NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't know about you, but every time I read the title of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=531111) thread, instead of seeing "speeders" I see "breeders".

maybe it's because I got called one yesterday......

anyway, about kids

where do you stand on the issue?

answer in the poll and post your opinion.

Just Say No to Kids!

Hah, I kept thinking the same thing.

And I've yet to have any sort of luck dissuading people from breeding, so I can't really say for sure.

Where do I stand?

On their heads, if possible. ;)

Can't stand 'em, don't want 'em and never will.

I've got enough problems in my life without having children to compound them.

Yeah I do wish people would just stop breeding.

where do you stand on the issue?

I think breeding without limits is a bit evil in this day and age. But having one or two children... no problem.

Having children is a fundamental right, but that doesn't mean it should be exercised to no end. I feel that people SHOULD be putting the breaks on, but that doesn't mean I think there should be a law. That would change SHOULD to MUST.

I don't know about you, but every time I read the title of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=531111) thread, instead of seeing "speeders" I see "breeders".

maybe it's because I got called one yesterday......

anyway, about kids

where do you stand on the issue?

answer in the poll and post your opinion.


I Love Children... :D


Which is why I freverntly hope I never have any. :(


BTW... are you making the muffins?

Ah, right, I understand now.

On a personal level I don't want kids. I can't think of anything more horrible, actually.

Secondly, there are too many humans cluttering the planet up, and we could do with global laws on maximum children (that probably shouldn't be plural) per adult. We could probably also do with mass, random sterilisations-at-birth, at least until the population's dropped a few billion.

People always moan that fewer people would be bad because we'd have fewer people to make stuff, but we'd also have fewer people consuming stuff, so that'd balance out, and the resources per person would obviously also increase.

Having children is a fundamental right

That is debateable. One has to think of the children as well after all.

I think breeding without limits is a bit evil in this day and age. But having one or two children... no problem.

I know someone who has 15 kids, she birthed 6 of them and adopted the rest, do you think she is evil?

just curious.

Get them in the mines forthwith!

The cold-hearted uber-objective side of my personality says that it's selfish and irresponsible for people to carry on breeding unchecked, that it's leaving a nightmare legacy for future generations in the form of the much-maligned 'demographic timebomb' and that those future generations are pretty much screwed anyway, because we are currently raping the planet as fast as our technologies allow.

The realistic side of my personality thinks that 4 billion years of evolution creates an urge to procreate that no amount of objectivity is likely to overcome.

The idealist side - when it can be persuaded to leave the nice, fluffy and peaceful land in which it resides for long enough to think about it - likes to think that future generations, armed with the knowledge that our spanking new 'information society' makes available, will actually be able to make it all work.

If the question really was how to stop breeders then there are any number of solutions, but I find them all a bit unpalatable.

I know someone who has 15 kids, she birthed 6 of them and adopted the rest, do you think she is evil?

A bit. While the adoption makes her a better person than most, she still added quite a few children to this crowded world.

Can she support them all ?

I Love Children... :D
Yay!


Which is why I fervently hope I never have any. :(
:( I corrected your spelling sorry


BTW... are you making the muffins?
yep, I am currently making banana muffins.

I think the term "Breeders" is derogatory and offensive and ought not be used.

Probably why I hadn't thought of it.

I think the problem here is not that there are too many kids. In fact, there is a huge shortage on young people in Western countries. There are too many people, yes. Old people. We should get rid of them.

That aside, I strongly dislike kids, so I say we keep them in special breeding facilities until they turn 18 and are ready to repay society.

Man, I'm good at solving problems.

A bit. While the adoption makes her a better person than most, she still added quite a few children to this crowded world.
do you think it's more of a moral problem with her, or do you think that it should be illegal for her to have so many children?



Can she support them all ?

she does, well, she and her husband do. Her kids are actually having a better material life than my kids do.

Love kids, like entertaining them and acting like a kid along with them, but in no way do I want them..........at this point in time. I've had enough pregnancy scares to know that

Yay!
:( I corrected your spelling sorryI would spoil my children rotten... I could never say NO! to that sad looking face with the puppy dog eyes...

the first sound you'ld hear after the baby's first cry would be me being twisted around his/her finger...

that's why I don't want children... I wouldn't do right by them.

please, feel free to correct me anytime.

yep, I am currently making banana muffins.
K! voting for Muffins then! :D

I think the term "Breeders" is derogatory and offensive and ought not be used.

Probably why I hadn't thought of it.

I don't particularly like being called a breeder, but it popped into my head.

that being said I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.

I think the term "Breeders" is derogatory and offensive and ought not be used.
Unless of course it actually refers to breeders. For example, the crazy Christian fanatics who have 12 kids with twins on the way holding down a single blue collar job.

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
Lol wth?
My friend calls her kid a rugrat, but that has general acceptance because of the cartoon I assume.
Crumb snatchers? Sounds like some sort of Dickensonian English insult.
Varmint? Really, varmint? Do people talk with a southwestern accent when saying it?
I can't even conjecture what a sprog is.

Hah, I kept thinking the same thing.

And I've yet to have any sort of luck dissuading people from breeding, so I can't really say for sure.

Have you at least dissuaded yourself? That would count for something :D

that being said I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.

I admit I used "Rugrats", but that's in reference to the cartoon... and only until they could walk...

i've also used...
"half pints" untill they got too big for me to carry on my shoulders.
"monkeys" when they were in their climbing phase... but stopped after they learned that not everything was meant for climbing... and jumping off of...

now they're "Neices and Nephews" and "kids".

Unless of course it actually refers to breeders. For example, the crazy Christian fanatics who have 12 kids with twins on the way holding down a single blue collar job.
or the women who have 8 kids by 7 daddies and live on welfare......

Lol wth?
My friend calls her kid a rugrat, but that has general acceptance because of the cartoon I assume.
Crumb snatchers? Sounds like some sort of Dickensonian English insult.
Varmint? Really, varmint? Do people talk with a southwestern accent when saying it?
I can't even conjecture what a sprog is.

:p

Why is there no "Family Planning" option?

I don't particularly like being called a breeder, but it popped into my head.

that being said I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.

I agree that 'breeder' is an awful term to use.

Rugrats - cute
crumb snatchers - never heard that one before...but amusing
varmints - strictly American...and yeah...not a nice term
sprogs - I use that and sprogettes...sorry!
crotch droppings - that is a despicable term for a child

What's wrong with wanting kids?

I do believe that if you have kids...they are your responsability, and you should act accordingly

or the women who have 8 kids by 7 daddies and live on welfare......

People are people are people. Ultimately they all eat and shit and burn fuel and take up room, no matter how rich their parents.
And yes, I think there should be laws limiting children, but I don't think people will obey them (either deliberately or by "accident"), so people should probably be sterilised after fathering/giving birth to a child, in order to reduce the chance of future... unfortunate events. If they want more than one there are going to be plenty to adopt for the forseeable future anyway, so no problem.

An amusing thought: Why not ban children completely? Get the necessary replacement humans from immigration; that way you can only import people with useful skills and qualifications, rather than starting with brats which, let's face it, are completely useless for 16+ years.

Why is there no "Family Planning" option?

you mean the one where people voluntarily quit popping them out?

that's family planning no?

Secondly, there are too many humans cluttering the planet up, and we could do with global laws on maximum children (that probably shouldn't be plural) per adult. We could probably also do with mass, random sterilisations-at-birth, at least until the population's dropped a few billion.

Communist China and Nazi Germany agree.

And I'm not calling you a commy or nazi, but they did implement those policies on a massive scale. Child sterilization policies and one child policies are evil in my opinion.

I always thought that famlily-planning just tried to make you stop having kids after number 2:p

The destruction of agriculture would cure the population problem very fast. Within 1 year the human population would go back to a sustainable level.

I do not want kids, and I can't stand them, well except for my nephew, but even he gets on my nerves after awhile (mainly due to the crying, I just cannot deal with crying, I just can't.)

Also to parents, Your kids are NOT that cute! Hell they're barely borderline interesting.

Communist China and Nazi Germany agree.

And I'm not calling you a commy or nazi, but they did implement those policies on a massive scale. Child sterilization policies and one child policies are evil in my opinion.

But what makes them evil?

Think how it will turn out if everybody keeps on breeding at an exponential rate... The population is already 6.7 billion, and predictions estimate it will be nine or ten billion by the middle of this century. Think about that... This isn't something we can piss around and ignore.

I want children. I'd like to have one (or two, given the high incidence of twins in my husband's family) and adopt at least one.

Also to parents, Your kids are NOT that cute! Hell they're barely borderline interesting.
not true, my kids are very cute and also, they are very interesting..........because I said so.

not true, my kids are very cute and also, they are very interesting..........because I said so.

One thing I have learned. Never diss a mothers kids ;)

I don't particularly like being called a breeder, but it popped into my head.

that being said I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.Why not sprogs? I've only ever heard that term used as a term of affection.

One thing I have learned. Never diss a mothers kids ;)

Nature's Rule number #1... Never piss off the Mommy!

Why not sprogs? I've only ever heard that term used as a term of affection.

I have only ever heard it used as a derogatory term.

not true, my kids are very cute and also, they are very interesting..........because I said so.

I rule that you submit a video to show how 'cute' and 'interesting' your kids are and let NSG decide! ;)

I rule that you submit a video to show how 'cute' and 'interesting' your kids are and let NSG decide! ;)

I don't know how cute Smunk's kids are, but they definitely sound interesting and like they do cute things. =)

I don't know how cute Smunk's kids are, but they definitely sound interesting and like they do cute things. =)

All in the eye of the beholder. To me: kittens are cute, the little bunny that lives outside my apartment is cute, kids aren't.

