posted on May, 21 2009 @ 01:39 PM
Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
See we are a lot a like. We are both pro-choice. Maybe I want to allow a little more choice than you do, but is that wrong.
My best friend and his wife have an autistic child and he is a real burden to the family. He wont behave and all he will eat is Cheetos and Pepsi.
It has to be Cheetos and Pepsi or he will flip. Like if you try to slip him a coke he will loose his mind. It is such a strain on my friends. I
have shared this idea with my friend and he says if it became legal he would put the boy out of his misery.
Why should my friend and his wife be burdened with this for the rest of their lives. It is no different than forcing a woman to have a child she
doesnt want. Neither one is fair.
[edit on 5/20/2009 by justsomeboreddude]
I'm not sure if your serious - or your having a joke?
Anyhow - I used to like the idea of just offing people who were a negative impact on society, but I lightened up a bit - its mainly because people
would complain about it too much.
Where people act in a criminal or violent way, then I still think it is economically better off to just kill them. The controllers however would have
us believe its 'barbaric' to kill off 'evil' (I mean screwed up that will kill for no particular reason) people - it isn't of course, they just
want to keep those people alive and in prison to increase the public debt. They have made it so expensive to execute people, that it is actually
cheaper to lock them up - which is what they want.
Once people are alive however, then I think it is moral to try and give them a good life - even though it might be a hard burden. The trick I think
is to try and identify if there is going to a problem before they are born - if theres a major problem then abortion should be considered, and further
to promote better genes by using some form of eugenics.
Ultimately you don't want to see children brought into the world who are going to suffer from day one - whether its a congenital disease, or extreme
poverty, especially if they are going to be treated as a burden by their parents, without loving parents then life is probably never going to give
them joy. Suffering could be averted by having an abortion.
I think eugenics is necessary, because natural selection is no longer going to be in charge of the gene pool - so we have to manage it ourselves, or
we will end up with a population suffering from every conceivable genetic disease etc. My suggestion for a eugenics program would be to test mothers
for capability, then either offer them a financial incentive (if they have no genetic issues, decent intelligence and physique etc) or a disincentive
if they have a genetic disease, or are below average mentally or physically.
I guess I'm pro-choice if that's what you call it - but people really need to work at getting it right before someone gets pregnant.
[edit on 21-5-2009 by Amagnon]