Ginjiro iv' e read what you said and to be honest I can' t believe that you actually believe this ' ' what' s wrong with people who have diseases and want to live.
You know what breeders do when a puppy isn' t strong enough to be a ' ' champion dog' ' ?....they kill it...same with horses i' m not sure about other species. Yet us humans kick up a big fuss when it' s one of our own and the doctor says to turn off the machine...what makes us so much more superior?. Isn' t that the same superiority complex that ended up in a lot of establishments that were later abolished?. Aside from that do you think it makes sense for someone to stay alive when all they can do to communicate with you is the odd dribble down their front and the occasional groan?.
Yeah, well most people I know get pretty upset when they think about how breeders treat animals. So instead of saying it' s wrong to cure the sick, I' ll say that it' s wrong to kill the weak.
Ok, if someone who' s weak wants to die himself then it' s ok. It' s his choice. But as long as there is will and means, a life should be saved.
If someone gets so sick that you can' t cure the poor guy then it is up to him. If he still wants to stay alive, then let him. Obviously he still enjoys life so why kill him?
Anyway, this the " strong survives, the weak dies" stuff is bugging me. Being a strong individual doesn' t necessary mean that you' re resistant to diseases or super-smart. Being strong can be anything depending on the circumstances. That' s why it' s important to keep all kinds of people alive since we are all strong in one way or the other. A thousand years ago the ability to do lots of things simultaneously would' ve meant nothing. But in todays complex society it is a really good thing. So you never know.
The whole idea of only letting the strong survive is stupid. Then we should just kill of everyone exept one guy and one girl who both happen to be super perfect. And then we' ll kill of every single species expect our own since they' re weaker. How logical is that?
Strange, i figured it' d be much more peaceful without people in gross positions of power.
And when you' re out with your girlfriend and this horny big guy who' s stornger than you sees her and decides to kill you and rape her, then what? No government, no laws, no police. It' s called suffering and I don' t like that.
No, we will be FORCED to alter our ways or face extinction. Overpopulation and the degradation of the o-zone layer coupled with the increase in greenhouse gasses could very easily wipe us out.
The overpopulation will come to a halt. Only in poor countries with weak governments will the population continue to rise too much. That' s why we need stronger governments all over the world. The o-zone layer and greenhouse gasses can and will be taken cared of if the knowledge is spread. But if people are like you and only care about their own survival then I understand why everything will go to hell. Thankfully, it seems there is enough people with the intellect to care about more than just themselves.
It' s predicted that the human population will have reached 9 billion by 2050. If we don' t start using alternative power soon then the pollution problems will simply increase.
There' s new technology on the way. If we keep learning and spreads our knowledge then things will turn out fine. One big problem is that lots of people are using too much energy, more than needed (americans and their damn cars) and they buy products that hasn' t been adapted to the environment (like sports cars and old school light bulbs). But if we spread our knowlegde and have strong governments, this can change.
< Message edited by ginjirou -- 17 Jul 06 21:20:07 >