haven for their beliefs (without forcing them on others) the lefties are attacking them and saying that they're dillusional and that everyone should become a lefty that way they'd be sane even though if everyone became a lefty it'd make people just the opposite. And also note that mentioning Christianity is like waving a red flag in front of a bull here and that encourages tons of violent and brutal comments aimed at Christians. I also have a hunch that you know all this but are pretending not to.

I'm not doing shit. You made the claim, back it the hell up. And until you are prepared to back up what you say with actual fact, don't say it.

Prove it, or shut it. You "know" what people have said? Find it.

Copypasta!
Would the world be a better place if there were yearly political compass tests and those who scored a certain distance from the center were all sentenced to death to make sure only the moderates survived?

Discuss.

Now I would support that, all extremism did throughout history was cause mass murder and suffering on a massive scale. Think about it. Over a billion died indirectly due to extremism from the beginning of civilization to now.

Stage 1: Execute everyone with an IQ of 135.

Stage 2: Execute everyone who isn't fit enough to run a marathon.

Stage 3: Execute a random 5% sample of the survivors to weed out those who are just plain unlucky.

Stage 4: Execute everyone who thought that the new Star Wars trilogy was better than the original.

Stage 5: Execute everyone who has ever referred to Tolkein's Lord of the Rings as 'the book of the film'.

Stage 6: Wait one year, then repeat.

I admit I have toyed with the thought how much better the world would be without the lying and deceiving Christians, yes. The ones that spread lies, promote falsehoods and use reasoning they know to be flawed just to trick others into following their beliefs.
I however have no problem with honest Christians. Just with the liars.There are Christians who are not liars? But their god is not real, so how can they not be liars?

Now I would support that.

Thanks. You just proved my point.

We kill people to prevent the killing of people. For freedom!

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

If straight-jackets had pockets in you'd lose quite a bit...

I'm not doing shit. You made the claim, back it the hell up. And until you are prepared to back up what you say with actual fact, don't say it.

Prove it, or shut it. You "know" what people have said? Find it.

Still looking for it.

There are Christians who are not liars? But their god is not real, so how can they not be liars?

They can simply say they believe in God ? Hell - even a young earth creationist that says "I have seen all the evidence, I agree that everything points to my beliefs being wrong - but I still choose to hold them" is fine by me. Honest disagreements make life interesting after all.

Stage 1: Execute everyone with an IQ of 135.

Stage 2: Execute everyone who isn't fit enough to run a marathon.

Stage 3: Execute a random 5% sample of the survivors to weed out those who are just plain unlucky.

Stage 4: Execute everyone who thought that the new Star Wars trilogy was better than the original.

Stage 5: Execute everyone who has ever referred to Tolkein's Lord of the Rings as 'the book of the film'.

Stage 6: Wait one year, then repeat.Stage 1: Execute everyone with an IQ less than 150.

Stage 2: Execute everyone who has ever referred to Tolkien's Lord of the Rings as 'the book of the film'. Also execute everyone who can't write 'Tolkien'.

Stage 3: Execute everyone who thought that the new Star Wars trilogy was better than the original.

Stage 4: Execute everyone who isn't fit enough to run a marathon.

Stage 5: Execute a random 5% sample of the survivors to weed out those who are just plain unlucky.

Stage 6: Wait one year, then repeat.

Thanks. You just proved my point.

We kill people to prevent the killing of people. For freedom!

You make it sound bad. By your logic, D-Day was bad even though it resulted in France's liberation, the Allies campaigns in the war would be bad even though they stopped the axis from infringing on the fundamental rights of man. By your logic a policeman gunning down a crazed phycho in something something high so he stops his rampage would be bad. The list goes on.

They can simply say they believe in God ? Hell - even a young earth creationist that says "I have seen all the evidence, I agree that everything points to my beliefs being wrong - but I still choose to hold them" is fine by me. Honest disagreements make life interesting after all.Only where disagreement makes any sense.

Only where disagreement makes any sense.

I disagree ;)

You make it sound bad.

Killing people is bad, always, all the time, no matter what. Sometimes it's necessary, but that doesn't make it good.

Originally Posted by United Beleriand View Post
There are Christians who are not liars? But their god is not real, so how can they not be liars?

Since atheists have no proof of the absense of God everyone they forcefully indorcrinate makes them a liar.

You make it sound bad. By your logic, D-Day was bad even though it resulted in France's liberation, the Allies campaigns in the war would be bad even though they stopped the axis from infringing on the fundamental rights of man. By your logic a policeman gunning down a crazed phycho in something something high so he stops his rampage would be bad. The list goes on.

Liberating France involved killing civilians, such as in the strategic bombing campaigns as well as ordinary, day to day combat "collateral casualties."

Shooting a crazed psycho is thus different because it doesn't involve the death of innocents.

You speak of the fundamental rights of man, but I think I have a right to life, a right you would advocate removing if I happened to live in say, Dresden, 1944.

You make it sound bad.

I make murdering innocent people merely because of their intelligence or political alignment "sound bad'?

By your logic, D-Day was bad even though it resulted in France's liberation, the Allies campaigns in the war would be bad even though they stopped the axis from infringing on the fundamental rights of man.

You're going to bring in fundamental rights of man when talking about killing people because they're off of center?

WTF?

By your logic a policeman gunning down a crazed phycho in something something high so he stops his rampage would be bad. The list goes on.

Try using some examples that were not:

1) a war against enemy SOLDIERS
2) acts of self defense

because none of those are what you're talking about. You're talking about killing people because of their beliefs. Not defense of self. Not defense of nation. Not for the great good of protecting freedoms. That doesn't compare to D Day, that doens't compare to shooting a dangerous criminal.

The best example I can come up of other examples of killing people because of their beliefs to compare was (and pardon the godwin everyone) was the holocaust.

And yeah, that was pretty fucking bad too.

Killing people is bad, always, all the time, no matter what. Sometimes it's necessary, but that doesn't make it good.

So killing nazis in a concentration camp allies stormed is bad? And stopping armed terrorists who are going to kill children in a village to get people to meet their agenda is bad?

