Conquer Club

I would like everyones opinions on the validity of eugenics.

Does every single human being have a devine right to live and create?
Should severe criminals be sterilised?
Are certain genetic illnesses and disabilities going to prove too costly to our future socieities?
Are some people just too dumb and irresponsible to raise children correctly?
Does this world really need everyone?


I certainly want this to be sensible and serious.

My opinions, at this present moment, is that certain criminals must be sterilised, and that young people wanting children (up to the age of 21) must pass a "responsible parent test" to ensure that they do not bring up a poorly educated, poorly mannered, poorly brought up litter of nasty brats.

I also believe that severe illnesses, such as bipolar disorder or severe mental conditions should be sterilised.

The poll is set up, so that you can change your vote later, if you change your mind.

Here we have the model citizen, this type of person is looking for a utopian world. if only we were all institutionalized as he is. then we'd all be happy living in a police state.

although enforced castration of paedo's wouldn't be a bad thing, and using the unborn to help the living is reasonable to a degree.

billy07 wrote:although enforced castration of paedo's wouldn't be a bad thing,

This anyway.



Also, where would you draw the line with genetic illnesses?

The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed. If not, then there is no reason to mess with his genitals.

On the matter of genetic "defects", I believe that eugenists are ignoring the obvious fact that evolution works fine without their help. If a genetic flaw is severe enough, then the gene carrying the defect will grow rare through either natural or sexual selection (mostoftenly through both).

Another matter to consider is the fact that some of the biggest breakthroughs both in evolution (consider the the poor survival skills of the human infant compared to other species) and outside of it (the flawed Mac that became the first PC) begun their "career" as flaws. Thus, eugenics is a means of hindering the evolution rather than advancing it.

mandalorian2298 wrote:The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed.

Yeah...but not everybody believes in execution. And the whole sterilizing paedophiles is a way to make the sexual attraction less so they won't do it.

the problem with the world is not guns, but the people who have them.

therefore, guns should be taken away from all of the people who have them, and given to the people who don't. then anyone who doesn't have a gun gets shot.

then the world will be perfect forever and ever and ever.

STEP 1: Dump temporary-sterilization meds into the world supply of potable water.

STEP 2: Require individuals to pass "Parental Licensing Tests" before providing counter-drugs.

STEP 3: Witness the healing of our society.

If you need a license to own a gun, drive a car, teach a class or become a citizen, why shouldn't you need one to raise a child? Cut down on the number of accidental pregnancies, or pregnancies in unstable, undereducated homes and we've already won half the battle against every negative human condition, from violent crime, gang-violence, pedophilia, overpopulation and crappy music.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Also, where would you draw the line with genetic illnesses?

Left it open....so as to be subjective.

mandalorian2298 wrote:
On the matter of genetic "defects", I believe that eugenists are ignoring the obvious fact that evolution works fine without their help. If a genetic flaw is severe enough, then the gene carrying the defect will grow rare through either natural or sexual selection (mostoftenly through both

Actually, I believe that there is alot to be said about this.

It was printed about 6 months ago in a British newspaper, a theory that in the north of england, the inhabitants of this area were predominantly the predecsors of the "upper and middle classes" of 200 years ago, during the industrial period. The reasons they gave for this, was that the poor, imaciated families of the time, were in a position whereby they were forced to send their 4-7 year old children to work in unsafe and ill conditions, thus causing these children to die at earlier ages, and not being saught after by women as sexual partners, due to the lack of wealth they could offer, and poor quality of life.

Not sure how deeply this can be looked into, but interesting nonetheless.

I liked them up until annie lennox got all grown up and serious.

I chose all of the above, because I am intelligent.

Dekloren wrote:http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261&q=end+game&total=35176&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Seen it..

Would give it an 8/10. Though, it is a little melodramatic.

I mean, fair enough, we live in enlightnened, liberated times compared to a thousand years ago, where mob-rule and vigilantism would have eliminated any major threat to a community, and practiced euthanasia and child-euthanasia when it was neccassary for the community to survive comfortably in times of drought/famine and danger.

But what you must realise, is that in these liberated times, we have become rather soft on those who harm, or could potentially harm the quality of lives of the collective.

I hold it as a belief that in our softy-softy approach to incessant benefit leeches, our liberal "human-right" approach to heinous offenders and cruel behaviour to those who suffer serious disabilities and mental illnesses detract from the quality of everybodies lives.

Snorri1234 wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed.

Yeah...but not everybody believes in execution. And the whole sterilizing paedophiles is a way to make the sexual attraction less so they won't do it.