Communist China and Nazi Germany agree.


Actually the Nazis advocated everybody having as many kids as they could, of course of the master race. They would implement sterilizations for those not fit to breed, but that's hardly random. However, it was the ends of the Nazis that were evil, not necessarily the means. That's something that has often been lost since then, but maybe in a few more years we can talk about stuff like eugenics without the shadow of nazism and absolutism over it.

As for me, I looove kids... medium-rare with a nice side of fries and some beer.

No, seriously, people should have all the kids they wanted, then they should be sent to an island to grow up a la Lord of the Flies. The survivors would make good citizens.

Kids can be cute, kids can also be annoying as hell...

All in the eye of the beholder. To me: kittens are cute, the little bunny that lives outside my apartment is cute, kids aren't.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c389/Smunkee/monstersmall.jpg

my kids are cute. ;)

I'm not female, so I don't exactly get to decide whether I'll ever have kids. :p However, I think it would be pretty doubtful. Either way, I support peoples' right to have kids. It isn't our corner of the world that's responsible for the overcrowding some people here are lamenting, after all. ;)

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c389/Smunkee/monstersmall.jpg

my kids are cute. ;)

Nope...nothing.

Sorry Smunkee, it's not your fault I have the paternal instincts of a tomcat.

I think the girl is cute in an evil sort of way:p

Nope...nothing.

Sorry Smunkee, it's not your fault I have the paternal instincts of a tomcat.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c389/Smunkee/park018.jpg

oh, come on, she is the cutest kid ever!

she even makes up songs.........about body parts, and sings them loudly in the grocery store.

I'm not female, so I don't exactly get to decide whether I'll ever have kids.

Now that is something that rather pisses me off.


And yes, I'm deliberately ignoring the second half of your post, because you should know better.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c389/Smunkee/monstersmall.jpg

my kids are cute. ;)

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c389/Smunkee/park018.jpg

oh, come on, she is the cutest kid ever!

she even makes up songs.........about body parts, and sings them loudly in the grocery store.

*resists urge to post pics of neices and nephews.*

ok... I demand lyrics... :D

I like kids, but I wouldn't want to have any. I want to be alone, too, (well, with cats, but I mean no other people) so I don't think I want to adopt, either.

I'm not female, so I don't exactly get to decide whether I'll ever have kids. :p

I think I just heard Bottle's head explode...\

Seriously, how could you think you wouldn't have a choice barring "accidents" (and even then)?

-snip picture-

oh, come on, she is the cutest kid ever!

she even makes up songs.........about body parts, and sings them loudly in the grocery store.

ok, ok, I admit it, I smiled, but still nothing.

Don't make me start a cuteness war.

ok... I demand lyrics... :D
the lyrics are

penis penis...penis penis...penis penis....penis penis.....vagina vagina....vagina vagina.....vagina vagina.....it's private parts!

the tune (http://www.nmnathletics.com/fls/300/sounds/boomer_sooner.wav?&ATCLID=26877&SPSID=2886&SPID=209&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=300)

I think I just heard Bottle's head explode...\

Seriously, how could you think you wouldn't have a choice barring "accidents" (and even then)?

You see the speechmarks around accidents? Yeah, that would be them.

Basically, the lack of contraceptive options available to men.

Don't make me start a cuteness war.
... considering the other threads on this board... I think a cuteness war would be a welcome change...






*stocks up on insulin*

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c389/Smunkee/park018.jpg

oh, come on, she is the cutest kid ever!

she even makes up songs.........about body parts, and sings them loudly in the grocery store.

OMG, it's a little tree elf! Does this mean I get a wish now? :p

Ok, so she is cute, but Amelia is cuter!

Behold, Amelia sleeping with her stuffed kitty, click! (http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=15666957&albumID=0&imageID=2696591)

I want to have twelve children. I won't settle for less!

the lyrics are

penis penis...penis penis...penis penis....penis penis.....vagina vagina....vagina vagina.....vagina vagina.....it's private parts!

the tune (http://www.nmnathletics.com/fls/300/sounds/boomer_sooner.wav?&ATCLID=26877&SPSID=2886&SPID=209&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=300)

ROLFMFAO!!!

I want to have twelve children. I won't settle for less!

Oh Good God, do I even want to know why you want 12?

ROLFMFAO!!!

yeah, it was pretty cute until she started singing it at the retirement home.....I thought all those old people were going to die.

You see the speechmarks around accidents? Yeah, that would be them.

Basically, the lack of contraceptive options available to men.

Oh, I misread and didn't see the "not." Either way, my point stands. Anybody that would do that to a man is undeserving of parenthood and worthy of nothing but contempt. I hold women that would do that and those that consider it acceptable on the same level as rapists.

... considering the other threads on this board... I think a cuteness war would be a welcome change...






*stocks up on insulin*

Hehehehe...though I wouldn't want to turn this thread into image spam.

Too bad the poll lacks an "I like kids I but I don't think I will have them" option.

Tant pis.

yeah, it was pretty cute until she started singing it at the retirement home.....I thought all those old people were going to die.

Oh they will, it's just a matter of time now. *nods*

Had to be done.

Oh Good God, do I even want to know why you want 12?

Baseball team *nods*

Oh Good God, do I even want to know why you want 12?
They're cheaper that way.

Too bad the poll lacks an "I like kids I but I don't think I will have them" option.

Tant pis.

it's implied in "muffins!" isn't it?

Baseball team *nods*

Well, better start putting steroids in their milk bottles then.

Oh Good God, do I even want to know why you want 12?

Isn't it obvious? He/she wants to build a big papier-mache egg-carton to keep them in, and needs an even dozen. :p

They're cheaper that way.

Yea, but not for people who don't want to have children. Who do you think pick up the slack on the tax breaks that family get?

If you ever want to cut down on population size in the USA, just take away the tax breaks that parents get for having children, that'll do it quite nicely.

All in the eye of the beholder. To me: kittens are cute, the little bunny that lives outside my apartment is cute, kids aren't.

Most kids aren't that cute, but Smunkee's are.

yeah, it was pretty cute until she started singing it at the retirement home.....I thought all those old people were going to die.

I declare her song to be an Earwig...


I can't stop huming it to myself... :D

it's implied in "muffins!" isn't it?

Nope.

Anyway, stopping breeders you say? But who will supply the world with proper non-breeders then?

Seriously, how could you think you wouldn't have a choice barring "accidents" (and even then)?

You guys are thinking about this more in the "What if he doesn't want kids, but has them anyways?" side of the issue. Think about it this way. What if he wants biological children, and can't find a woman willing to have them for him?

You guys are thinking about this more in the "What if he doesn't want kids, but has them anyways?" side of the issue. Think about it this way. What if he wants biological children, and can't find a woman willing to have them for him?

I really should go back and change that line since it was based on me misreading what he first posted...

What I first meant by putting accidents in quotes was I don't think children should be described that way. Then I discovered I had misread and that the poster was male. In that case, "accidents" means the (admittedly rare) occurance of a woman tricking a man into getting her pregnant.

Oh, I misread and didn't see the "not." Either way, my point stands. Anybody that would do that to a man is undeserving of parenthood and worthy of nothing but contempt. I hold women that would do that and those that consider it acceptable on the same level as rapists.

I agree... Sadly, not everyone agrees, and once it's happened, well, what then?
And the only non-permanent method of contraception available for men is so easily sabotaged, too...

Of course, it shouldn't be understood that I think a large proportion of women would ever do such a thing, but that doesn't mean none do.

Edit:
You guys are thinking about this more in the "What if he doesn't want kids, but has them anyways?" side of the issue. Think about it this way. What if he wants biological children, and can't find a woman willing to have them for him?

Sorry, I can't really empathise with that. :/

Oh, and I missed your thread on the opposite happening a while ago (him deliberately sabotaging the contraceptives), and it should be noted that that happens too... But at least there are usually things the woman can do about it, and they have many different contraceptive options available. Not that it makes it non-reprehensible, of course.

where do you stand on the issue?

The numbers speak for themselves:

2005 World Pop: 6 453 628 000
1900 World Pop: 1 650 000 000

It has nearly quadrupled in only 105 years.

I agree... Sadly, not everyone agrees, and once it's happened, well, what then?
And the only non-permanent method of contraception available for men is so easily sabotaged, too...

Of course, it shouldn't be understood that I think a large proportion of women would ever do such a thing, but that doesn't mean none do.

Agreed. Honestly, if that were to happen, I think the man would be well within his rights to be exempt from things like child support. He shouldn't be held responsible for a child he was tricked (note I didn't say "did not consent to") into having. Actual unintended pregnancy is one thing, being tricked is another entirely.

Unfortunately, actually enforcing this and keeping it free from abuse by deadbeat fathers would be next to impossible.

The numbers speak for themselves:

2005 World Pop: 6 453 628 000
1900 World Pop: 1 650 000 000

It has nearly quadrupled in only 105 years.

Has the birthrate increased? Probably not by much - we just tend to survive our early years more often and with better nutrition. I doubt attitudes have changed much, but rather external factors like infant mortality, access to medicine, elimination of certain diseases, etc. ;)

Has the birthrate increased? Probably not by much - we just tend to survive our early years more often and with better nutrition. I doubt attitudes have changed much, but rather external factors like infant mortality, access to medicine, elimination of certain diseases, etc. ;)

Even if the birth rate stays the same the growth is exponential, and the population goes up, and up, and up...

