If a person is defective, they should be eliminated

Post Reply New Topic

Certainly do not round up the humans and kill all the defective ones. But I also think it's taking up a lot of resources trying to help those who cannot be helped. I think it's a waste of resources. I also think that if a baby is born with a heart problem, that we should not put a baby through surgery for a new heart. I think we should allow the child to die. I know it seems harsh, but it seems more logical.

I did also express cohabitation of certain laws of nature alongside human values and laws. I also nowhere stated to legalize murder, I just simply stated that we should stop wasting our resources on certain things. Like I do not believe in aid being sent to Africa. In a natural world, a population gets overpopulated, they starve or disease spreads, and either they die off and no longer exist. Or they die off and the population is restored.

We need to stop overusing antibiotics as well. It's used in our aggro factory farming business in cow feed and other animal feed. We use to much in our hospitals. We try so hard to cure disease that we seem to have completely lost the idea of managing diseases. I think management is a lot better than cure. Did you know sharks rarely get sick or infected by diseases because of the way their skin is patterned? If we learned this kind of information beforehand then we could do what we could to manage diseases.

If only we were a little smarter in managing and not seemingly want to cure every possible thing we could in the world. I am not saying open season on humanity nor am I encouraging genocide.

However, I am saying we need to live side by side with the ecosystem not against.

And I agree with this though I am not sure I have the same idea of what living side by side with the ecosystem looks like.

Why do we want a newborn babey with the possibility of giving a heart defect to their offspring? When reproducing off spring, we want to pass on the stronger of genes. All species do this. All species want to pass on the best genes. The reason for so many disease and so many people with these genes is the fact that we save those kinds of babies. And what if those babies given a new heart continue for the rest of their life to have different heart problems, etc? It more sound to allow the natural course take it's toll.

I am in the process of majoring in environmental conservation and natural resources. I want to create not just green technology, but sustainable technology. Technology that abides by the laws of nature. I want to have a world less dependent on coal and less dependent on so many drugs, etc. To me that is cohabitation. Not just saying "How we can fix a problem", but "Why is this problem occuring" and not just creating a new gadget or a new drug because that only fixes the short term. But something that is created in the process of long term thought.

We need to stop thinking short term and start making decisions for the long term.

In the case of whole societal collapse it would be happening because the government and support networks for health and assisted living were but at that given point cease to be. IMHO it wouldn't be an organized thing, it would be like the middle ages or back - something that just sort of spontaneously happened on a case by case basis.

I am aware of that, I guess I am not quite sure what exact point you're making.

Just that. The more of a burden we make of ourselves or the more we push on society or make demands without giving back the more vulnerable a position we put ourselves in.

What's to say they will have offspring...and I don't think we can really breed ourselves into superhumans with no health problems and no need of any technology related to it.

giving back what is what I would like to know...but that is ridiculous you seem to be justifying the idea we should just simply act neurotypical and accept every attempt at a cure or else. I mean there would be no justification for trying to kill off everyone with autism, or any other 'defect'. Seems kind of like blaming the victim......well if only you had acted more normal you wouldn't be sent to the death camp would be come a common phrase.

That isn't what I said. Quit putting words into my text.

No species can breed themselves into super species, but all species all other animal species do try to keep the stronger genes in their gene pool. We need to take that mindset into mind. It isn't about being super powered. It's about being smart. It's about management over cure. I think by wanting to cure everything that we are trying to make super humans.

that was hardly my intention, it just seemed that was the implication so sorry.......I guess I suck at comprehending things. Also I just feel like most parents aren't going to just let their child die if theres something they can do about it so expecting someone to let their defective child die would be a little ridiculous in the real world.

But those are decisions based on Emotions and Morals.

Emotional argument v.s. Logical Argument.

Gorillas and other species have some radius of emotionally reasoning as we do. Elephants recognize their dead. However, they all when have defective children do the more logical thing which is to leave them to die. Emotional argument v.s. logical argument. Think long term not short term. "Oh my baby will get to live", but the long term is the child may continue to have complications, may get sick easier, etc those are long term possibilities not overseen. Just that their baby can live. But you can have children some other time. But you can still reproduce another child. It isn't like this is the end of the world. It is more logical for the long term to let the child die.

That may be but it still exists, do you honestly expect parents to want to leave their child to die, if there is something they can do to prevent it? Thing is emotions are part of the human experience, to deny them is to deny human nature. I am glad my mom did not feel she could produce a better child....when she had me if she had looked at just the logic then yes I would have been tossed aside to die.

But they are not preventing anything. In the long term the child may still suffer from the problems that they tried to prevent. So there was really nothing worth the effort of wasting the resources to waste more resources on a sick child.

I'd just argue that those of us who are high functioning should be trying to chip away at the angles that throw barriers between ourselves and NT's. We can and in a sense need to let certain things fly but overall getting communication to work and getting messages conveyed back and forth as well as being able to defend ourselves verbally, ideologically, and even physically is a big deal.


In the case of a societal collapse it would more likely be LFA's but I have a feeling that anyone who hung back and said they couldn't do what was asked of them would be in constant danger.


I don't know if its just life as a guy that I'm speaking from but from my own experience victim is a synonym for mark; being a victim is not a good thing and if bad things happen to you it seems like admitting to victimhood is the worst choice as, at least in my experience in living as a guy, it means that you're weak and deserve to have absolutely everything taken from you by someone stronger.

I find it rather offensive that such a topic as this one is discussed here. Are we playing Nazis again? =/

"natural" is an illusion we are matter and we exist and as such we are natural, it doesnt serve as an argument at all, there are loads of things that make us say we differ from animals after all.
all of this is not to say that we cant improve upon ourselves or take clues from nature around us.

evolution in the natural world comes from the simple fact of survival, you might argue that we have made it too easy but instead of trying to regulate who dies or not we could perhaps remove many of the warnings and much of the hand holding, lets throw out military training as well, anyone stupid enough to sign up deserves the quick death coming to them then right?

even if we acknowledge that we should remove the "weak" members how does one decide who is weak?

i know plenty of NT's my age that dont come close to my accomplishments, yet there are still things all of them could do much better than me, in the this is where the whole idea of eugenics break down time and time again.