Look, I don't want to derail this thread into a discussion about the death penalty. Some people do believe in it and some don't. But, wanting to sterilize a person based on eugenics means believing that this person's offspring would be hazardus to society, belief which is based on the belief that this person has proven him/herself to be hazardus to society, in which case it would be illogical to allow this person to live. People advocating sterilization because they say they don't believe in the Death Penalty are pure hypocrats. (as the saying goes "They want to stay virgins, but to f*ck as well.")

Also, phedophiles are psychichly sick people. By sterilizing them, you will only be denying them one outlet for their urges. In all probability, the this could only cause their behaviour to escalate into torturing or killing of children.

I think that somebody in this thread is a multi

mandalorian2298 wrote:The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed. If not, then there is no reason to mess with his genitals.

Murderers, traitors, rapists and the like do deserve capitial punishment. If not that, then find me a large, abandoned island thousands of miles away from any nation's territorial waters and dump them off there. Let the offenders fend for themselves and have nature take her brutal course.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed. If not, then there is no reason to mess with his genitals.

Murderers, traitors, rapists and the like do deserve capitial punishment. If not that, then find me a large, abandoned island thousands of miles away from any nation's territorial waters and dump them off there. Let the offenders fend for themselves and have nature take her brutal course.

G'day mate.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed. If not, then there is no reason to mess with his genitals.

Murderers, traitors, rapists and the like do deserve capitial punishment. If not that, then find me a large, abandoned island thousands of miles away from any nation's territorial waters and dump them off there. Let the offenders fend for themselves and have nature take her brutal course.

G'day mate.

Jenos, you are a whining, self-righteous gimboid. Every post you make is full of the the same ill thought-out, heavy breathing nonsensey. And every thing you say is wrong.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:The idea of sterilizing criminals is ilogical to me. If the crime is unforgivable (pedophils or serial killers being examples of this case) then the criminal should be executed. If not, then there is no reason to mess with his genitals.

Murderers, traitors, rapists and the like do deserve capitial punishment. If not that, then find me a large, abandoned island thousands of miles away from any nation's territorial waters and dump them off there. Let the offenders fend for themselves and have nature take her brutal course.

G'day mate.

That was not ment to be a slur on the people of Austrialia, unintended as it was. I ment that we find a new place, perhaps France could agree to turn one of those worthless South Pacific Islands they own into an international prison colony.......

heavycola wrote:


Jenos, you are a whining, self-righteous gimboid. Every post you make is full of the the same ill thought-out, heavy breathing nonsensey. And every thing you say is wrong.

I did not intent to slur the Aussies, get off my back!

Either execute them or find a more cost effective method of detaining them, that is all, ALL, I was saying. I was also agreeing with Mandalorian about the illogic of castration. All that I was saying, so chill, will'ya?

Slur the aussies all you want. Bunch of crims.

See - it's the way you say things like 'execute them or find a more cost-effective way of detaining them'.
Traitors cost too much to incarcerate so let's put them to death. You talk arse, sir.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

heavycola wrote:


Jenos, you are a whining, self-righteous gimboid. Every post you make is full of the the same ill thought-out, heavy breathing nonsensey. And every thing you say is wrong.

I did not intent to slur the Aussies, get off my back!

Either execute them or find a more cost effective method of detaining them, that is all, ALL, I was saying. I was also agreeing with Mandalorian about the illogic of castration. All that I was saying, so chill, will'ya?

Try buying premium and playing some games. Cheap cunt.

sheesh, I can't believe people are discussing the merits of eugenics in the 21st century. This misguided and racist philosophy became thoroughly discredited when one of its advocates, Adolf Hitler, tried to implement it to its (warped) logical conclusion.
Any debate on the death penalty, right to life etc has nothing whatsoever to do with a debate on eugenics.
Some people are quick to mouth off in forums without even understanding what the hell they're discussing.
I'm gonna give the original poster the benefit of the doubt that he hasn't fully understood what he's raising in his poll, rather than abeing a sick, nazi fantasist.

Sounds like the 'Reproduction Sphere Removal Facility' just located its first customer Mr Monkey...

In other news:
1. AOTA FTW, unless pre-birth screening indicates that the child will be both female and fit.
2. Jenos talks 100% utter shite, in 100% of his posts.
3. My word is motherfucking bond.

Dancing Mustard wrote:In other news:
1. AOTA FTW, unless pre-birth screening indicates that the child will be both female and fit.

I like where this is going.

heavycola wrote:Slur the aussies all you want. Bunch of crims.

See - it's the way you say things like 'execute them or find a more cost-effective way of detaining them'.
Traitors cost too much to incarcerate so let's put them to death. You talk arse, sir.

Ok then. You could have pointed this out without all the flame and whip. I agree, I "screwed the pouche" on that bit about the traitors; death it is.

On reflection, I'm normally more careful when I speak. What happen!? Sorry if my post caused undue frustration.