Has the birthrate increased? Probably not by much - we just tend to survive our early years more often and with better nutrition. I doubt attitudes have changed much, but rather external factors like infant mortality, access to medicine, elimination of certain diseases, etc. ;)

Which is good, but people should adapt accordingly to avoid overpopulation.

oh, come on, she is the cutest kid ever!
I beg to differ. :D
http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb115/nipeng_bucket/Natalia1.jpg
http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb115/nipeng_bucket/Natalia2.jpg
There are more cutest kids in the world than one ;)

But I'm gonna have two children and no more if I can help it. I think that's responsible. We shall give the Earth a much needed break. :(

Even if the birth rate stays the same the growth is exponential, and the population goes up, and up, and up...

It's hard to say. The birthrate in the First World is dropping like a stone, while in the Third World, it's skyrocketing. So keeping the population down probably requires different tactics depending on where you are. It would be nice if we in the First World could keep our birthrate at an even level, rather than at a sharp decline, because when you import Third-Worlders to a First World country, the tendency for them is to sharply increase the number of children produced. In other words, a stitch in time saves nine, so to speak. :p

I stand in favor of reducing Developin countries' birth rates while increasing developed countries' birth rates. The Catch-22: Lower birth rates make Developed countries more "First World-ey." If only there were a way to get dumb people to stop having kids, and get pinnacles of society to have more kids. Hmmm.

Breeding licenses might work. Difficult to enforce though...

Breeding licenses might work. Difficult to enforce though...

If it works in California for non-purebreed dogs (which may be illegal soon) then maybe we'll have a template for forcing the country to comply. :p Not that I'd want to see it happen, but it's just crazy enough to actually be proposed.

I beg to differ. :D
http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb115/nipeng_bucket/Natalia1.jpg
http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb115/nipeng_bucket/Natalia2.jpg
There are more cutest kids in the world than one ;)

But I'm gonna have two children and no more if I can help it. I think that's responsible. We shall give the Earth a much needed break. :(
okay, that is one really cute kid, although the look of mischief in her eyes...you are going to have to watch her close, she looks like the kind of smart that could get into trouble. ;)

That is debateable. One has to think of the children as well after all.

Life, Liberty, And the pursuit of happiness.

Seems life doesn't mean life functions to you.

I don't know about you, but every time I read the title of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=531111) thread, instead of seeing "speeders" I see "breeders".

maybe it's because I got called one yesterday......

anyway, about kids

where do you stand on the issue?

answer in the poll and post your opinion.
Education.

In particular, make sure that women and girls are educated, have access to reproductive health care, and have the right to make their own decisions about their bodies.

That's the #1 way to reduce overpopulation. When women have the ability to restrict their family size, they overwhelmingly choose to do so. A few will still choose to have big families, but the growing acceptance of adoption and step-families helps make people more likely to adopt rather than making new babies.

send some missionarys to the third world countrys. has to be a religion that preaches condums and abstinints sooo cathlisisum is out;)

ps i opoligise 4 MY GOD OFFILE spelling and if u are wondering im atheiest

send some missionarys to the third world countrys. has to be a religion that preaches condums and abstinints sooo cathisisum is out;)

:ps i opoligise 4 MY GOD OFFILE spelling and if u are wondering im atheiest

No one can possibly make so many errors unintentionally, unless they've been living under a rock since birth. I don't buy it. :rolleyes:

Anyway, on topic, regardless whether we should be reproducing, I would still take offense to the word "breeder" being thrown at people (outside San Francisco, that is - I would feel cheated if I took my possible future kids there and *didn't* get yelled at :p) especially since many people adopt.

If it works in California for non-purebreed dogs (which may be illegal soon) then maybe we'll have a template for forcing the country to comply. :p Not that I'd want to see it happen, but it's just crazy enough to actually be proposed.

Why are some of things taken seriously. I'm a satirist. In point of fact, I'm supporting General ZOD for 2008. If I suggest it, the general public should look at actual solutions. Nobody really believed in Swift's rather modest "proposal."

Anyway, on topic, regardless whether we should be reproducing, I would still take offense to the word "breeder" being thrown at people (outside San Francisco, that is - I would feel cheated if I took my possible future kids there and *didn't* get yelled at :p) especially since many people adopt.
adopting is not breeding, it's adopting.

Why are some of things taken seriously. I'm a satirist. In point of fact, I'm supporting General ZOD for 2008. If I suggest it, the general public should look at actual solutions. Nobody really believed in Swift's rather modest "proposal."

I wasn't taking anything too seriously, there. ;) Although I'm sure there are planty of people who would want to put legal limits on the number of children allowed even in this country - a minority to be sure, but probably a significant one.

adopting is not breeding, it's adopting.

Yes, and a person who yells "breeder" at you has no idea whether the kid(s) you're walking with are yours biologically or not - hence the second half of my objection to using the term.

Yes, and a person who yells "breeder" at you has no idea whether the kid(s) you're walking with are yours biologically or not - hence the second half of my objection to using the term.

oh, that. People yell crap at me all the time without knowing what they are talking about. Someone called me a "damn liberal" the other day too.

oh, that. People yell crap at me all the time without knowing what they are talking about. Someone called me a "damn liberal" the other day too.

I think it works as a general rule to say that the louder something is yelled at you, the less sense it will probably make. I had the great fortune to be called a "fascist" a few weeks back, just for saying "no, thanks" to a guy trying to hand me a Larouche pamphlet. Not sure why I was singled out, but I got a chuckle out of it just the same. :p

Have you at least dissuaded yourself? That would count for something :D

Oh goodness me, yes - Mrs. Dobbs and I are out of the running in the highly competitive world of international human breeding.

So that makes it two down and - how many billions to go?

I hope to have kids running around some day. And would love to see them raised into beautiful and intelligent people.

Oh goodness me, yes - Mrs. Dobbs and I are out of the running in the highly competitive world of international human breeding.

So that makes it two down and - how many billions to go?

The wealthy and well-educated who subscribe to the absurd notion that it's their duty not to reproduce are asking for the world of Cyril Kornbluth's SF classic The Marching Morons ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons ).

you mean the one where people voluntarily quit popping them out?

that's family planning no?

Yes, but it sounded like that option wants me NOT to have any children at all.

People should be able to have as many kids as they want if they are able to provide a good life for them.

I personally have vowed never to have kids and got myself snipped. I like kids... for about 10 minutes max and then hope for them to go away. Of course god has a sick sense of humor and has made reality such that kids love me to death and will not leave me alone.

If someone is on welfare then I wish they would at least reconsider having more until they can provide for them without state help.

on the positive side...


MY NIECE JUST FOUND OUT THAT SHE IS PREGNANT!!

her mother (my sister) and her mother in law both cried with joy when she told them.

WOOHOOO i get a baby that i dont have to push out of my own body or raise myself!!

People that keep popping kids out who can't support then piss me off. Women who have kids with men who have known drug/alcohol problems piss me off. Convicted child abusers having kids piss me off. People who can provide a loving, stable, safe home having kids is great.

Yes, but it sounded like that option wants me NOT to have any children at all.

oh, well, either way. I had my two and voluntarily took hubby to get snipped so there would be no more. ;) family planning.

The wealthy and well-educated who subscribe to the absurd notion that it's their duty not to reproduce are asking for the world of Cyril Kornbluth's SF classic The Marching Morons ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons ).

Wow. Sounds like an interesting, if strange, read. :p

Also, "Tinny-Peete?" What's up with that? :p

oh, well, either way. I had my two and voluntarily took hubby to get snipped so there would be no more. ;) family planning.

I was thinking about the same thing, contraception,... 2 is enough,... (though the vasectomy kinda scares me).

Though it's kinda cruel, I guess it's good that social Darwinism actually exists.

Step 1: Make pornagraphy freely available. With the internet we are almost at this point.

Step 2: Remove the social stigma attached to masterbation. Since no one really cares about it much after high school, we are again almost there.

Problem solved.

The wealthy and well-educated who subscribe to the absurd notion that it's their duty not to reproduce are asking for the world of Cyril Kornbluth's SF classic The Marching Morons ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons ).

Well. Suffice it to say that you'll never know the full depth of the absurdity that is my life, either. I know that story; I've read it more than once. My thanks to you for properly referencing it here. Well done.

Thing is, there's always some clever Dick or Jane being sprung from the loins of the terminally dull-witted. And most of my siblings (and Mrs. Dobbs' siblings) have more than amply reproduced to the extent that our genetic codes have most likely already been passed along. So honestly, I think the world will do just fine without me someday.

(though the vasectomy kinda scares me).
hubby said it wasn't that bad, and believe me if someone was going to whine about it, it would be him. ;) we went in, it took 15 minutes, I waited on him hand and foot for 36 hours he went back to work, no big deal. He was sore but not anywhere near the pain he expected, since it's such a sensitive area.

Step 1: Make pornagraphy freely available. With the internet we are almost at this point.

Step 2: Remove the social stigma attached to masterbation. Since no one really cares about it much after high school, we are again almost there.

Problem solved.

As weird and as unlikely to work as I think all that is, you're forgetting the fact that the internet isn't widely available among the people who are actually doing the world's "breeding." ;) Bit of a snag, there.

As weird and as unlikely to work as I think all that is, you're forgetting the fact that the internet isn't widely available among the people who are actually doing the world's "breeding." ;) Bit of a snag, there.

Point noted.

on the positive side...


MY NIECE JUST FOUND OUT THAT SHE IS PREGNANT!!

her mother (my sister) and her mother in law both cried with joy when she told them.

WOOHOOO i get a baby that i dont have to push out of my own body or raise myself!!Congrats!... now... how is it that YOU get a baby???

[jking] :p

now repeat the Aunt/Uncle creed.... "I promise to spoil my Neice/Nephew rotten and blame it on the Grandparents."

oh, well, either way. I had my two and voluntarily took hubby to get snipped so there would be no more. ;) family planning.
I'm sure you Volunteered, but did HE? [no worries, I know he went willingly.]
:D

Congrats!... now... how is it that YOU get a baby???