Since atheists have no proof of the absense of God everyone they forcefully indorcrinate makes them a liar.

Atheists don't "forcefully indoctrinate," and your sentence doesn't even make sense.

Do try to keep up SL, I and others are WTFPWNING your bigoted nazi-esque eugenics post AND your irrelevant side-commentaries and you've yet to notice.

Since atheists have no proof of the absense of God everyone they forcefully indorcrinate makes them a liar.

which by the same statement is true for every single religion on the fucking planet.

I disagree ;)Yeah, just as you can disagree with others and maintain that the moon is square. You seem to confuse disagreement with ignorance. Christians do not maintain their position just because they disagree, but because they choose to not want to know any better.

I make murdering innocent people merely because of their intelligence or political alignment "sound bad'?

Note that I didn't agree with the intelligence on I was just asking about it as stated earlier and further note that people too far from the enter are RARELY innocent because they end up bombing schools or brainwashing or causing bloody crusades, wars and riots and they demoralise the populace. That is NOT innocent.

Since atheists have no proof of the absense of God everyone they forcefully indorcrinate makes them a liar.

Unless you're referring to China, atheists do not forcibly indoctrinate anyone.

Since atheists have no proof of the absense of God everyone they forcefully indorcrinate makes them a liar.
Since Christians have no proof of the absence of non-Jew-ish Gods everyone they indoctrinate makes them liars.

Since atheists have no proof of the absense of God everyone they forcefully indorcrinate makes them a liar.

Is this even English?

Yeah, just as you can disagree with others and maintain that the moon is square. You seem to confuse disagreement with ignorance. Christians do not maintain their position just because they disagree, but because they choose to not want to know any better.

oh christ, give it a rest for once, can you show up in one SINGLE thread without your typical "blarg, christians are fools because they believe different than I do, blarg!" bullshit.

have you tried, maybe talking about....something ELSE, for a change? Maybe in a thread that has absolutly nothing to do with your particular raison d'etre?

Seriously, a one trick pony gets old after you've figured out the trick.

Unless you're referring to China, atheists do not forcibly indoctrinate anyone.

Well then how come they try so hard to remove religious rights when in government and they try to make others atheist more that Baptists try to make everyone Baptist?

So killing nazis in a concentration camp allies stormed is bad? And stopping armed terrorists who are going to kill children in a village to get people to meet their agenda is bad?

Yes. Less so than the alternative, perhaps, but still bad. You see, nazis and terrorists are people too, and there's this crazy idea of people being equal, maybe you've heard of it?

Also execute everyone who can't write 'Tolkien'.

Ok, my bad. :D

Note that I didn't agree with the intelligence on I was just asking about it as stated earlier and further note that people too far from the enter are RARELY innocent because they end up bombing schools or brainwashing or causing bloody crusades, wars and riots and they demoralise the populace. That is NOT innocent.

do you even read what you post anymore? Do you think about it in advance? do you pause and think "wait, maybe this might sound.....totally insane"?

Or does the BS just kinda....flow?

Of course, if I wanted to watch your head explode, I'd point out that you are and ADMITTED fascist, and fascism is inherently and extreme right of center ideology. And since you've stated that those off from center should be killed, and admitted to believing in an extreme right wing philosophy....when are you gonna off yourself, for the benefit of society?

Is this even English?

Yes it is blatantly obvious that it is English.

Well then how come they try so hard to remove religious rights when in government and they try to make others atheist more that Baptists try to make everyone Baptist?

Which religious rights are atheists removing in western countries?

In the UK most public schools are run by religious groups or preach a certain religion, but there isn't even one school which advocates atheism.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Every time eugenics has been implemented, it has sucked. Sucked ass. No different with this idea, it sucks ass.

Well then how come they try so hard to remove religious rights when in government and they try to make others atheist more that Baptists try to make everyone Baptist?

um...how many atheists can you name in the US government?

oh christ, give it a rest for once, can you show up in one SINGLE thread without your typical "blarg, christians are fools because they believe different than I do, blarg!" bullshit.

have you tried, maybe talking about....something ELSE, for a change? Maybe in a thread that has absolutly nothing to do with your particular raison d'etre?

Seriously, a one trick pony gets old after you've figured out the trick.Christian ignorance is no trick. It's a life style.

Well then how come they try so hard to remove religious rights when in government and they try to make others atheist more that Baptists try to make everyone Baptist?

Eh, atheists aren't like the borg, they're not all the same. Nor are baptists.

Simple really:

NO.

Yes it is blatantly obvious that it is English.

I suggest you look up the words "blantantly", "obvious" and "is"

Christian ignorance is no trick. It's a life style.

so I'll take that as a "no"

Which religious rights are atheists removing in western countries?

In the UK most public schools are run by religious groups or preach a certain religion, but there isn't even one school which advocates atheism.

There are organizations that want all references to Christianity on old US artifacts and traditions removed or made illegal.They want to have people who say "under God" in the pledge of allegiance made illegal.

um...how many atheists can you name in the US government?

Everyone in the demacrat party.

There are organizations that want all references to Christianity on old US artifacts and traditions removed or made illegal.They want to have people who say "under God" in the pledge of allegiance made illegal.

Here you go again talking without knowing.

Find one. Find me one organization that would make saying "under god" illegal. Go on, find it. You said, back it up. Prove it. If you are so sure that such organizations exist, find me one organization that has stated this.

Put up, or shut up.

Christian ignorance is no trick. It's a life style.

Blah blah hate religion blah blah jews are evil blah blah...

Yeah, we've heard you say it ad naseum. Point being...why don't you say something else for a change.

There are organizations that want all references to Christianity on old US artifacts and traditions removed or made illegal.They want to have people who say "under God" in the pledge of allegiance made illegal.And that's bad?

There are organizations that want all references to Christianity on old US artifacts and traditions removed or made illegal.They want to have people who say "under God" in the pledge of allegiance made illegal.

How the fuck does one go about making people illegal? :confused:

Everyone in the demacrat party.

I'm sorry, what is this organization you are refering to as the "demacrat" party?

If you mean democratic party...let's see, clinton is a southern baptist, obama is protestant I believe, leiberman is jewish, keneedy is catholic, and that's the first few off the top of my head.

