Subject:
|
Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 1999 01:39:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
906 times
|
| |
|
|
Christopher L. Weeks wrote in message
<3783B529.73A74C27@cclabs.missouri.edu>...
> Ed Jones wrote:
> > I grew up during the 60s - remember the era that fought for equal rights,
> > fought against the war in Vietnam, fought for student rights, fought • against
> > oppression of the poor by the rich, fought to get assistance to those who • were
> > in need.
Groovy!
<silly debate snipped>
> No, I would advocate sterilizing as a precondition for receiving aide,
> and then allowing them to waive future aide in order to turn it off.
> Actually, I wasn't the one who brought up reversible sterilization, that
> was Mike's idea. I meant full-on permanent sterilizations.
Chris, I tend to agree with you more often than with Ed "Boxer" Jones,
but if you would advocate the above, I would have to puke. When some one
brought up this sterilizing idea, I thought it was a joke. I don't like
that idea and I will tell you why. I don't think the government should be
handing out goods taken from one who earned them to another who did not. No
matter what preconditions are made, I still won't like group theft. Your
new precondition is just wrong wrong worng and two wrongs still don't make a
right.
> > Or is your intent merely to limit the reproduction of citizens that you • find to
> > be worthless to society?
> I'm not sure what you mean by merely. I consider such a goal a grand
> aspiration, not something to be referred to as 'mere.' We already have
> natural selection that is guided by societal mores. I'm not proposing
> anything particularly revolutionary. And it's behavior that we impose
> on lower animals without qualm...what's the difference?
Maybe David Duke's grand aspiration.
> > Jeez what's next - concentration camps. Or is your intent extinction? • Yeah, right. Concentration camps wouldn't do any good.
> > I am truly appalled by the direction this debate has taken.
> :-)
Concentration camps have been shown to be effective in the past, and
depending on your true aspiration might do a lot of good. I agree that it
is pretty appalling to demand sterilization for receivers of charity. Now
if you are talking about punishment, maybe in some cases it wouldn't be such
a bad idea. Like rape, for instance, sterilization (or even castration)
might be appropriate - a good deterrent. Deterring people from being
slackers is a good thing to do, but I doubt we swayed Ed much with this
idea. And he has proven to be a hard nut to crack anyway.
> Christopher L. Weeks
--
Have fun!
John
AUCTION Page (Technic, and Town)
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/2-many-toys/
TRADE Page http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego/index.htm
MOC,CA[cl,bf,cr,fm,bk+++ wp,dm,rk,df++ fk-]++++(6035)
SW,TR,old(456)+++ TO++ PI,SP+ DU-- #+++++
ig88888888@stlnet.com & IG88888888 on AOL
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
433 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