[jking] :p

now repeat the Aunt/Uncle creed.... "I promise to spoil my Neice/Nephew rotten and blame it on the Grandparents."


thank you!

uhhhhh it takes a villlage.... or something....


i havent lived close enough to famly to even babysit since my sisters older girl was born....37 years ago...so yeah, ill do my best to spoil the tyke.

I'm sure you Volunteered, but did HE? [no worries, I know he went willingly.]
:D
it was mostly his idea, after a cumulative of 83 hours of labor, 2 c-sections and a blood transfusion, I think he was ready to take some of the responsible painful stuff.

And as addendum, anyone who uses the phrase "my baby daddy" to refer to the father father of her child needs to be permantly barred from further reproduction.

And as addendum, anyone who uses the phrase "my baby daddy" to refer to the father father of her child needs to be permantly barred from further reproduction.

I thought "Baby Daddy" was a member of the Scissor Sisters?

thank you!

uhhhhh it takes a villlage.... or something....


i havent lived close enough to famly to even babysit since my sisters older girl was born....37 years ago...so yeah, ill do my best to spoil the tyke.

Yay Ash! happy happy baby time!

have you gotten into scrapbooking yet? you could totally take like a million pictures of the kid.

Yay Ash! happy happy baby time!

have you gotten into scrapbooking yet? you could totally take like a million pictures of the kid.
thank you!

oh im going to have to stand in line.

her mother in law had only the one son and has been waiting through 8 years of marriage. there isnt anything she isnt going to be doing for this baby.

I have already decided to never have children. Can't stand them..
I have the paternal instincts of a rock :p

Well. Suffice it to say that you'll never know the full depth of the absurdity that is my life, either. I know that story; I've read it more than once. My thanks to you for properly referencing it here. Well done.

You're welcome.

Thing is, there's always some clever Dick or Jane being sprung from the loins of the terminally dull-witted. And most of my siblings (and Mrs. Dobbs' siblings) have more than amply reproduced to the extent that our genetic codes have most likely already been passed along. So honestly, I think the world will do just fine without me someday.

Those who think they wouldn't make good parents and so decide not to have children certainly have my respect. There are too many bad parents as it is. It's the ones who think there's some kind of duty not to do so regardless of their particular circumstances or parenting aptitude that I don't respect.

I voted #2 and #6.

I kind of agree about the right to reproduce, but there are enough cases of people who pass debilitating hereditary diseases to a whole brood, and people who give their children a really crap upbringing, that I'm afraid I can't quite vote for it. Perhaps a right to one child?

Similarly, I couldn't vote for a government restriction on the number of children a person can have. Not that it would necessarily go the way the One Child policy of China has, but something similar: if each person (couple actually, since children are really measured in halves per parent) can only parent one child, there is a huge incentive to genetically choose that child.

I am deeply worried about the experiment of China. There have been wars which have drastically distorted the balance of the sexes, but it went the other way, a lack of males. I can't think of any precedent for a society with an excess of males, and I suspect it means a warlike and cruel society in the medium term.

And here's a controversial thought: if Western countries implemented a One Child policy, would Westerners be more likely to keep the girls?

I think it works as a general rule to say that the louder something is yelled at you, the less sense it will probably make. I had the great fortune to be called a "fascist" a few weeks back, just for saying "no, thanks" to a guy trying to hand me a Larouche pamphlet. Not sure why I was singled out, but I got a chuckle out of it just the same. :p

Damn you are good people. What a sane response!

As weird and as unlikely to work as I think all that is, you're forgetting the fact that the internet isn't widely available among the people who are actually doing the world's "breeding." ;) Bit of a snag, there.

Yep, big snag. Lower infant mortality, equal access to opportunity, high school level education (at least) across the globe would make it work ... but that's a way off I fear.

her mother in law had only the one son and has been waiting through 8 years of marriage. there isnt anything she isnt going to be doing for this baby.
Except maybe... share! :p :D

on the positive side...


MY NIECE JUST FOUND OUT THAT SHE IS PREGNANT!!

her mother (my sister) and her mother in law both cried with joy when she told them.

WOOHOOO i get a baby that i dont have to push out of my own body or raise myself!!

Grats!

I don't want kids, but I have no problem with those that do so long as they are capable of providing them with a responsible upbringing and loving home environment.

This is going to sound dreadfully old-fashioned, but I like the idea of extended families.

I grew up in a nuclear family (mum dad sis and bro) and I'd always regarded my own childhood as just about ideal ... but I've heard from friends about the fantastic role grandparents and close family friends can play, and it's put a chink of doubt in my perceptions.

My best friend, for instance, has told me about her upbringing as an only child. Her father had bouts of depression. It's not that he was a bad father, but when his condition became acute, my friend felt quite neglected and had only her grandmother to turn to. If gran hadn't been living right there in the same house, she would have had no-one in those times.

More generally, an extended family is some protection against bad parenting. I know people will say a small child is not competent to choose their parents, but crikey: even very small children respond to love, and if there is someone there who has more love to offer than the actual parent(s) then the kid should be able to choose.

And if things come to the point where the child has to be removed from the home by the government, relatives who weren't the cause of the problem are an essential source of continuity. Being placed in a foster family must be absolutely terrifying for a child.

Rodents breed in great quanity with a great lack of quality.

Stupid people do the same thing, and being in a democracy...

The only solution I see is the mass sterilization of idiots.

The only solution I see is the mass sterilization of idiots.

Anyone who fails to pass high school is given a "vaccine". I like.

The only solution I see is the mass sterilization of idiots.

You look like a size 18. Here are your eppaulettes. You will be issued a Luger down at the armoury. Welcome to the SS.

Stop the Breeders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AsId-qVIb4)? But I like Kim Deal :(

This is going to sound dreadfully old-fashioned, but I like the idea of extended families.

I grew up in a nuclear family (mum dad sis and bro) and I'd always regarded my own childhood as just about ideal ... but I've heard from friends about the fantastic role grandparents and close family friends can play, and it's put a chink of doubt in my perceptions.

My best friend, for instance, has told me about her upbringing as an only child. Her father had bouts of depression. It's not that he was a bad father, but when his condition became acute, my friend felt quite neglected and had only her grandmother to turn to. If gran hadn't been living right there in the same house, she would have had no-one in those times.

More generally, an extended family is some protection against bad parenting. I know people will say a small child is not competent to choose their parents, but crikey: even very small children respond to love, and if there is someone there who has more love to offer than the actual parent(s) then the kid should be able to choose.

And if things come to the point where the child has to be removed from the home by the government, relatives who weren't the cause of the problem are an essential source of continuity. Being placed in a foster family must be absolutely terrifying for a child.


i (obviously) agree with you. its great to be able to show a child the acceptance that parents sometimes find it impossible to give.

You look like a size 18. Here are your eppaulettes. You will be issued a Luger down at the armoury. Welcome to the SS.

Can I get the P-38 instead? They are much better weapons.:rolleyes: Anyway, Hitler had the right idea, just the wrong damn targets.

Anyone who fails to pass high school is given a "vaccine". I like.

Better make it a lot earlier than that.

i (obviously) agree with you. its great to be able to show a child the acceptance that parents sometimes find it impossible to give.

Yeah! And a little can go a long way.

I went to visit an uncle of mine who lives interstate, and while I was there I saw him fixing something (I think it was a standard lamp) and I saw him in his workshop. He fiddles with things and figures them out in exactly the way I do, and quite unlike the way my father would go about it.

I realized that this man, who I can barely remember meeting as a child, had actually been an important influence on me.

Congrats on your growing family, btw :)

I voted #2 and #6.
I kind of agree about the right to reproduce, but there are enough cases of people who pass debilitating hereditary diseases to a whole brood, and people who give their children a really crap upbringing, that I'm afraid I can't quite vote for it. Perhaps a right to one child?
do you think people with diseases that can be passed on genetically should be legally barred from having children? if not, do you think it's morally wrong for them to have them?

if it's either morally wrong or you think it should be illegal, what types of diseases do you think should be on "the list"?

I am not trying to bother you, I just think this is an interesting question.

Can I get the P-38 instead? They are much better weapons.:rolleyes: Anyway, Hitler had the right idea, just the wrong damn targets.

Yep, I was bound to get the details wrong. Comes from giving less than one quantum of rat's arse about the pretty uniform or the sidearm.

Not a big fan of eugenics. Enough said.

Yeah! And a little can go a long way.

I went to visit an uncle of mine who lives interstate, and while I was there I saw him fixing something (I think it was a standard lamp) and I saw him in his workshop. He fiddles with things and figures them out in exactly the way I do, and quite unlike the way my father would go about it.

I realized that this man, who I can barely remember meeting as a child, had actually been an important influence on me.

Congrats on your growing family, btw :)

thanks!

Yep, I was bound to get the details wrong. Comes from giving less than one quantum of rat's arse about the pretty uniform or the sidearm.

Not a big fan of eugenics. Enough said.

Not many people are fans of eugenics. Sad that we can use breeding to improve every other species except our own.

Not many people are fans of eugenics. Sad that we can use breeding to improve every other species except our own.

I'm much more a fan of genetic engineering than eugenics, mainly because it is a lot more effective and gives the parents much more freedom including the freedom to decide to have their child without any changes.

do you think people with diseases that can be passed on genetically should be legally barred from having children? if not, do you think it's morally wrong for them to have them?

I never argue morality with those who don't believe in it. With you, it would be a pleasure.

No I don't think they should be legally barred. In the West most people can access screening (as close as I want to go to eugenics) and if their doctor tells them their own condition is heritable and the condition is going to really impact their offsprings quality of life, then yeah I think it would be wrong to just leave it to chance.