See, this is what you get what you type without thinking. Fail.

Blah blah hate religion blah blah jews are evil blah blah...

Yeah, we've heard you say it ad naseum. Point being...why don't you say something else for a change.What should I say? That religion is a good thing? Or that Jews did not fabricate the biblical god?
Do you want me to lie for the sake of political correctness?

There are organizations that want all references to Christianity on old US artifacts and traditions removed or made illegal.They want to have people who say "under God" in the pledge of allegiance made illegal.

Ah, so you're one of those people who thinks that it's your right to force your religion on everyone else, and that anyone who objects is infringing on your rights, yes?

You're attacking the rights of atheists by trying to make them pledge allegiance to something they don't believe in, we just want equal rights.

How the fuck does one go about making people illegal? :confused:

With the Evil Atheist Conspiracy, all things are possible. ;)

Ah, so you're one of those people who thinks that it's your right to force your religion on everyone else, and that anyone who objects is infringing on your rights, yes?

You're attacking the rights of atheists by trying to make them pledge allegiance to something they don't believe in, we just want equal rights.

No we have a right to religion as long as its not forced, atheism is a kind of religion and they're trying to force it on everybody.

And secondly why can't those who beleive in God have 'under God' and those who don't leave it out. Why do they try to make it illegal?

What should I say? That religion is a good thing? Or that Jews did not fabricate the biblical god?
Do you want me to lie for the sake of political correctness?

or maybe just, I dunno, talk about something ELSE for a change? Mainly because there are rules about derailing threads, even in those as...silly as this one, and since this topic doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the verasity of christianity...your comments are kinda irrelevant to it all..

Are you just incapable of talking about other things? Have you gotten so wrapped up in your little crusade that you neglected forming opinions on other topics?

Stage 1: Execute everyone with an IQ of 135.

Stage 2: Execute everyone who isn't fit enough to run a marathon.

Stage 3: Execute a random 5% sample of the survivors to weed out those who are just plain unlucky.

Stage 4: Execute everyone who thought that the new Star Wars trilogy was better than the original.

Stage 5: Execute everyone who has ever referred to Tolkein's Lord of the Rings as 'the book of the film'.

Stage 6: Wait one year, then repeat.

cant we start with #s 4&5?

With the Evil Atheist Conspiracy, all things are possible. ;)

Just as the NWO can control us all... ;)

Now I see.

And secondly why can't those who beleive in God have 'under God' and those who don't leave it out. Why do they try to make it illegal?

I'm still waiting for you to show me one organization that would make saying under god illegal.

Everyone in the demacrat party.

There is one elected atheist in America. Does he comprise this mysterious demacrat party?

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

The internet would be empty and that would be sad. ;)

Every time eugenics has been implemented, it has sucked. Sucked ass. No different with this idea, it sucks ass.

Me to idea:

"Yeah, you're an ass sucker. You go around, find people's asses, and suck them." :D

Cookie for reference.

do you even read what you post anymore? Do you think about it in advance? do you pause and think "wait, maybe this might sound.....totally insane"?

I really don't think he does.

I find it very amusing though that a member of the nsg "Jew Crew" is sitting here advocating Nazi Science.

or maybe just, I dunno, talk about something ELSE for a change? Mainly because there are rules about derailing threads, even in those as...silly as this one, and since this topic doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the verasity of christianity...your comments are kinda irrelevant to it all..

Are you just incapable of talking about other things? Have you gotten so wrapped up in your little crusade that you neglected forming opinions on other topics?this thread is about eliminating dumb people. and the instant connexion to christians wasn't even made by me. but the world would be a better place indeed if it was freed from certain dumb followers of the abrahamic religions.

No we have a right to religion as long as its not forced, atheism is a kind of religion and they're trying to force it on everybody.

And secondly why can't those who beleive in God have 'under God' and those who don't leave it out. Why do they try to make it illegal?
Don't be dumb.

Atheism is a religion the same way that bald is a hair color.

Also, it's not about being legal or illegal. It's about what the pledge officially is. If the government law specifically says that our nation is "under God," then they are saying that the official government position is that our nation can be described by that phrase. A state endorsement of religion, if you will. Now, if it said "without God," that would be an official endorsement of Atheism. But if the Pledge of Allegiance doesn't mention it either way, then it is religion neutral, not anti-religion.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

What if you're one of the people who scored lower than the certain amount?

Judging from this thread, I'd advise you to hope such a law never becomes implemented, for your sake.

I'm still waiting for you to show me one organization that would make saying under god illegal.

Atheist want to go to the next level with the killing them all bit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=483572) If they got into power kiss right to religion good bye.

No we have a right to religion as long as its not forced, atheism is a kind of religion and they're trying to force it on everybody.

You're not making sense. Atheism isn't a religion and nobody's trying to force it on you.

And secondly why can't those who beleive in God have 'under God' and those who don't leave it out. Why do they try to make it illegal?

Firstly, nobody's trying to make it 'illegal'! If the official pledge changed and you continued to say the old one you wouldn't be arrested or prosecuted.

Having "under god" in the pledge constitutes a state endorsement of religion and implies that atheists are unpatriotic. How would you like it read "one nation, not believing in god"? The only way to make the pledge neutral is by leaving god out.

You're not making sense. Atheism isn't a religion and nobody's trying to force it on you.

Well how come they're all pushy and try to make everyone beleive there isn't a God when it's better for some people for them to belive in God?

The idea of God is the reason some people are good and philanthropic and making everyone beleive atheism by spouting off "there is no God" all the time could destroy the best in people God brings out.

Well how come they're all pushy and try to make everyone beleive there isn't a God when it's better for some people for them to belive in God?

The idea of God is the reason some people are good and philanthropic and making everyone beleive atheism by spouting off "there is no God" all the time could destroy the best in people God brings out.people who need god to be good are not good people.

Well how come they're all pushy and try to make everyone beleive there isn't a God when it's better for some people for them to belive in God?

The idea of God is the reason some people are good and philanthropic and making everyone beleive atheism by spouting off "there is no God" all the time could destroy the best in people God brings out.

Overall, theists are far more pushy than atheists. When was the last time atheists preached their beliefs in the street or came door to door?

... and nobody's trying to force it on you.No, that's called educating ;)

What should I say? That religion is a good thing? Or that Jews did not fabricate the biblical god?
Do you want me to lie for the sake of political correctness?

No, I want you, as was clear enough in that post, to shut the fuck up about it, and perhaps, just once, discuss something else.

Or are you really that one-dimensional?

Well how come they're all pushy and try to make everyone beleive there isn't a God when it's better for some people for them to belive in God?

The idea of God is the reason some people are good and philanthropic and making everyone beleive atheism by spouting off "there is no God" all the time could destroy the best in people God brings out.

Discussion and forcing beliefs are two different things. Atheists are willing to discuss religious ideas. It's Theists who consistently try to force their beliefs on others using the government. Also, people's morality does not truly come from God, or these people would advocate Slavery, genocide and intolerance, like a strict reading of the Bible suggests. But no-- they only take the "good" parts from the Bible, things like "Love thy neighbor." That suggests that they have an independant criteria that they use to decide which tenets they like, one that does NOT come from religion.

I really don't think he does.

I find it very amusing though that a member of the nsg "Jew Crew" is sitting here advocating Nazi Science.

What's the NSG "Jew Crew"?

Atheist want to go to the next level with the killing them all bit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=483572) If they got into power kiss right to religion good bye.

1. Just because one atheist thinks that it doesn't mean we all do. :rolleyes:

2. That diatribe isn't even directed at Christians, it's directed at people who are trying to turn the US into a totalitarian theocracy.

Atheist want to go to the next level with the killing them all bit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=483572) If they got into power kiss right to religion good bye.

thats bullshit

Atheist want to go to the next level with the killing them all bit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=483572) If they got into power kiss right to religion good bye.

I'm feeling generous. That's one poster. Find two more.

1. Just because one atheist thinks that it doesn't mean we all do. :rolleyes:

2. That diatribe isn't even directed at Christians, it's directed at people who are trying to turn the US into a totalitarian theocracy.

B-but... that person wants to deny the rights of theocrats to practice their beliefs by forcing them on other people! It's a fundamental right to kill people for not practicing Christianity!

1. Just because one atheist thinks that it doesn't mean we all do. :rolleyes:

2. That diatribe isn't even directed at Christians, it's directed at people who are trying to turn the US into a totalitarian theocracy.

They are basically saying that if the Christians who want a totalitarian theocracy piss them off then ALL Christians will suffer.

B-but... that person wants to deny the rights of theocrats to practice their beliefs by forcing them on other people! It's a fundamental right to kill people for not practicing Christianity!

Will nobody think of the children? :eek:

I'm feeling generous. That's one poster. Find two more.

Nope, not counting it. I asked for three posters on NSG. That wasn't an NSG poster. That was an NSG poster quoted something posted on another cite.

We're still at 0.

I can't believe the OP would advocate their own death...

I can't believe the OP would advocate their own death...

Well, some people are suicidal. Maybe he should get help.

No, I want you, as was clear enough in that post, to shut the fuck up about it, and perhaps, just once, discuss something else.

Or are you really that one-dimensional?The only important factors for the survival of humanity are saving the environment and getting rid of ideology and religion. All other considerations are merely superficial and need not really be discussed, at least not by me.

They are basically saying that if the Christians who want a totalitarian theocracy piss them off then ALL Christians will suffer.

It's entitled "A Word of Warning to Christian Dominionists and Reconstructionists" and the threats are directed at "you". Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it includes other Christians?

What's more, do you realise that quoting ONE PERSON does not prove that all atheists think that way?

I can't believe the OP would advocate their own death...

I think this whole thread is a cry for help actually.

The only important factors for the survival of humanity are saving the environment and getting rid of ideology and religion. All other considerations are merely superficial and need not really be discussed, at least not by me.

so yes, you really are that one dimensional.

It's entitled "A Word of Warning to Christian Dominionists and Reconstructionists" and the threats are directed at "you". Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it includes other Christians?

What's more, do you realise that quoting ONE PERSON does not prove that all atheists think that way?

You naive fool. If one atheist with little inluence says something, then it clearly represents what the majority of atheists think.

On the other hand, if a Christian preacher with thousands of members makes bigoted comments, then it's just some crazy fringe group.

Atheist want to go to the next level with the killing them all bit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=483572) If they got into power kiss right to religion good bye.
My word... You just made your own list there :)
I can't believe the OP would advocate their own death...
Yup :D

so yes, you really are that one dimensional.no. focus does not equal range.

What's the NSG "Jew Crew"?

Basically, pro-Israeli, pro-Zionist. A good number of the Islamophobes and right-wing authoritarians in there.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Have you seen Forrest Gump? It shows that a man's smarts cannot be completely measured by his IQ.

You naive fool. If one atheist with little inluence says something, then it clearly represents what the majority of atheists think.

On the other hand, if a Christian preacher with thousands of members makes bigoted comments, then it's just some crazy fringe group.

The Ministry of Truth has analysed this DoubleThink and found it to be double-plus GoodSpeak.

Basically, pro-Israeli, pro-Zionist. A good number of the Islamophobes and right-wing authoritarians in there.

Are they still around? I thought Designated Marksman/Captain Pooby was the only active member.

It's entitled "A Word of Warning to Christian Dominionists and Reconstructionists" and the threats are directed at "you". Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it includes other Christians?

What's more, do you realise that quoting ONE PERSON does not prove that all atheists think that way?

For if you persist in trying to hijack the governments of this nation - local, state and federal - so as to remake this great land into a theocratic nightmare, we will destroy you: we will burn you out of your homes and businesses; we will shoot you down in the streets; we will march on and sieze the major cities and capitols across the land. We will make war on you until either you have surrendered or none of you are left alive. We know how to do this, because we are Americans too, and have done it before: to each other, to Germany, to Japan. You are not the only ones who can become ferocious in the pursuit of victory.

And after such a war? Assuming you were intelligent enough to surrender, there will be no great reconciliation as there was after the last Civil War. All of you will be offered two choices: exile or death. Because at that point we will have had enough of you, will want to be shut of you and your meanness and cancerous spirits for ever and all time. So in your multitudes you shall either leave forever or perish.
I pledge all of the above with my back, my heart and even my soul. I may lose the latter in helping to exact so terrible a cost from you, but at least I will win my country.


Hmm... and how exactly do they plan on discerning the normal moderate Christians from the ones that want a theocracy? In the war this evil man described with cities being stormed and people being shot in the streets how will it be possible? I think this man is targeting ALL Christians because of what the Theocrats want. Its not easy discerning the the theocrats from the moderate ones, what more if theres a war going on? Trust me I know both moderate Christians and theorcratic ones, you can only tell once you get to know them and that won't be possible in a war.

Hmm... and how exactly do they plan on discerning the normal moderate Christians from the ones that want a theocracy?

Probably by looking at the ones who are doing things to try to put in place a theocracy...

Moreover i note that you are not familiar with the concept of metaphor

Hmm... and how exactly do they plan on discerning the normal moderate Christians from the ones that want a theocracy? In the war this evil man described with cities being stormed and people being shot in the streets how will it be possible? I think this man is targeting ALL Christians because of what the Theocrats want. Its not easy discerning the the theocrats from the moderate ones, what more if theres a war going on? Trust me I know both moderate Christians and theorcratic ones, you can only tell once you get to know them and that won't be possible in a war.

You can't just look at somebody and see if they're a christian either. Hell, most people I know are surprised to learn that I am not one when they first find out.

What's the NSG "Jew Crew"?

A group of self-proclaimed "friends of Israel", the kind that feels that the State of Israel can do no wrong, every palestinian death is just, and that any good muslim is a dead muslim. You know, the worst lot you can find on the side of Israel, the one that creates the bad taste in your mouth when you defend Israel on the forum because you've got a fear that you can be likened to them.

In short... Nah, I won't sink that low. I'll leave it at that.

Hmm... and how exactly do they plan on discerning the normal moderate Christians from the ones that want a theocracy? In the war this evil man described with cities being stormed and people being shot in the streets how will it be possible? I think this man is targeting ALL Christians because of what the Theocrats want. Its not easy discerning the the theocrats from the moderate ones, what more if theres a war going on? Trust me I know both moderate Christians and theorcratic ones, you can only tell once you get to know them and that won't be possible in a war.

1. You can't tell a Christian from a non-Christian until you get to know them.

2. Given that 80+% of Americans are Christians, it's fairly obvious that the blogger doesn't think that there are enough atheists/agnostics to win a war like that, no? It only makes sense if it's refering specifically to theocrats.

3. If it was threatening all Christians then it would have been addressed to all Christians.

4. You still haven't produced a scrap of evidence that 'you' changes in meaning half-way through the text.

5. You still don't seem to realise that this one man doesn't represent all atheists! He doesn't even support your ridiculous claim that atheists want to wipe out religion, because he's supporting democracy and pluralism!

Are they still around?
I hope not. One-sided fanatics are never needed, not on either side.

A group of self-proclaimed "friends of Israel", the kind that feels that the State of Israel can do no wrong, every palestinian death is just, and that any good muslim is a dead muslim. You know, the worst lot you can find on the side of Israel, the one that creates the bad taste in your mouth when you defend Israel on the forum because you've got a fear that you can be likened to them.

And don't forget, the ones that believe any criticism of Israel means you're anti-semitic!

You can't just look at somebody and see if they're a christian either. Hell, most people I know are surprised to learn that I am not one when they first find out.

I can tell by your sig.

1. You can't tell a Christian from a non-Christian until you get to know them.or see them going to church, or read what they write on internet forums...

Nope, not counting it. I asked for three posters on NSG. That wasn't an NSG poster. That was an NSG poster quoted something posted on another cite.

We're still at 0.

Ah, so we are. Oh well, thems the breaks SL.

or see them going to church, or read what they write on internet forums...

Pfft. I've gone to churches, Bible groups... I'm not Christian at all.

And I've also argued Christian viewpoints... not trying to come across as Christian but to appeal to Christians... at any rate, you might easily make the mistaken conclusion from such that I too was Christian.

You really need to do more than just assume.

I suck at math, would I be killed?

or see them going to church, or read what they write on internet forums...

I know plenty of Christians who only go to church a couple of times a year.

I know plenty of Christians who only go to church a couple of times a year.just to be seen, huh? I know that sort

Meh, enough with all the generalizatons. I'm Catholic and I don't care whether or not you believe in God; I don't think you ought to say "under God" in the pledge, and I don't think you should be forced to pledge at all.

Atheists are not trying to destroy religion -- they just don't want it crammed down their throats.

I don't think you're amoral if you're an atheist, and I've known plenty of devout Ultimate Assholes.

I don't think you're amoral if you're an atheist, and I've known plenty of devout Ultimate Assholes.

For an example, we turn to Fred Phelps.

Now I must go shower. *Runs*

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea should lead the way ... by killing themselves.

*gavel*

... Atheists are not trying to destroy religion -- ...that depends on whether they see religion as a bad thing and damaging to humanity or just don't care.

that depends on whether they see religion as a bad thing and damaging to humanity or just don't care.

You aren't representative of all atheists. You might be representative of anti-religionists, I don't have a frame of reference.

In the scenario posited by the OP, a university degree would be worthless.

Also, stupidity doesn't make one a bad person.

You aren't representative of all atheists. You might be representative of anti-religionists, I don't have a frame of reference.I'm not an anti-religionist. I'm not necessarily an atheist either. And I wasn't talking about me.

If I were giving out IQ tests and executing the people who scored too low, I'd also take the time to execute the ones who score too high. Unauthorized intelligence can be frightfully dangerous to the sort of government that would do such a thing. *nod*

If I were giving out IQ tests and executing the people who scored too low, I'd also take the time to execute the ones who score too high. Unauthorized intelligence can be frightfully dangerous to the sort of government that would do such a thing. *nod*

I'd love to see the kind of IQ test a government lead by you would give.

