Personality Cafe banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Okay it's time for a new creation. Let's pick some fights. I'm going to put three fun topics up here. I'll make a statement on all three of them. I may OR may not agree with my statement, but that's not the point. Let's just start arguing. Someone post some opposing sides of the arguments (whether you agree with what you're saying or not). Play devils advocate all you need to.

Please keep in mind in this thread that no one's post necessarily reflect their own personal opinion in any way shape or form. We're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

1) Forced sterilization should be implemented by the government in cases of multiple abortive mothers as well as women on welfare who continue to have children along with the fathers of said children.

2) Violence solves all problems. Corporal punishment should be encouraged rather than discouraged to control children, and fistfights should be re-instituted as a standard way of deliberation between disagreeing parties.

3) Religion should be reincorporated into childrens schooling in order to impart a proper moral compasses, and increase societal uniformity.


Okay 3.....2......1............GO!!


*if anyone wants to add topics, by all means feel free to throw more into the fray. The more we can argue about the better*
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kr3m1in

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,780 Posts
1. If by forced sterilization you mean post-birth abortions for the mother, father, AND all their kids, I'm totally down (the best part of Obama-care was the death panels). If you just mean neutering, I don't think you go far enough! In fact, I'm for a ban on all live births. Live births are a haphazard and ultimately detrimental to a prosperous and strong human species. Live births promote genetic inferiority by allowing genetic diseases to continue. In that case, why not sterilize every one, and grow babies? You get the exact right amount of offspring, and they can be genetically engineered to do a specific job well. No more welfare either, as everyone would have a job.

2. Again, you don't go far enough! A disagreement "solved" with a fight can have 1 of 2 possible outcomes. 1) The losing party gets upset and causes more problems. 2) The losing party gains respect for the winning party and everything is fine. A fight to the death instead of fistfights would be much more efficient. Afterwards, there is no problem anymore. By definition, it is solved.

3. To say a moral compass is granted by religion is one of the most heinous statements I have ever heard. The utterly despicable things done in the name of religion and "God" should be proof enough that people act independently of any professed belief; people rally behind a name when convenient, and circumvent when it isn't. To introduce such hypocrisy to any human, much less a child, would most certainly breed some sort of psychopathic tendencies. Besides, don't we want independent thinkers leaving school as opposed to mindless drowns?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
1. If by forced sterilization you mean post-birth abortions for the mother, father, AND all their kids, I'm totally down (the best part of Obama-care was the death panels). If you just mean neutering, I don't think you go far enough! In fact, I'm for a ban on all live births. Live births are a haphazard and ultimately detrimental to a prosperous and strong human species. Live births promote genetic inferiority by allowing genetic diseases to continue. In that case, why not sterilize every one, and grow babies? You get the exact right amount of offspring, and they can be genetically engineered to do a specific job well. No more welfare either, as everyone would have a job.

2. Again, you don't go far enough! A disagreement "solved" with a fight can have 1 of 2 possible outcomes. 1) The losing party gets upset and causes more problems. 2) The losing party gains respect for the winning party and everything is fine. A fight to the death instead of fistfights would be much more efficient. Afterwards, there is no problem anymore. By definition, it is solved.

3. To say a moral compass is granted by religion is one of the most heinous statements I have ever heard. The utterly despicable things done in the name of religion and "God" should be proof enough that people act independently of any professed belief; people rally behind a name when convenient, and circumvent when it isn't. To introduce such hypocrisy to any human, much less a child, would most certainly breed some sort of psychopathic tendencies. Besides, don't we want independent thinkers leaving school as opposed to mindless drowns?
Okay so you're not supposed to agree with me and then take it FURTHER (the first 2 points) :p LoL

3) But what about the fundamental beliefs that span multiple monotheistic religions regarding maintenance of order and peace. The generalization of these religious practices can be summed up in "the golden rule", which seems to NOT be taught to children these days outside of a religious atmosphere. This viewpoint would further humanity as a whole, and should be impressed at a fairly early age regardless of the means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,684 Posts
Besides, don't we want independent thinkers leaving school as opposed to mindless drowns?
Didn't you want to genetically engineer children for certain jobs? If so, then having independent thinkers causes more problems as even one person who doesn't want the job they were raised for throws off the system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,146 Posts
Didn't you want to genetically engineer children for certain jobs? If so, then having independent thinkers causes more problems as even one person who doesn't want the job they were raised for throws off the system.
That's why we genetically "persuade" them to the right direction.

And by genetically I mean ocular flashbang, and by "persuade" I mean threaten.
With violence.
And Ocular Flashbangs.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top