That's why I said "perhaps one." I think people deserve a chance to raise a child, even if (for instance) the parent is struggling with their own life to the extent it might seem impossible for them to do it well. Ever seen "I am Sam"? I kind of agree with that -- you can't measure a person's talent until you've let them have a go.

"She's an idiot, so sterilize her young before she has adult rights" I find abhorrent. Even idiots learn if the subject is important enough to them and you take the time.

Like Bottle said somewhere, parenting choices should be taught in school. I'd say not just as an optional unit in HS, but as a mandatory citizenship issue. Perhaps in place of maths, which definitely isn't for everyone.

if it's either morally wrong or you think it should be illegal, what types of diseases do you think should be on "the list"?

Arggh. I admit that makes it harder.
I for instance have short-sightedness -- both my parents had it. They knew I would too, but I'm SO glad they didn't consider that a show-stopper.
I've heard of people with heritable deafness choosing to have deaf children, because to them being deaf is a perfectly OK thing. That makes me uncomfortable.

You got me. No list. It has to be judged on cases. I could come at obligatory counselling, ie education which they can't choose to just not read.

If people mess up really badly on two children, time for the snip.

I am not trying to bother you, I just think this is an interesting question.

It is! Unfortunately I have to go, but I'll be back in a few hours.

EDIT: Scratch that. Real life has been cancelled for today! Yay!

Not many people are fans of eugenics. Sad that we can use breeding to improve every other species except our own.

We use those other species as tools for our own good. Do you think we should use human beings as tools?

We use those other species as tools for our own good. Do you think we should use human beings as tools?

Since when did we stop? I never got that memo.

We use those other species as tools for our own good. Do you think we should use human beings as tools?

I'll leave this to you, just for the sake of simplicity.
Oh, and out of respect for the succinct winfullness of that reply!

I'm much more a fan of genetic engineering than eugenics, mainly because it is a lot more effective and gives the parents much more freedom including the freedom to decide to have their child without any changes.

I don't like eugenics because it deprives actual living people of their rights, if not their lives.

Yeah, I see myself backing into a contradiction here. A right to parenthood. :(

I am extremely dubious about genetic engineering, because in the current world class system, it will give a breeding advantage to rich people. Their children will have a genetic advantage to go with their socioeconomic advantage, making an even more unjust and statified human society.

Even for plants and animals, I am dubious about genetic engineering. We simply don't know what we are doing well enough to engineer new species's or subspecies's.

Since when did we stop? I never got that memo.

I've never used human beings as tools. If you do so, I hope never to meet you and I hope your "tools" don't allow people like you to use them. I also desperately hope that you never have children or gain custody of any children.

I've never used human beings as tools. If you do so, I hope never to meet you and I hope your "tools" don't allow people like you to use them. I also desperately hope that you never have children or gain custody of any children.

Please. Humans have been using other humans for as long as the species has existed. It is called "society" and you are just as guilty as anyone.

Remember this: refusing to look at reality doesn't make it go away.

Please. Humans have been using other humans for as long as the species has existed.

Indeed. There have been assholes as long as human beings have existed. That doesn't make those assholes a good thing.

It is called "society" and you are just as guilty as anyone.

Society doesn't use people as tools. It is made up of those people, each and every one of them bringing their own individual contributions to the whole.

Any society that does use people as tools (a) only uses some of them in that way and (b) is a society that should be overthrown.

Remember this: refusing to look at reality doesn't make it go away.

I'm not refusing to look at reality, my dear. I am looking at it. And I am seeing someone with a rather disgusting attitude.

*...*

I'm not refusing to look at reality, my dear. I am looking at it. And I am seeing someone with a rather disgusting attitude.

Steady on. "My dear" is fair enough as tit-for-tat to the patronizing "Remember this:" but there is no need to get personal yet.

Indeed. There have been assholes as long as human beings have existed. That doesn't make those assholes a good thing.



Society doesn't use people as tools. It is made up of those people, each and every one of them bringing their own individual contributions to the whole.

Any society that does use people as tools (a) only uses some of them in that way and (b) is a society that should be overthrown.



I'm not refusing to look at reality, my dear. I am looking at it. And I am seeing someone with a rather disgusting attitude.


Society doesn't use people: It is composed of people using each other. As to whether it should be overthrown, I believe that breeding to improve the species would produce a radically different form of society. In short it would overthrow existing society.

Finally: your disgust at my attitude is nothing compared to my disgust at the human hive overpopulating its environment.

People should voluntarily stop at two (even better if they stopped at one). They won't, though. Eventually we'll reach the point (if we haven't already) where the world won't be able to support the population and we will begin dying off. We will eventually stabilize well below that point and start all over again. The point at which the world will no longer be able to support the population will have settled at a lower point. This will go on until the world is incapable of supporting any life whatsoever. We will die.

The choices are hard. We either have to stop breeding on our own, or the government(s) need to step in and stop us, in which case people will rise in (violent) protest because the government is interfering with their "right" to breed.

I see no way out. Common sense won't prevail legislation will be prevented from prevailing. :(

How about Market Parenting? I just invented it, so you know it will be majorly whack ...

(Blood/Alcohol approx 0.12 %. Not crazy screaming drunk but well into the superfluous post range)

People wishing to pass on their genes can pay money (say $250K over twenty years.) Government pays double that and the money goes to pay the parent (the effective parent, the one who actually raises the kid) who wins the tender. Tendering process consists of kids going parent-shopping. We will need to set some money aside to pay for incubation too (for the crack whores who will carry the actual child.) Perhaps funded from a tax on sex.

Yeah, it needs a bit of polishing. But we need something drastic, 'cos this parenting thing is a very corrupted market.

I don't know about you, but every time I read the title of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=531111) thread, instead of seeing "speeders" I see "breeders".

maybe it's because I got called one yesterday......

anyway, about kids

where do you stand on the issue?

answer in the poll and post your opinion.

i love kids,hell i maturbate and god cries and gives me another kid to love.

god pisses me off..lol

i love kids,hell i maturbate and god cries and gives me another kid to love.

god pisses me off..lol

The what now? :confused:

well i don't really hate people, although i don't really love the consiquences of there being some damd many of the bas... i mean sweathearts.

i do think though, that something needs to be put in the drinking supply, or some other invisible method, to lower ALL human fertility accross the board without bias or exception.

you can cry about that being a loss of freedom, but i guarantee it would be far less painful then what happens when we overload nature's cycles of renewal and the entire web of life, including the air we breathe, colapses, or nature finally comes up with something that just offs or stirilizes us, faster then we can or do come up with something to counteract it. universal famine and dehydration are rather grim alternative prospects as well.

yes it may be possible for many more of us to live on this mudball then do currently, though even that is a big maybe, but happily and healthily, especially mentally healthily, or even physically, that is a real question.

(another possibility would be to allow, even encourage, adolescents to sex up a storm, and then be manditorily stirilized upon reaching the age of majority, or voluntarily as a prerequisite to adult privelages)

i don't think we can count on things like celibacy and family planing.
putting something in the food or water, EVERYONE'S food and or water, is probably the safest course for humanity's future survival and current mental well being.

=^^=
.../\...

i don't think we can count on things like celibacy and family planing. putting something in the food or water, EVERYONE'S food and or water, is probably the safest course for humanity's future survival and current mental well being.

=^^=
.../\...

We could always just import our water from Japan - seems to work for them. :p

We need to encourage breeding in the West, not stop it. It's China, India and the Middle East that need to stop.

Bruce Willis will drive a car into their hellicopter.


He ran out of bullets.

Bruce Willis will drive a car into their hellicopter.


He ran out of bullets.

I wanted to see that movie, until I noticed that the obnoxious kid from the PC/Mac commercials was in it. :( Unless he dies in the first 15 seconds, I think I'll pass.

Society doesn't use people as tools. It is made up of those people, each and every one of them bringing their own individual contributions to the whole.

It's called employment. I don't have any more choice about being employed than my screwdriver does. I'm but a tool to my boss for doing programming; my wages finance the maintenance I require to survive. I'm a self-maintaining tool.

It's called employment. I don't have any more choice about being employed than my screwdriver does. I'm but a tool to my boss for doing programming; my wages finance the maintenance I require to survive. I'm a self-maintaining tool.

Alas, our bleak reality.:(

What? Don't you think it's a bit worrying that ONE Asian country has a larger population than the entire West (Western Europe, America, Australia, Japan) combined?

Now factor in that there are TWO Asian countries that EACH have a larger population that the entire West combined.

I'm still hoping for an environmental or economic disaster that'll wipe a couple of hundred million out.
I don't find that aspect of it overly worrying, other than as part of the overall population.

What worries me more is that there are still people who fail to intellectually recognise that the act of treating any individual human less favourably than themselves, solely because of the colour of their skin, is fundamentally wrong.

This sort of slavering racism, perpetuated by narrow-minded bigots who nowadays find themselves twitching in corners as the reality of their situation (i.e. that they are the minority) hits home, is one of global society's biggest issues.

What? Don't you think it's a bit worrying that ONE Asian country has a larger population than the entire West (Western Europe, America, Australia, Japan) combined?

Now factor in that there are TWO Asian countries that EACH have a larger population that the entire West combined.

I'm still hoping for an environmental or economic disaster that'll wipe a couple of hundred million out.

Naaa I ain't worried by that at all, Although I would love to hear why you are worried about it?

I don't particularly like being called a breeder, but it popped into my head.

that being said I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.

and 'ankle-biter'....

Naaa I ain't worried by that at all, Although I would love to hear why you are worried about it?