I'd love to see the kind of IQ test a government lead by you would give.How much lead does he have?

I'd love to see the kind of IQ test a government lead by you would give.

He means that said government would be morally outrageous to almost anyone who actually passed the test, and as such, running a totalitarian state sans revolution is much easier if you have all the geniuses.

Yes they can, they just need to be modified.

Humans everywhere used to be masters at execution even before the renaissance, taking into consideration that we have better technology and are more advanced it should be easier.
NO.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/birkenau-tor.jpg

I'd love to see the kind of IQ test a government lead by you would give.

They would be held in a chair suspended over a vat of pudding. :)

I can't believe the OP would advocate their own death...

Hey buddy I know you hijacked it first, but I want this thread back on course to where it was scheduled to go, or I'm gonna open a big can of curry jokes and bring this thread down!!

You did bring the curry jokes didn't you? ...?
No, you were supposed to bring the curry jokes. All I've got is this gavel, can't hijack anything with that ...

*tries to hide from real hijackers*

They would be held in a chair suspended over a vat of pudding. :)

I'm not stalking you, really I'm not. I put this synchronicity thing down to me drinking on a monday morning, 'n' therefore thinking almost exactly like you.

I'm sure we can reach some compromise. Curried pudding?

No who says only smart people who cram study non stop are superior. If they did that Einstien would have been executed.

Besides be a lota dead people... a lot

Curried pudding?

:eek:

:eek:

It's OK, LG. Here's a mud pie. Come on back to us.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

gosh, you really are an astonishingly silly person.

gosh, you really are an astonishingly silly person.

Hey I'm part Filipino. :D

that's no excuse..

wait, just thinking of the filipinos i know, they are rather silly. but one of them is also cool. the generalisation doesn't work.. no excuse.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

If this was the case, the world would have all ready witnessed the first Presidential Execution ever.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

I don't think so. It matters what you do with what you got, not how much you got. Think of Forest Gump.
Oh, and supposing the world was a "better place", it most certainly would NOT be worth price.
Now piss-off Sir Troll.

Edit: oh, wait you're that facist-dude. Never-mind, you're not a troll, you're serious.

Yeah, just as you can disagree with others and maintain that the moon is square. You seem to confuse disagreement with ignorance. Christians do not maintain their position just because they disagree, but because they choose to not want to know any better.

*Some* do, yes. Many others do not. I do not know which group is bigger, nor do I really care. As long as they do not withold anyone else access to the information they ignore, nor deliberately provide false information to others - they can believe the moon is square and inhabited by purpleskinned clones of the great Xenu for all I care.

As an aside: your generalisations reduce your credibility. I advise you to study thine enemy some more.

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.

So, basically they agree with the title.
Sorry, I couldn't help it. :)

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

What about the typical bell curve distribution of IQ results? Each year the results would get scaled up, causing even more to die.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived? Who makes the IQ tests?



Question 42:
Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?
a) yes
b) no

[note to examiner; on yes deduct 50 points and schedule immediate termination]

What about the typical bell curve distribution of IQ results? Each year the results would get scaled up, causing even more to die.It's doubtfull the distribution would remain bell curved. If you kill the lower 50%, you should have a half-bell curve the next year. Unless for some unexplicable reason a lot of people suddenly get dumber to compensate for the sudden gap in intellectual poverty.

It's doubtfull the distribution would remain bell curved. If you kill the lower 50%, you should have a half-bell curve the next year. Unless for some unexplicable reason a lot of people suddenly get dumber to compensate for the sudden gap in intellectual poverty.

It'd eventually re-bell (so not a word), but not within a year.

It'd be somewhat amusing (morality aside) to see a country halve its population each year until the last, smartest, guy is left (although if I were him I'd have pulled an Einstein and emigrated), so rather than having a stateless society, all you'd have would be a societyless state.

Again, though, eugenics is stupid. See what I did there?

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.
No. That would be horrible! I'd be even more neurotic, paralyzed with fear about my score. And anyway, you can be extremely smart, but have a low IQ. It only tests a few kinds of intelligence.

Hey I'm part Filipino. :D

I'm part human and another part human!

If this was the case, the world would have all ready witnessed the first Presidential Execution ever.Oh, every nation should have a head of state rolling every now and then...

For the sake of argument: suppose intelligence is a desired trait in our subjects - excuse me - in all our subjects. Why would we want to regulate this ourselves?

Suppose we have a not so bright man. Chances are that he would not be so very succesfull in live, aren't they? This could lead that he would meet and marry a not so very bright woman. And perhaps - if they have children - they would not be so very bright either.

So they would not be so very succesfull themselves. But, is this a bad thing? Perhaps they think of themselves that they are very succesfull in life, because they could afford the big screen tv, or were capable to buy that two bedroom condo, or drive their favourite (red, ofcourse) pickup-truck. That they have to make payments for the rest of their lives, might seem natural to them, so they would be happy. And personnally, I prefere a happy workforce, to an unhappy one.

Intelligent people tend not to be content in life if they have to perform tasks beneath their abilities. Are you going to clean toilets for a living? I wouldn't want to.

So, I say, don't kill off the less intelligent, they serve their purpose.

Hermes, Ruler of the Holy Empire of Cromlach

Kill all with an IQ under a certain limit... hell yeah! Tech support would be so fscking easy! it would be a dream!

SCNR

Executed?No.The school systen should be re-tooled to allow students to follow their strengths and interests.Those with poor test scores and no interest in school and no ability to think on their own(No common sense) could be apprenticed to work programs until they "graduate" to a real job(Factory,MCDs,Wal-Mart).Those with high test scores,an interest in learning,and possessing an ability to quickly adapt to new situations would be given a full education and allowed to follow their interests(Scientists,Management,politicians etc....)The current system doesn't work,i.e. The VP of the company I work for(College Graduate with Buisness Degree)flipped his truck on an icy road coming to work and totalled it.After 3 hours at the hospital he comes to work,brushing broken glass out of his hair,and holds a 2 hour meeting to determine if the roads are unsafe.

