Results 131 to 140 of 151
Thread: A brilliant response to anti-abortion harassment
-
11-13-13, 07:58 PM #131
Re: A brilliant response to anti-abortion harassment
WickedTribe liked this post
-
- Join Date
- 01-28-07
- Location
- Arizona
- Posts
- 13,490
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
11-13-13, 08:26 PM #132Re: A brilliant response to anti-abortion harassment
Ae's post made me think of something, if we are moving everyone to help with climate (or whatever the point was), why would we pick Texas? Why not part of Canada or somewhere that (assuming Global Warming and Climate Change is true, which I do) won't get as screwed by climate change. Could be wrong, but guessing Texas would be on the list of places not to go.
-
-
-
- Join Date
- 02-13-07
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX
- Posts
- 42,785
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
-
- Join Date
- 01-28-07
- Location
- Arizona
- Posts
- 13,490
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 5
-
-
11-14-13, 06:51 AM #138
Re: A brilliant response to anti-abortion harassment
I get a day behind on this thread... and theres 8 addtional pages to read and... im out. TLDR
Tablet-
-
-
11-14-13, 03:01 PM #140
Re: A brilliant response to anti-abortion harassment
Well you suddenly seem to have gotten more reasonable, haven't you! Your original question was asking me to explain how we will come up with unlimited resources if we have unlimited population growth, not why population growth will not deplete our resources.
The truth is that your assumption is fallacious one to start with. We don't have unlimited population growth of any species here on earth and we never will. There will always be natural events that affect and limit population growth. We also have not even come close to discovering all of the resource potential that this planet has to offer us. Not to mention the technological advancements we will see as time goes on. No matter our population growth, it is incredibly arrogant and naive to think that we will destroy this planet and/or "use it all up". The planet was here long before us, and it will keep spinning long after I suspect.
The question really is should human beings limit our own population growth through abortion or sterilization, or I dunno - killing the weak or infirmed? The answer is no. Using a "save the planet" argument to justify it is just adding insult to injury in my opinion.
One last thing. You know, in Nazi Germany eugenics evolved over time, starting with abortions, then killing and forced sterilization of handicapped or those with genetic deformities, and then... Well you know the rest of that story.
A similar story happened in the U.S., with reports of compulsory sterilization happening all the way into the 70's when Native American women were still undergoing procedures. Fortunately cooler heads prevailed and that trend died. We certainly don't need today's politicians capitalizing on these notions. They are NOT the angels some would portray them to be and certainly should not be trusted to decide who lives and who dies. If you disagree with me on that, well then I don't think you've been paying attention.
While some ideas like the ones Civil posed are tempting to support, this is the reason I would never support it. Because the question of who decides is a tricky one. Right now it's left at mothers and their babies - and while I think even that is abhorrent, I do not want to see any expansion of the enterprise of killing children or old people.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks