Knew it was coming
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=182591
Printed Date: 01 February 2026 at 8:15am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Knew it was coming
Posted By: oldsoldier
Subject: Knew it was coming
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 6:20pm
|
Quite a while back I mentioned that the enviormentalist movement would eventually get down to population control as the answer. Well folks here it is, children have a drastic effect on the carbon footprint, and population control is the answer. American children are the most dangerous to the enviornment to be exact. Eugenics will be next as the envioronmentalist movement will "suggest" which gene pools need to progress, and which need to die out.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090803/sc_livescience/savetheplanethavefewerkids - http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090803/sc_livescience/savetheplanethavefewerkids ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 6:37pm
|
And like many stupid ideas or opinions from all sides of the political spectrum on all issues, it will be discussed by some, debated by a few, ridiculed by many and ignored by most. /thread. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 6:44pm
Sort of Godwined? |
oldsoldier wrote:Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 9:08pm
|
Throughout history of the great empires of man, when it comes to some form of eugenics each culture/race considers themselves superior, and the wealthy/aristocracy/religious classes within that culture/race more superior than the comman man. Now the envioromentalist have deemed American children undesireable to the needs of the planet, (and I would bet that would exclude thier "superior" children). The fact that this even got exposure and pssibly a little traction in the minds of even a few should be frightening. Remmember "Rainbow 6" the Clancy book, a group of radical scientists and enviornmentalists deciding to rid the planet with a virus, of all human life except for thier own little group, maybe not as fictitious as we may think.
-------------
|
Posted By: TinMan
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 9:17pm
|
When I read your response the sound of a jack in the box being cranked played in my head. |
Posted By: Gator Taco
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 9:21pm
|
Is it not obvious that high population numbers will increase our impact on the environment? So would it not also be obvious that the converse of this is also true?
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/trailgator01 - last.fm |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 9:39pm
|
The only reason this is "frightening" to you is because, in your brain, you somehow managed to convince yourself that spreading the word that having less kids is good for the planet is the same as eugenics and ethnic cleansing, despite the fact that the original article states nothing like that. You've created this falsity in your brain, and have somehow convinced yourself it was true. That is the frightening part. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 9:48pm
|
HAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHA.... You actually believe that someone not crazy as hell wants to rid the planet of people because of their carbon footprint? ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: MeanMan
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 10:15pm
|
Well, when the US creates an army of killer, terminator style robots controlled by the next generation of playstations and xboxs, the world will finally appreciate chubby, game addicted, spoiled American children. ------------- 
hybrid-sniper~"To be honest, if I see a player still using an Impulse I'm going to question their motives." |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 10:37pm
|
I think Gene Roddenbury had all this pegged with all the "plots" of the original Star Trek TV series. Eugenics, Climate Change, Over-Population, Race problems, Science over Mankind solutions, kinda interesting. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 12:47am
|
The first wave of disinformation aimed at reducing birthrates has already been launched. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090804/ap_on_re_us/us_fea_parenting_cost - Link .
------------- 
|
Posted By: Impulse88
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 2:46am
| Blame the mormons |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 3:52am
|
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/afdbdiagram.pdf - http://zapatopi.net/afdb/afdbdiagram.pdf
------------- 
|
Posted By: Impulse88
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 5:58am
lol |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 10:23am
Watch the first five minutes or so of Idiocracy and it will remind you of this statement
Honestly, I have no problems with voluntary population control. I realize it is a free country, but do people really need to be popping out 4,5,6+ children? Anyone that can't see the impact of overpopulation needs to have their headgear checked. It astounds me when people see my wife and I running ragged trying to keep our three girls in check and have the audacity to ask us "when we are going to try for that boy?" Really?
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 10:37am
|
ITT: OS goes overboard, pretty much invokes Godwin once again, and equates smart reproductive practices as eugenics.
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 10:43am
Or even government support in the form of tax exemption/benefits for only having one/two children. You know, positive reinforcement - such a thing does still exist. OS made it sound as if there will be some roaming death squads killing your infants if you have a second kid. It's just a fearmongering thing. Same as Limbaugh and the other radio blowhards saying that nationalized health care is just an excuse to euthanize old people. No, really, they actually are saying that. In a non joking manner. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 11:03am
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 11:09am
The Floridian economy would crash! Think about it: Nobody buying bingo markers, Polident or Depends. Nobody dragging their grandkids to Disney. Nobody sending those crappy orange boxes to their grand-nephews in Idaho. Next step would be the whole thing floating off in the ocean. |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 12:15pm
|
At least the Cubans won't have as far to go in that case, Whale.
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 3:51pm
Of course. It is the only way the Catholics will maintain if not increase their numbers in the world. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:06pm
|
Well, this planet DOES have a sustainable limit as to how many humans it can support with current technology/energy sources. That's just a fact that you have to live with. Human as a race aren't destined to do whatever the hell they want. One must always live within their means. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:11pm
|
Why do you keep referencing 'American' children? The article does not really mention that at all, other than comparing the footprints between different countries. You make it sound like a terrible, menacing thing. I'm scared that people with similar mindsets as yourself, and FE are increasingly having greater control over my life - governing positions, being given more outlets (television, internet, tea parties) to spew asinine, and illogical hate, etc ... I just don't want people like this to be a part of my life, or my future family's life. Sorry. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:15pm
Thats exactly why I'm glad McCain didn't win. He's too old and crazy to do any good. Also, isn't America all about living outside of your means? People do it ALL the time |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:36pm
|
Strange and exotic issues have gone from science fiction to science fact and the social impact is always affected. From Jules Verne to George Orwell many of the fictitious ideas in these works are now comman place. The fact than we have X amount of room and resources is clear. My question is how does the world curtail the population growths in the third world as well as here. The Romans were one of the groups that decided that only Romans were fit to inherit the world and created a genocidal program to eliminate non Roman populations within thier empire. Even Britian decided to "breed" out the Scots and Celtics with thier policy of "right of first night". So population control can here as in China become a governmental concern, and a "permit" may be required to have children. China has a one child policy, and if a female is born especially in the hinter lands, that female infant is usually put to death before any record of birth is made, males are more important in that culture so the family tries again. Just the pretense that "American children" have a greater "carbon footptrint" can gather momentum with little or no public concern umtil it directly affects the individual set of American parents. Don't be so sure that government will not change the rules to fit the situation, Social Security was initially designed for a "retirement" age to be 65, in an era where few made it to 65. Now a change of the rules is silently passing through congress to raise the age to 72. A child bearing, license or permit is not as far fetched as many here think. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:47pm
Which is vital to maintaining a large dating pool for the clergy. Edit:
Winnar! -------------
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:48pm
|
oh hush up old man. none if this is going to affect you
------------- 
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:49pm
|
Of course not, I date people slightly older than what the clergy is interested in.
-------------
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:50pm
|
no not you. you posted right as i was -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 4:51pm
|
Yeah . . . I know, but it worked out well so I ran with it.
-------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 5:23pm
| HERE HERE! I second that motion for inactment of a license to breed! In order to get said license, one must show the ability to take care of resulting offspring (i.e. having a high school education and a JOB). Anyone convicted of having children without a license are subject to spaying or neutering. |
Posted By: TinMan
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 5:26pm
| Retroactively |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 6:29pm
|
"Social Security was initially designed for a "retirement" age to be 65,
in an era where few made it to 65. Now a change of the rules is
silently passing through congress to raise the age to 72. A child
bearing, license or permit is not as far fetched as many here think." This equates to forced population control how? Sometimes I think you fail to remember that stuff still has to be voted in to take effect. Voted in by somewhat sane people who aren't as evil as you make them out to be. Explain to me how something used by many people such as marijuana can't be voted legal, but your crazy thoughts of needing a permit for having a child(which probably crossed noone elses mind, ever) will ever become law? Oh and I agree with Oldpbnoob. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 06 August 2009 at 9:19am
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 06 August 2009 at 5:34pm
Did you just semi-quote Keanu Reeves?
And on a serious political issue, no less?
:) ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 06 August 2009 at 5:37pm
|
While we are here, I love Ender's Game.
------------- 
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 06 August 2009 at 7:13pm
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 07 August 2009 at 3:19pm
I too love Ender's Game. Have you read the 'shadow' story-arc of sequels, following Bean? ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 07 August 2009 at 3:42pm
| I still think the halo series borrowed heavily from Enders Game, especially the books of his youth. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 07 August 2009 at 4:55pm
Nope - don't think you are kidding. But consider this line from the 1989 masterpiece "Parenthood," as presented by Keanu Reeves portraying a (shocking, I know) noble stoner/outcast named "Tod:"
Granted, that was in the context of proper fathering and not population control, but the sentiment carries over, I think.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 07 August 2009 at 7:02pm
| It's a highly underrated sentiment. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 07 August 2009 at 7:05pm
|
The day we start licensing something like as fundamental and human as the right to breed is the day we toss aside all notions of liberty... ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |