Then you will just end up with a bunch of mutated flesh eating puppies.
And whos right is it anyways to decide who should live or die? Remember we are all just an imagination of ourselves. And anyone who agrees with a policy like that is blindly believing that they are to be on the "clean" side of the stick. We dont need most of the things we feel we have to kill for. There is a better path, but the power hungry elite dont want that. If you feel that in your heart something is wrong with that, but you seem to feel a need to have to do it, then you have been decieved.

[edit on 26-12-2004 by Garatron]

While we're playing Imagine This:

You guys seem to be overlooking a simple answer, that doesn't involve coordinating mass suicide or murder.

Quit. Having. Children.

That will solve the problem. It might take 50 years or so, but that's damn quick in the time scheme of the Earth and all.

Why not just strip this planet and move on?

It is after all a just a pile of rock that happens to have the right conditions for life
to arise.There are most probly lots of planets like earth in this galaxy.
All we need to do is develop some way of Ftl travel and hey presto population problems solved.


Leave some nice statue or something put all the life in some sort of genebank it might be useful later.

just like to clear this up, no one is stating that we should start killing everyone to control the population. We are discussing planetary suicide, which means a significant amount of the population basicly take their life. Extreme measures in other words.

Originally posted by infinite
just like to clear this up, no one is stating that we should start killing everyone to control the population. We are discussing planetary suicide, which means a significant amount of the population basicly take their life. Extreme measures in other words.

Envoking a call for mass suicide isn't much different. You're asking for people to be dead in the end and it wouldn't be by your hand in either fashion.

Originally posted by Jadette
Envoking a call for mass suicide isn't much different. You're asking for people to be dead in the end and it wouldn't be by your hand in either fashion.

Indeed and you are making a valid point.
What gives us the right or the power to tell people to take their own life?

I was thinking along the lines of a large disaster. One that was large enough only to create a population bottleneck, like bottlenecks of the past, but not large enough to eliminate all life on the planet.

This Tsunami thing certainly has done something for the future propogation of the species, seeing as most of the victims were those who hadn't yet had a chance to multiply.

Someone suggested somewhere on another thread, though, that we should stop breeding, and as I thought about it, that would really create a short-term bottleneck. Maybe something that we could use to maybe catch up with ourselves. If we did not breed for one generation (hypothetically speaking of course, as this would be impossible), and allowed many of our elders to die, and then the next generation bred when they were up in ages, we may see some positive change from something like that.

I don't know. I haven't thought that one through too much. It does sound pretty nihilistic, though. Maybe even ruthless.

Anyway, too many people trying to control too many people is going to lead us in a direction we can only control less and less in time.

My vote is to exterminate all of those in favor of this idea (simply out of self defense, of course)

We could definately do without all of the hate-war-death mongers in the world!

yeah... how about we start by killing 3million jews and through any none blond haired, blued eyed ethnic individuals...

oops, sorry that was hitler...

how about we kill all non american, non patriotic hippiez..

oops, nope thats rednecks...

somebody help me out here, I don't know who as a collective we are trying to destroy to save the collective "super race of socially superior beings that are worthy of a planet that they have no extra right to civilise..."

(Joking..)

however, I do have one thing to state,

there are starving millions in 3rd world countries tha I see on tv every day, asking me to pledge all I can to save the life of a starving child covered in flies suffering with on of many diseases...

..just an idea, instead of trying desperately to feed these millions as we have done since before I was born, how about teaching these people "contraception", that way each family will not try to feed their starving 13 children on food that they receive to be able to only feed a family of 4...

just an idea but my family would prolly starve if they had 13children and no way to support then...

Hmm, interesting topic you got going here. Kind of reminds me of an episode from the series "Sliders". They go into the portal and when they arrive in San Francisco in the alternate reality, there is hardly anyone there. They learn that people don't have to work the robots do their jobs (i think). so People sit around enjoying life, and in order to get money they have to withdraw it from an ATM machine. And for every dollar they withdraw there name gets put into a big jar. And at the end of the month the government draws names from the jar, and those people whose names are drawn get killed. (i hope that made sense :puz

IMO this saves the environment because everyone will want to use as little as possible, and also keeps down the population. Just a little something to ponder.

Peace~Smurf

Originally posted by Klepto
..just an idea, instead of trying desperately to feed these millions as we have done since before I was born, how about teaching these people "contraception", that way each family will not try to feed their starving 13 children on food that they receive to be able to only feed a family of 4...

Because this is common sense. Those who currenly hold the reigns of power in this country, particularly, are Christians. Christians can't have contraception. It's just not God's way, see? But of course famine and disease is...

So it's not so much that people need education to them, it's just that God's wrath is now upon them for their iniquity. Isn't that just perfect?

If anyone were to go, I say let it be the Christians. Since Constantine, it has been they who have been the most hypocritical in their faith, and used it to their advantage to secure power over others. Very Christ-like....

Is it that hard to remember to take the f-ing pill?

A bottleneck is not optional. It is inevitable, and while we as a species may have the power to hasten its advent, we do not have the power to avoid its inevitability. Yet.

I am for trying to get the power to avoid it. By colonizing as many worlds as we can grab, as quick as we can get them.

Originally posted by c00ster
My vote is to exterminate all of those in favor of this idea (simply out of self defense, of course)

We could definately do without all of the hate-war-death mongers in the world!

again,
this is another example of failing to read the thread. No one has stated anything about exterminate, only you.

Great, you can be the first to go. In fact, why don't all enviro-wackos who want to knock off most of humanity commit suicide? Isn't it their duty, or is it just other peoples job?

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

And what makes 500,000,000 the perfect number? Who decides who else has to die? Who's left in charge?

2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.

But theoretically, if you breed all the fit people, then they will cease to be diverse...and ultimately cease to be fit. Look at the history of European monarchies. And it all depends on what you consider to be 'diversity.'

3. Unite humanity with a living new language.

Great, when does everybody start to learn English? Honestly, this wouldn't work. Just how would people write a new language and standardize it? It's failed when tried before. If a Russian invented it...I bet it would be remarkably similar to Russian.

4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.

Well, then you broke that rule when you went on about impossible theoretical subjects such as genocide, Hitler-style breeding programs, eradication of all cultures, and now the outlawing of religion.

5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.

Like who dies and who doesn't? Like who marries who and who doesn't? Like whose culture is destroyed and whose isn't?

6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.

All this talk about unity and you think there will still be nations? News flash: the League of Nations tried this already. It failed.

7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.

Like "religous" laws such as "Thou shalt not kill"? And I suppose that the office of 'Pressident of the United States' would be on that list, wouldn't it?

8. Balance personal rights with social duties.

I can see the communal farms already. Wait...is that a train headed for Siberia?

9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.

I thought you wanted to replace religion with "reason."

10.Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature

Person #1: "There's a wolverine in my kitchen!"
Person #2: "Oh, then just evacuate your house...have to leave room for nature, you know."

And what's this business about mankind being a cancer? As if all our projects to make millions of square miles inhabitable is bad. As if protecting endangered species it bad. Humans have done some bad things, but we have also done some good things, so if we're harming your precious earth-god, then why don't you leave? You know, help us get down to 500,000,000.