Oh and religion has no place in politics.You can be moral without religous overtones and most of the founding fathers were Deists.I also find it offensive to hear politicians rant about good Christian values saving the country.Even if 80% of the country is Christian(A figure I doubt but still the lowest percentage I've seen quoted)the other 20% have just been told they don't matter officially.I say all the other religions should march on Washington and demand an end to this religous apartheid.

In short,I'm not anti-religion,I just hate Hypocrites,and religion is where you find most of them.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Is this an elaborate attempt at suicide?

The act of itself is considered dumb and the maker (s) should be arrested and forced to watch the Nazi genocide videos.

Is this an elaborate attempt at suicide?
zing!

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

yea that's a great idea :rolleyes:....let's kill people because they are different...

Go away.

Seconded

The act of itself is considered dumb and the maker (s) should be arrested and forced to watch the Nazi genocide videos.

Funniest home country genocides!

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

But wouldn't you only need to do it once? Whats the point in doing it to the same people over and over again?

Also, officially the stupidest idea ever. Sounds like something Hitler would have thought up.

They would be held in a chair suspended over a vat of pudding. :)

Is getting dropped in the pudding the punishment for doing badly or the reward for doing well?

Is getting dropped in the pudding the punishment for doing badly or the reward for doing well?

Both!

Also, officially the stupidest idea ever. Sounds like something Hitler would have thought up.

Funniest third reich racial purity videos?

zing!

Thanks.:D

I concur..

We should exterminate all with an IQ lower than 101




Seeing that IQ is based on average intelligence and 100 is the average we should all be exterminated soon :)

Note that exterminating all below a lower number like 70 would mean that we would keep killing the dumbest 2,5% of our population till no more than 40 people are left.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

It might for a while. I think intelligence requires an environment of intellectual diversity to evolve though... Would be a bit like in-breeding. I mean, look at some of the royals in Europe. It would weaken the gene pool eventually. Then, of course, you can argue why people are dumb in the first place. Is it due to bad genes(i.e. you can't do anything about it once they're born) or a bad upbringing(which you can affect if you only knew in which way) etc.

But wouldn't you only need to do it once? Whats the point in doing it to the same people over and over again?

Also, officially the stupidest idea ever. Sounds like something Hitler would have thought up.

No, you missed the point.
Example.

take a population with 10 ppl with IQ 80, 20 with IQ 90, 20 IQ 100, 10 IQ 110, 10 IQ 120.

First year. The average is (10*80+20*90+20*100+10*110+10*120)/(10+20+20+10+10)=6800/70=about 97.
Now, you kill everyone who scored below the average. Henve, the 10 ppl with IQ 80 and the 20 with IQ 90.

Second year. The average is (20*100+10*110+10*120)/(20+10+10)=4300/40=about 107.
Now those with IQ 100 die.

Next year, those with IQ 110 die. And so on...

Of course, my computation doesn't take into count births, but hey, in such a world, no intelligent people would ever choose to have a child. He's going to
a) die if he's less intelligent than the average
b) con-cause the death of his parents if he's more intelligent than the average

So...:rolleyes:

1) my random thoughts are not all bizzare and weird like the rubber one. Some of them are ideas for new types of military RP weaponry and government systems. I also once came up with the idea of the police using tanks instead of copcars for my IC nation. Some however I just use for discussion because I wonder what people will think about it.
You mean like in the anime, Tank Police?

2) I'd bet all the money in my pocket that the majority does support mass exterminations of Christians and conservatives but try to make sure no one can tell. And taking into consideration that the people here think that ALL Christians and ALL conservatives are stupid they'd want them all killed. In fact many poster have said before that they'd wish these kinds of people were wiped out.
That's only because a few very vocal ones make this reaction seem reasonable.

yea that's a great idea :rolleyes:....let's kill people because they are different...



Seconded

Oh pleease! You go away yourselves for being so pretentiously politically correct and boring. I don't think South is really suggesting that we should execute a couple of hundred million people. It's a thought experiment for gods sake.

Oh pleease! You go away yourselves for being so pretentiously politically correct and boring. I don't think South is really suggesting that we should execute a couple of hundred million people. It's a thought experiment for gods sake.

What has god got to do with it?!

Oh pleease! You go away yourselves for being so pretentiously politically correct and boring. I don't think South is really suggesting that we should execute a couple of hundred million people. It's a thought experiment for gods sake.

And after thinking about it we've found that hypothetical situation to be made of stoopid.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.


Jeez I hope this thread don't qualify you South Lizasauria for death because it is stupid and you wrote it .... hehehe.

Jeez I hope this thread don't qualify you South Lizasauria for death because it is stupid and you wrote it .... hehehe.What is stupid about it? It's lack of political correctness? It's failure to accept dumb people as people?

What is stupid about it? It's lack of political correctness? It's failure to accept dumb people as people?

Its STUPID to even suggest such a thing .... DA!

Its STUPID to even suggest such a thing .... DA!
Because you say so?

What is stupid about it? It's lack of political correctness? It's failure to accept dumb people as people?

It is a brilliant plan. The human race is a plague upon our planet. This plan will ensure that hardly any humans will survive.

It is a brilliant plan. The human race is a plague upon our planet. This plan will ensure that hardly any humans will survive.Yep.

Because you say so?


Because all people have the right to live their life.

Yep.



Does that include you UB?

It is a brilliant plan. The human race is a plague upon our planet. This plan will ensure that hardly any humans will survive.


It's a stupid plan and so are you for thinking it's not.

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

below what IQ score?
If the ones at the lower end are removed would not the average keep on increasing?
Since when to smart people automatically score high on IQ tests?
To agree with the OP would you not have to be quite stupid thus condoning yourself to execution?

Why is this thread still going?

Because all people have the right to live their life.At whose expense?

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

Better place? Probably not.

Is it going to happen if we don't stop breeding like rabbits and living longer and longer? Probably someday...I hope I'm dead by then.

Every time somebody starts a thread with anything to do with intelligence, 90% of the posts in that thread are riddled with attempts to talk up.

That's pretty much the only fun part of these threads. :D

Copypasta!
Would the world be a better place if there were yearly political compass tests and those who scored a certain distance from the center were all sentenced to death to make sure only the moderates survived?