Because the birth rate in China and India is a significant part of the Muslim Conspiracy for a Sharia Europe. *Nods*

To answer the OP.

I love em, I have two meself, but I am one of 16, and my dad was one of 11, and his mum was also one of 16.

Whats the beef? It is perfectly natural to have children, it is THE point of life after all.

As to over loading the planet, what if there where no animals only trees, given enough time the planet would still be over populated, some things you just can't do anything about, and I think nature has her little ways of dealing with things anyway.

To answer the OP.

I love em, I have two meself, but I am one of 16, and my dad was one of 11, and his mum was also one of 16.

Whats the beef? It is perfectly natural to have children, it is THE point of life after all.

Breeding isn't "the" point of life. It might be the point of YOUR life, but you should be damn thankful that there are people who find other purpose to their lives. Otherwise you wouldn't enjoy any of the modern comforts you currently have! :D


As to over loading the planet, what if there where no animals only trees, given enough time the planet would still be over populated, some things you just can't do anything about, and I think nature has her little ways of dealing with things anyway.
Yes, nature does have little ways of dealing with overpopulation. Starvation and disease are the primary ones.

Wouldn't it be better if, instead of breeding until we all die of plague or famine, we controlled our population numbers so that nobody had to suffer such a fate? Or would you really prefer to leave it up to the forces of nature, to control our population with the same ruthless and uncompromising forces that limit all other animal life?

Personally, I'd like to use our lovely bulging human frontal cortex to come up with a better solution than "make babies until we run out of food."

To answer the OP.

I love em, I have two meself, but I am one of 16, and my dad was one of 11, and his mum was also one of 16.

Whats the beef? It is perfectly natural to have children, it is THE point of life after all.

As to over loading the planet, what if there where no animals only trees, given enough time the planet would still be over populated, some things you just can't do anything about, and I think nature has her little ways of dealing with things anyway.

Wow. Lemme guess - Mexican? ;)

Wouldn't it be better if, instead of breeding until we all die of plague or famine, we controlled our population numbers so that nobody had to suffer such a fate? Or would you really prefer to leave it up to the forces of nature, to control our population with the same ruthless and uncompromising forces that limit all other animal life?

Personally, I'd like to use our lovely bulging human frontal cortex to come up with a better solution than "make babies until we run out of food."

Hey, that's what I've been trying to say!*

Maybe people will listen to you.

Doubt it, though. Humans :rolleyes:

*Well, that and take the piss out of TPF, but he deserves it.

Edit: Oh, and bitching about the lack of contraceptive options for males. But nobody cares about that, either. *Sigh*

Hey, that's what I've been trying to say!*

Maybe people will listen to you.

Doubt it, though. Humans :rolleyes:

*Well, that and take the piss out of TPF, but he deserves it.
To me, people who make 10+ babies and blame it on some biological urge to procreate are no different than a person who eats chocolate until he makes himself sick.

Biology has given us certain fundamental drives. But we also have the ability to exercise judgment, and control how we respond to those drives.

It is perfectly normal and natural for a human to enjoy the taste of chocolate. There's nothing unhealthy about liking chocolate, or about eating it from time to time. But it's profoundly unhealthy (and extremely infantile) to gorge yourself recklessly because you wanna have more more more more.

In the same way, it's perfectly normal for a human being to desire offspring, or to wish to be a parent. There's nothing unhealthy about thinking kids are cool. I don't personally want kids, and even I still think kids can be really awesome in a lot of ways. I can understand why many people wish to be parents. But it's gluttonous and revoltingly irresponsible to pump out a dozen babies simply because you wanna have more more more more, and to then blame "biology" for your failure to exercise good judgment.

Breeding isn't "the" point of life. It might be the point of YOUR life, but you should be damn thankful that there are people who find other purpose to their lives. Otherwise you wouldn't enjoy any of the modern comforts you currently have! :D

Hey Bottle,:p

Naaa wrong. When I say the point of life, I don't mean on a personal level or even a philosopical level. I mean litraly the point of life(all kinds of life) is to procreate, carry on genetic heretiage, and well just to live, and this is as true for the smallest microbe up to the biggest whale.


Yes, nature does have little ways of dealing with overpopulation. Starvation and disease are the primary ones.

Wouldn't it be better if, instead of breeding until we all die of plague or famine, we controlled our population numbers so that nobody had to suffer such a fate? Or would you really prefer to leave it up to the forces of nature, to control our population with the same ruthless and uncompromising forces that limit all other animal life?

Personally, I'd like to use our lovely bulging human frontal cortex to come up with a better solution than "make babies until we run out of food."

As I say some things are just beyond our control, including world wide population control measure, it just wont happen. So I choose to not worry about such things. As to a preferance in how we fuck up the planet, I have none. Given enough time we just will.

Wow. Lemme guess - Mexican? ;)

Naaa English!

Naaa English!

What, they have Mormons in England now? :p Rare to see the huge family thing on *both* sides, that's all. ;)

What, they have Mormons in England now? :p Rare to see the huge family thing on *both* sides, that's all. ;)

Dunno if it's that rare. I was talking to my brothers wife last night and she also comes form a large family. Perhaps it is just a genration thing, my dad was a war baby.

Hey Bottle,:p

Naaa wrong. When I say the point of life, I don't mean on a personal level or even a philosopical level. I mean litraly the point of life(all kinds of life) is to procreate, carry on genetic heretiage, and well just to live, and this is as true for the smallest microbe up to the biggest whale.

Actually, there is no "point to life" from that perspective. Objectively speaking, there's no point at all. Life simply is, when it manages to thrive. When it doesn't thrive, it either changes or disappears.

A "point to life" only exists from a philosophical perspective.


As I say some things are just beyond our control, including world wide population control measure, it just wont happen.

So because you choose not to control yourself, you believe this means it's impossible to control?

It's quite possible to help people make responsible choices when it comes to procreation. We've already made huge strides in that arena. It's surprisingly easy to get through to people when you present sound information in a reasonable manner.

Just look at the advancements in prenatal care. A lot of the improvements in infant health are due to educating people about the choices they make. Education about fetal alcohol syndrome, for instance, informs the public about a risk factor that can be avoided quite easily. In the majority of cases, if you inform people they will make better choices.

But I guess you would suggest that, since we can't wipe out FAS over night, we should just stop trying, right?


So I choose to not worry about such things. As to a preferance in how we fuck up the planet, I have none. Given enough time we just will.
If you'd like to throw up your hands and act recklessly because you just don't care, then I suppose that's your choice.

Your children will enjoy a better future because of the people who refuse to accept that sort of attitude, and who strive to improve the world rather than succumbing to lazy, fatalistic thinking.

Edit: Oh, and bitching about the lack of contraceptive options for males. But nobody cares about that, either. *Sigh*What about chemical castration, or getting your tubes tied. I had a friend as school whose father did that. It's supposed to be reversible so when you do want children you just go and have another operation.

What about chemical castration, or getting your tubes tied. I had a friend as school whose father did that. It's supposed to be reversible so when you do want children you just go and have another operation.

Just?

As I say some things are just beyond our control, including world wide population control measure, it just wont happen. So I choose to not worry about such things. As to a preferance in how we fuck up the planet, I have none. Given enough time we just will.

Yes, some things are beyond our control.

This is not one of them. It's actually quite a simple problem to solve (not to say it wouldn't be a lot of work, it just doesn't require any significant imagination).
The problem is that humans are lazy, greedy, bigoted, stupid, short-sighted and ignorant. They're the same reasons people ignore environmentalists. They're the same reasons we still stubbornly hold on to oil as our primary fuel, when we know it's going to run out sooner rather than later. They're the reasons people die from hunger and easily preventable diseases in both the poorest and richest countries in the world.

Humans are fucking greedy, fucking lazy, fucking stupid and a big fucking bunch of cunts. I'm not going to have any children, and in forty or fifty years when I'm old and dying, and the world is going to hell, I'm going to laugh at it. Because it is nobody's stupid fault but our own, we could have prevented it, but it was too expensive, or too much work, or our gods got angry if we didn't have fourteen children, and it's going to be bloody hilarious!

I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.

I go with "whelp".

Just?

I was just about to say that myself...

Surgical sterilization isn't 100% reversible after it's done. Not to mention do you really want to go through it again?

I was just about to say that myself...

Surgical sterilization isn't 100% reversible after it's done. Not to mention do you really want to go through it again?

Yeah i can't understand the comparison of the contraceptive pill, etc with an invasive procedure

Yeah i can't understand the comparison of the contraceptive pill, etc with an invasive procedure

Well to be fair it's not exceptionally invasive for men, it is major surgery for women.

But I see your point. If you think you may want kids later, why go under the knife? Use a condom for Christ's sake.

...in forty or fifty years when I'm old and dying, and the world is going to hell, I'm going to laugh at it. Because it is nobody's stupid fault but our own, we could have prevented it, but it was too expensive, or too much work, or our gods got angry if we didn't have fourteen children, and it's going to be bloody hilarious!


I too have always wanted to be the laughing madman left standing on the ruins of civilization. :D

What about chemical castration, or getting your tubes tied. I had a friend as school whose father did that. It's supposed to be reversible so when you do want children you just go and have another operation.

Yeah, vasectomy's about it. It's reversible between about 50-80% of the time. Something I discovered recently: it's tricky to get a vasectomy on the NHS; they tend to use massive waiting times as a disincentive. You'd've thought they'd've loved them, compared to shelling out for condoms and all the contraceptives for women...
Reversals are almost universally not available on the NHS, and I imagine they're even more expensive (but then, so are kids; if you can't afford the former you wouldn't be able to afford the latter anyway, so no worries).

Bit shit, though, don't you think? Contraceptives available to men: Condom, vasectomy, not having sex. Plus the assumption that men just don't care about how many women they knock up, because that's their problem.