Discuss.

I find your ideas intriguing, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

The internet would be empty and that would be sad. ;)

You win the thread. :)

It's a stupid plan and so are you for thinking it's not.

Were derogatory terms called for?

Surely you must agree that the human race has a J shaped growth curve and is therefore detrimental to our planet, plague perhaps being too strong a word.

This plan would kill all but a few dozen of humans.

Therefore this plan could be regarded as a solution to the rapid growth of humans. I do not necessarily agree, but neither would it be stupid. What is stupid that the thread starter did not conceive his plan would kill all of humanity.

Were derogatory terms called for?

Surely you must agree that the human race has a J shaped growth curve and is therefore detrimental to our planet, plague perhaps being too strong a word.

This plan would kill all but a few dozen of humans.

Therefore this plan could be regarded as a solution to the rapid growth of humans. I do not necessarily agree, but neither would it be stupid. What is stupid that the thread starter did not conceive his plan would kill all of humanity.

The point is that the people who are mentally challanged aren't the ones responsible .... well unless you are talking about George W .... but thats a topic for another thread.

The point is that the people who are mentally challanged aren't the ones responsible .... well unless you are talking about George W .... but thats a topic for another thread.

No individual human is to blame, but humanity would be rooted out this way... Too few left to make a mess

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

Discuss.

No. I know this is hard to believe, but dumb people are people too, they have people who care about them and....etc. They aren't just zombies.

That said, I respect your courage to support what you believe in even if it would almost certainly cost you your own life. :)

Thats a decision that should be left up to God. If you want to change the world start by changing yourself for the better instead of pronouncing death on the world. If every one would do that then we could work together to find sensible solutions to world problems.

Why is this thread still going?

stupidity?

The main problem with this is that IQ tests are essentially designed so that all the scores form a bell curve. IQ tests are/were usually designed so that 100 would be the average. Anyone scoring less than a 100 would be executed leaving only those with IQs of greater than 100. But now the average will shift to the right-say, to 115. Now when the population is tested again some people who were originally above the 100 but are now below 115 will be executed for being "below average". This will have the effect of moving the average even further to the right and the whole cycle will repeat. Eventually the "average" will be so far to the right that even the smartest people would be executed.

The main problem with this is that IQ tests are essentially designed so that all the scores form a bell curve.

I fail to see the point in a comparative intelligence test...

Would the world be a better place if there were yearly IQ tests and those who scored lower than a certain amount were all sentenced to death to make sure only the average or smart survived?

No. It would be a better place if, on a yearly basis, we rounded up all the smartasses who're keen on meritocracies, pogroms, eugenics programs and the like and fed them to lions, live on pay-per-view.

The internet would be empty and that would be sad. ;)

And you teach our kids to write!!!11 :eek:

Oh dear. Before we even consider the disgusting disrespect for human life there is a teeny-weeny problem. No test can reliably measure intelligence. IQ has been time and again proven not to be objective, but to reflect particular cultural values and thus have a substantial class bias. As the rich have the resources to have their children coached in such a test, this proposal would in practice become to a great extent "lets kill the children of the poor".

From personal experience I have discovered the pathetic inaccuracies of IQ scores. When I entered secondary school we were all given such a test as a guide for the school as to the grades we should later be achieving. One of my classmates, who actually achieved close-to full marks in the IB (an achievement matched by a tiny percentage of those taking the examinations) apparently had average intelligence. Many of the students with apparently far higher IQ marks left after GCSEs, having failed to achieve sufficient grades to continue. I myself by a considerable margin had the lowest IQ mark in my class, and yet achieved A or A* in all my GCSEs and A-Levels. I have a great degree of scepticism of the capacity of any IQ test to reliably measure intelligence. So if we follow your scheme we will actually kill a large number of the most intelligent and hardworking members of society. I think we have established that not only is this proposal immoral and murderous, there is precisely 0% chance of it achieving its specified aim, selecting the most intelligent for survival.

All in all, a pretty crappy idea, I'd say.

Oh dear. Before we even consider the disgusting disrespect for human life ...Well, the uncontrolled procreation of humankind is disgusting disrespect of all other life on this planet.

Some really intelligent people do really stupid stuff.

It's called emotions.

Some really intelligent people do really stupid stuff.

It's called emotions.No. It's called stupidity.

Well, the uncontrolled procreation of humankind is disgusting disrespect of all other life on this planet.

At least we don't fuck as a greeting, like bonobos.

At least we don't fuck as a greeting, like bonobos.Bonobos do not destroy the planet, do they?

Bonobos do not destroy the planet, do they?

That's what they'd like us to think.

Well, the uncontrolled procreation of humankind is disgusting disrespect of all other life on this planet.

Get back to me as soon as you can find a suitable, actually measurable criteria by which to choose which humans are allowed to live. Then this argument becomes relevant. Although, even you can find a fair measurement, I'd argue that large population growth is only one of many factors leading to environmental damage and 'disrespect of all other life on this project'. I would argue that capitalism, the unsustainable search for profit at all environmental costs is rather more important. On a more practical level, in many developed countries population growth is in fact almost below replenishment levels. It is only in developing countries that substantial population growth continues. Would you advise be that we kill all the funny coloured folk to balance this out? Hmm?

Just look at this:

http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/dailydish/2007/05/14/dd_dshparisgojailnow503270x396.jpg

And now tell the OP does not have a point. :rolleyes:

Just look at this:

http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/dailydish/2007/05/14/dd_dshparisgojailnow503270x396.jpg

And now tell the OP does not have a point. :rolleyes:

The OP does not have a point.

Get back to me as soon as you can find a suitable, actually measurable criteria by which to choose which humans are allowed to live. Ok. Only keep the first-borns.

Is this a serious question?

Is this a serious question?With a world population of humans approaching 6 billion it certainly is.

Ok. Only keep the first-borns.

Yay for state-sponsored murder of children! And parental infanticide or desertion of children where the child has some disability that will mean their chances of supporting the parents in old age are reduced! And the same where the family really wanted a child of the other gender! Need I go on? Hardly produces just outcomes. Try again.