Actually, there is no "point to life" from that perspective. Objectively speaking, there's no point at all. Life simply is, when it manages to thrive. When it doesn't thrive, it either changes or disappears.

A "point to life" only exists from a philosophical perspective.

Then we disagree it seems, but lets try it this way. Lets define the word 'point' in this context to mean what it does. You alluded yourself that where life cannot survive it changes. In other words it adapts so that some form of life will always be. It seems then this is what living organisms do, they try their utmost to just carry on living. Or the point of life is to live.


So because you choose not to control yourself, you believe this means it's impossible to control?

Sheesh Bootle you do seem to be a master of the logical leap into the viod of complete assumption. Where did you get this idea? Which of my words enabled you to leap to this frankly wrong conclusion? I have two kids, is that sign of no control?


It's quite possible to help people make responsible choices when it comes to procreation. We've already made huge strides in that arena. It's surprisingly easy to get through to people when you present sound information in a reasonable manner.

Except of course what you mean is to get everybody to thinkg the same way about certian things. Just wont happen, not while we have all sorts of differing opinions, my and you can't agree, what makes you think you can get others to agree? We will never all be the same, think the same, feel the same, or share the same vaules.


Just look at the advancements in prenatal care. A lot of the improvements in infant health are due to educating people about the choices they make. Education about fetal alcohol syndrome, for instance, informs the public about a risk factor that can be avoided quite easily. In the majority of cases, if you inform people they will make better choices.

But I guess you would suggest that, since we can't wipe out FAS over night, we should just stop trying, right?

And again a wrong assumption from you. I merely said that some things are beyond our control and these things I don't worry about.


If you'd like to throw up your hands and act recklessly because you just don't care, then I suppose that's your choice.

And another wrong assumption. Please tell me what enables these insights into my physche?


Your children will enjoy a better future because of the people who refuse to accept that sort of attitude, and who strive to improve the world rather than succumbing to lazy, fatalistic thinking.

And now you know all about my children too? Astounding.

Let get this absolutly correct so that when I am telling my mates about it over a beer or two I don't do you a miservice. Which of my words gave you this idea about me?

Yes, some things are beyond our control.

This is not one of them. It's actually quite a simple problem to solve (not to say it wouldn't be a lot of work, it just doesn't require any significant imagination).
The problem is that humans are lazy, greedy, bigoted, stupid, short-sighted and ignorant. They're the same reasons people ignore environmentalists. They're the same reasons we still stubbornly hold on to oil as our primary fuel, when we know it's going to run out sooner rather than later. They're the reasons people die from hunger and easily preventable diseases in both the poorest and richest countries in the world.

Humans are fucking greedy, fucking lazy, fucking stupid and a big fucking bunch of cunts. I'm not going to have any children, and in forty or fifty years when I'm old and dying, and the world is going to hell, I'm going to laugh at it. Because it is nobody's stupid fault but our own, we could have prevented it, but it was too expensive, or too much work, or our gods got angry if we didn't have fourteen children, and it's going to be bloody hilarious!


I think you have the gist of it. This is what I mean by beyond our control. World wide laws aimed at population control will never happen.

But I see your point. If you think you may want kids later, why go under the knife? Use a condom for Christ's sake.

Condoms, alas, are hardly the most reliable or least intrusive form of contraception available. Also, they're easily sabotaged.
Wouldn't it be nice if there were more options?

I too have always wanted to be the laughing madman left standing on the ruins of civilization. :D

There's a painting in that thought... If only I were an artist.

Condoms, alas, are hardly the most reliable or least intrusive form of contraception available. Also, they're easily sabotaged.
Wouldn't it be nice if there were more options?

You'll get no argument from me.

There's a painting in that thought... If only I were an artist.

Don't worry, come forty or fifty years we'll get to see it first-hand :D

Instead of trying to keep people from having kids, why don't we just kill everybody over 50. Since the majority of people are older this will lessen the strain on the global population.

Well to be fair it's not exceptionally invasive for men, it is major surgery for women.
yes it is, and much more risky for women than men.

But I see your point. If you think you may want kids later, why go under the knife? Use a condom for Christ's sake.

Condoms are evil, they are inconvenient and messy and also, they are way unreliable. I will never rely on a condom or the pill again. I refuse. I am still a bit uncomfortable relying on the vasectomy......knowing my past luck.

Instead of trying to keep people from having kids, why don't we just kill everybody over 50. Since the majority of people are older this will lessen the strain on the global population.

Actually, according to this (http://www.indexmundi.com/world/median_age.html), the world's median age is 28 years.

Condoms are evil, they are inconvenient and messy and also, they are way unreliable.

Actually, that's one criticism of condoms I don't understand. If anything I'd say they were less messy than going without. Am I missing something obvious?

yes it is, and much more risky for women than men.



Condoms are evil, they are inconvenient and messy and also, they are way unreliable. I will never rely on a condom or the pill again. I refuse. I am still a bit uncomfortable relying on the vasectomy......knowing my past luck.

How so with the messy?

I don't particularly like being called a breeder, but it popped into my head.

that being said I don't like a lot of the words people use to describe kids either

rugrats
crumb snatchers
varmints
sprogs
crotch droppings

it's pretty rude.

I tend to call them rugrats, anklebiter or little monkeys, but I don't mean that in a rude way.
If I want to be rude, I'd call them brats...

How so with the messy?

Condoms are messy? That one escapes me too. They make sex cleaner... ;)

Actually, according to this (http://www.indexmundi.com/world/median_age.html), the world's median age is 28 years.

You mean to tell us someone who propagates the killing of hundreds of millions people has no idea what he's talking about? Get out!

Actually, that's one criticism of condoms I don't understand. If anything I'd say they were less messy than going without. Am I missing something obvious?
not really, I guess it depends on where the mess ends up.....sorta.....

also the idea of all of it being contained makes me kinda sad.

Condoms are messy? That one escapes me too. They make sex cleaner... ;)

I suppose I did kind of make a mess of the flat when I blew up all the ones the uni hands out.......as well as rubbing lube all over the phone and door handles.

also the idea of all of it being contained makes me kinda sad.

I didn't know you were a gourmand of the jizz.

I suppose I did kind of make a mess of the flat when I blew up all the ones the uni hands out.......as well as rubbing lube all over the phone and door handles.

You're obviously not on the same page as me here. ;) Heh.

I didn't know you were a gourmet of the jizz.

YAY and thats the best thing i've read in a while

Actually, the world's median age is 28 years.

All I'm saying with modern medicine people are living long and adding to the worlds population. At least in America people are having less children, so we if we bump off all of the population that is over 50 there will be a big decline in the population.

All I'm saying with modern medicine people are living long and adding to the worlds population. At least in America people are having less children, so we if we bump off all of the population that is over 50 there will be a big decline in the population.

......and workforce

......and workforce

Then we put those good-for-nothing kids to work! Kill two birds with one stone! :rolleyes:

Yeah, vasectomy's about it. It's reversible between about 50-80% of the time. Something I discovered recently: it's tricky to get a vasectomy on the NHS; they tend to use massive waiting times as a disincentive. You'd've thought they'd've loved them, compared to shelling out for condoms and all the contraceptives for women...
Reversals are almost universally not available on the NHS, and I imagine they're even more expensive (but then, so are kids; if you can't afford the former you wouldn't be able to afford the latter anyway, so no worries).

Bit shit, though, don't you think? Contraceptives available to men: Condom, vasectomy, not having sex. Plus the assumption that men just don't care about how many women they knock up, because that's their problem.You ignored my comment about chemical castration. If chemical castration is included then I'd say the number of options for contraception were about equal for males and females. Both can use condoms or various forms of, either could have surgery to prevent fertilisation, either could use chemicals to temporarily make then infertile - the pill for women, and this chemical castration for men. The only contraception that I can think of which is only available to women is that coil thing which can be stuck in the uterus to prevent fertilisied embryos from attaching to the wall of the womb. I can't think of anything you could shove inside your scrotum that would prevent pregnancy.

Anyway - Scientists have developed a male chemical contraceptive which was 100% effective and side-effect free in trials (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3167090.stm)

I didn't know you were a gourmand of the jizz.

:p I don't know if I would go that far. It does come from the penis though and the penis is holy.

also the idea of all of it being contained makes me kinda sad.You're weird, lady. :p;)

You ignored my comment about chemical castration. If chemical castration is included then I'd say the number of options for contraception were about equal for males and females. Both can use condoms or various forms of, either could have surgery to prevent fertilisation, either could use chemicals to temporarily make then infertile - the pill for women, and this chemical castration for men. The only contraception that I can think of which is only available to women is that coil thing which can be stuck in the uterus to prevent fertilisied embryos from attaching to the wall of the womb. I can't think of anything you could shove inside your scrotum that would prevent pregnancy.

Anyway - Scientists have developed a male chemical contraceptive which was 100% effective and side-effect free in trials (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3167090.stm)
Men can also potentially try something like the use of suspensories.

http://www.malecontraceptives.org/methods/suspensories.php

Heat treatments may also potentially work as a male contraceptive option, though the long-term effects have not been completely defined.

You ignored my comment about chemical castration. If chemical castration is included then I'd say the number of options for contraception were about equal for males and females. Both can use condoms or various forms of, either could have surgery to prevent fertilisation, either could use chemicals to temporarily make then infertile - the pill for women, and this chemical castration for men.[snip]

Anyway - Scientists have developed a male chemical contraceptive which was 100% effective and side-effect free in trials (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3167090.stm)

I ignored the chemical castration because it isn't available... The closest thing would be RISUG (www.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISUG), which is only in trials, and then only in India.
They've developed several forms of male contraceptive, but they're all "some time" from actually being available. There are hormonal contraceptives, like you linked to, "dry orgasm" pills, aforementioned RISUG, herbal extracts and drugs used for other things (eg. blood pressure) that reduce fertility... Yet, there are very few trials, and exactly none of them are actually available to the general public.

*Notices Bottle's link in preview* Yeah, that's a good site... Heat is about the only other thing available, but even that's had few trials done. Ultrasound, IIRC, might also have contraceptive effects.

There are lots of possibilities, but little research, few trials, and nothing available. Why not?

*Notices Bottle's link in preview* Yeah, that's a good site... Heat is about the only other thing available, but even that's had few trials done. Ultrasound, IIRC, might also have contraceptive effects.

There are lots of possibilities, but little research, few trials, and nothing available. Why not?
Because if men CAN be responsible for contraception, then somebody might actually expect them to take responsibility for contraception. Kinda hard to blame the slut for getting herself pregnant, if you can bear equal blame for failing to take YOUR pill.

There are lots of possibilities, but little research, few trials, and nothing available. Why not?

Idiotic traditional male gender roles. The pill is considered too "unmanly."

I ignored the chemical castration because it isn't available... The closest thing would be RISUG (www.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISUG), which is only in trials, and then only in India.
They've developed several forms of male contraceptive, but they're all "some time" from actually being available. There are hormonal contraceptives, like you linked to, "dry orgasm" pills, aforementioned RISUG, herbal extracts and drugs used for other things (eg. blood pressure) that reduce fertility... Yet, there are very few trials, and exactly none of them are actually available to the general public.

*Notices Bottle's link in preview* Yeah, that's a good site... Heat is about the only other thing available, but even that's had few trials done. Ultrasound, IIRC, might also have contraceptive effects.

There are lots of possibilities, but little research, few trials, and nothing available. Why not?Ah, I see what you mean now.

My guess as to why these alternatives aren't being developed is because there is a situation similar to that between the oil lobby and the green lobby a decade or so ago. So, I blame either the condom companies or the Vatican, each trying to advance the cause of their own prefered method.

Yay, conspiracy theories. :D

Because if men CAN be responsible for contraception, then somebody might actually expect them to take responsibility for contraception. Kinda hard to blame the slut for getting herself pregnant, if you can bear equal blame for failing to take YOUR pill.

Well, that's one reason I'd favour, say, RISUG; I consider it a good day when I remember my name and my address. But that's why we have electronics! It remembers, so I don't have to.

But it is still very, very, stupid, and very, very, frustrating. And I don't understand why more women don't push for this, too; yeah, I know men are unreliable and we don't care about who we knock up and nobody in their right minds would trust us with anything important (:rolleyes:), but some women can't use many of their contraceptives (oh, don't I know that), and the bloke using something doesn't prevent her using something Just In Case. Surely it's in everyone's best interests?

Gah!

Ah, I see what you mean now.

My guess as to why these alternatives aren't being developed is because there is a situation similar to that between the oil lobby and the green lobby a decade or so ago. So, I blame either the condom companies or the Vatican, each trying to advance the cause of their own prefered method.

Yay, conspiracy theories. :D

And, remember, there's not much profit available in a dirt-cheap, one-injection-every-ten-years contraceptive, so why would a pharmaceutical company be interested in that?

Well, that's one reason I'd favour, say, RISUG; I consider it a good day when I remember my name and my address. But that's why we have electronics! It remembers, so I don't have to.

But it is still very, very, stupid, and very, very, frustrating. And I don't understand why more women don't push for this, too; yeah, I know men are unreliable and we don't care about who we knock up and nobody in their right minds would trust us with anything important (:rolleyes:), but some women can't use many of their contraceptives (oh, don't I know that), and the bloke using something doesn't prevent her using something Just In Case. Surely it's in everyone's best interests?

Gah!
Some women, like some men, buy into patriarchal, sexist bullshit about sex roles. This is because women, like men, are people, and half of all people have below-average intelligence. ;)

Seriously, though, most responsible adults are excited at the prospect of improved contraceptive options.

In my own relationship, we've decided that condoms are his responsibility because the Pill is mine. Since I have to pay for the Pill and remember to take it every day, and take care of all the minor medical annoyances that go with it, he is responsible for buying condoms, remembering to use them, and taking care of the associated clean up, etc. We find this a fair division of responsibility in our relationship, considering the options we currently have available.

But if a "male Pill" came on the market I would certainly want to consider trading roles. I've been on the Pill for a decade, and I'd like to see what it's like to be a post-pubescent female who ISN'T on it. Just for a change.

Seriously, though, most responsible adults are excited at the prospect of improved contraceptive options.

Yeah, I know. I'd just like some other option to turn up before I'm either too old to care, or so fed up that I just go and get the snip (although I think we're rapidly heading towards Option 2 anyway). Ho hum.

In my own relationship, we've decided that condoms are his responsibility because the Pill is mine. Since I have to pay for the Pill and remember to take it every day, and take care of all the minor medical annoyances that go with it, he is responsible for buying condoms, remembering to use them, and taking care of the associated clean up, etc. We find this a fair division of responsibility in our relationship, considering the options we currently have available.

But if a "male Pill" came on the market I would certainly want to consider trading roles. I've been on the Pill for a decade, and I'd like to see what it's like to be a post-pubescent female who ISN'T on it. Just for a change.

We have pretty much the same deal. Unfortunately, the mini-pill is the most reliable form of contraception that doesn't have horrible side effects for my girlfriend, which isn't ideal. Both of us would prefer not to have to use condoms at all, but all things considered it'd be pretty stupid not to... However, if an alternative popped up that was more reliable and less intrusive! Halle-friggin'-lujah.

I definitely, DEFINITELY believe that there need to be regulatory laws on childbirth. Enforcement might be an issue though.

Meh. Do what you want. Overpopulation isn't a real problem; there's just some issues with distribution of resources.
A few less billion people won't change that.

Meh. Can we enforce a hypothetical breeding law in Africa? Hmm? Seems as though it'd be an issue.

As to here (here being wherever you are, if you've got a computer) we should be more concerned about our old peoples...

It's called employment. I don't have any more choice about being employed than my screwdriver does. I'm but a tool to my boss for doing programming; my wages finance the maintenance I require to survive. I'm a self-maintaining tool.

You don't get to choose what you study? What jobs you apply for? Whether or not to stay in a job that you are currently in?

Seriously, you can't come up with a comparison that is a little less full of BS?

You don't get to choose what you study? What jobs you apply for? Whether or not to stay in a job that you are currently in?

Seriously, you can't come up with a comparison that is a little less full of BS?

More or less, not really (you apply for everything in the hope of getting anything), not really (because hunger and getting evicted is bad - you don't get the dole straight away if you leave voluntarily).

And even if the steel could choose to be a spanner or a screwdriver, it would wind up a tool either way.

More or less, not really (you apply for everything in the hope of getting anything), not really (because hunger and getting evicted is bad - you don't get the dole straight away if you leave voluntarily).

You make the choice to apply for everything. Many don't. And none are forced to.

You make the choice to stay at your job. Yes, there are consequences if you don't, but the choice is still yours.

You aren't being used as a tool. You have chosen your path in life. The fact that your choices are limited and that some choices will be better for you than others doesn't change the underlying fact - you were not bred to be and are not used as a tool.

A cow, on the other hand, doesn't choose to be used for milk or meat. We choose that. It is bred for that purpose.


And even if the steel could choose to be a spanner or a screwdriver, it would wind up a tool either way.

Would it? Without us deciding what to do with it?

My solution: Mandatory nudity. If seeing everyone naked all the time doesn't permenantly turn a good portion of people off, I don't know what will. America would literally wither away and die. I know I'd gouge my eyes out with a tuning fork.

My solution: Mandatory nudity. If seeing everyone naked all the time doesn't permenantly turn a good portion of people off, I don't know what will. America would literally wither away and die. I know I'd gouge my eyes out with a tuning fork.

Better ban alcohol too at the same time just to be on the safe side

Better ban alcohol too at the same time just to be on the safe side

Yes, exactly. I make it so that our custom instead of shaking hands is bear hugs. Yeah. That should pretty much make the human erection go extinct.

My solution: Mandatory nudity. If seeing everyone naked all the time doesn't permenantly turn a good portion of people off, I don't know what will. America would literally wither away and die. I know I'd gouge my eyes out with a tuning fork.

Of course, that may just be a stimulus for more people to get in shape, and then there'd be lots of screwing going on!

Yes, exactly. I make it so that our custom instead of shaking hands is bear hugs. Yeah. That should pretty much make the human erection go extinct.

Meh. I don't think anything can make the human erection go extinct. From what I've been told, those things just pop up randomly fairly often (although not as much as during puberty).

Of course, that may just be a stimulus for more people to get in shape, and then there'd be lots of screwing going on!

Yes. I solved the world obesity problem as well. I will be your King!!!

Meh. I don't think anything can make the human erection go extinct. From what I've been told, those things just pop up randomly fairly often (although not as much as during puberty).

I literally used to solve that problem by thinking of disgusting people naked. At times, I swear I could hear my brain scream.

I literally used to solve that problem by thinking of disgusting people naked. At times, I swear I could hear my brain scream.

Oh my...

Out of curiosity, did you ever use Ann Coulter?

Oh my...

Out of curiosity, did you ever use Ann Coulter?

Great... if anybody sees an very unhappy pair of testicles can you call me, please?

I propose mandatory salt peter in all beverages. Less erections and possibly more lesbian sex.

Great... if anybody sees an very unhappy pair of testicles can you call me, please?

MUAHAHAHAHAHA! =)