Fatties beware: your nuts are in danger!
Forum rules
1) Remain civil. Respect others' rights to their viewpoints, even if you believe them to be completely wrong.
2) Sourcing your information is highly recommended. Plagiarism will get you banned.
3) Please create a new thread for a new topic, even if you think it might not get a lot of responses. Do not create mega-threads.
4) If you think the subject of a thread is not important enough to merit a post, simply avoid posting in it. If enough people agree, it will fall off the page soon enough.
1) Remain civil. Respect others' rights to their viewpoints, even if you believe them to be completely wrong.
2) Sourcing your information is highly recommended. Plagiarism will get you banned.
3) Please create a new thread for a new topic, even if you think it might not get a lot of responses. Do not create mega-threads.
4) If you think the subject of a thread is not important enough to merit a post, simply avoid posting in it. If enough people agree, it will fall off the page soon enough.
-
Deacon
- Shining Adonis
- Posts: 44234
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Lakehills, TX
The only reason anyone is morbidly obese is genetics, so we should eliminate them from the gene pool to have no more fatties and far lower healthcare costs.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922
[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="472441"]
Phong - you know how some people have a tendency towards obesity, even if their not lazy, like how some people have ridiculous metabolisms where they can eat like a trailer trash hippo and be almost as skinny as a concentration camp survivor?
Yep. Genetic proclivity.
(though, Deacon, I think you have a point - they should tube-tie women who want it, too - realize, too, Blaze, this is still strictly voluntary, no one is being forced into it)[/quote]
I didn't realize that was genetic, both of my parents and 3 out of the 5 of their kids are too.
That being said however, how does being fat make someone unfit to breed? (I'm not saying this is your opinion, it's a question to everyone).
...Because skin color really, medically makes you demonstratably unhealthy ... doesn't it?That'd be the government recognizing some people as unfit to reproduce, and also, intense discrimination. If the government pays for one man's vasectomy, and they won't for mine, just because I weigh less, that's discrimination of the worst sort! No better than skin color.
Phong - you know how some people have a tendency towards obesity, even if their not lazy, like how some people have ridiculous metabolisms where they can eat like a trailer trash hippo and be almost as skinny as a concentration camp survivor?
Yep. Genetic proclivity.
(though, Deacon, I think you have a point - they should tube-tie women who want it, too - realize, too, Blaze, this is still strictly voluntary, no one is being forced into it)[/quote]
I didn't realize that was genetic, both of my parents and 3 out of the 5 of their kids are too.
That being said however, how does being fat make someone unfit to breed? (I'm not saying this is your opinion, it's a question to everyone).
In the fall of 1972 President Nixon announced that the rate of increase of inflation was decreasing. This was the first time that a sitting president used the third derivative to advance his case for reelection. - Hugo Rossi, Mathmetician.
This is my point. They NEED to be offering it to everyone.Blaze - They're not FORCING it on anyone.
Furthermore, they're not offering it to everyone (though, really, I think it might be nifty if they would...) because there's no eugenical (er, what IS the proper word, there?) reason to discourage healthy genetic stock from breeding.
"Hello, we have a school, but you're black, so you can't use it. You don't need it anyway. Black people have no use for school. It's only for white people. Sorry."
Yeah, we've been through this before.
phong it's not fat people we're talking about, it's chronically obese people. it has reached such a phase with these people that is a mere genetical disease. pretty much like cancer which fuggle mentioned.
btw, if it's voluntary - I'm for that. as long as no one is being, coerced or (As we often say) "superconvinced"
btw, if it's voluntary - I'm for that. as long as no one is being, coerced or (As we often say) "superconvinced"
I'm still dubious about the ultimate purpose of this plan. Are the medical costs of chronically obsese greatly excessive compared to other genetical disesase? Where are the statistics for that?
If this plan is made solely to eliminate morbid obseity from the human race (assuming that it is possible, that is!), then why not other diseases? How about couples that carry genes for Down's syndrome? Or chronic hepatitis B? If you keep going backwards and backwards, sooner or later all of us will probably have to be sterilized, simply because we all have some genes that code for some disease. Our children may not have any expression, but the genes will be there and it will show up sooner or later. The genetic code can't simply be erased, especially if this is voluntary sterilization! I doubt that medical costs will drop anytime soon with eugenics.
Unless your idea of eugenics is simply to create perfectly shaped human bodies.....
EDIT: Ninjaed Deacon. Like I said, it is a large, tough plan which is not very feasible. Genes aren't eliminated that easily.
If this plan is made solely to eliminate morbid obseity from the human race (assuming that it is possible, that is!), then why not other diseases? How about couples that carry genes for Down's syndrome? Or chronic hepatitis B? If you keep going backwards and backwards, sooner or later all of us will probably have to be sterilized, simply because we all have some genes that code for some disease. Our children may not have any expression, but the genes will be there and it will show up sooner or later. The genetic code can't simply be erased, especially if this is voluntary sterilization! I doubt that medical costs will drop anytime soon with eugenics.
Unless your idea of eugenics is simply to create perfectly shaped human bodies.....
EDIT: Ninjaed Deacon. Like I said, it is a large, tough plan which is not very feasible. Genes aren't eliminated that easily.
Last edited by YH on Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
Deacon
- Shining Adonis
- Posts: 44234
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Lakehills, TX
[quote="Phong";p="472469"]how does being fat make someone unfit to breed?[/quote]
[quote="Deacon";p="472458"]The only reason anyone is morbidly obese is genetics, so we should eliminate them from the gene pool to have no more fatties and far lower healthcare costs.[/quote]
In response to YH, I still personally have a problem classifying obesity as a "disease" in the same way that I have a hard time classifying a heroin addiction as a disease. If you take THE fattest person in the world and wire their mouth shut, they WILL die thin.
[quote="Deacon";p="472458"]The only reason anyone is morbidly obese is genetics, so we should eliminate them from the gene pool to have no more fatties and far lower healthcare costs.[/quote]
In response to YH, I still personally have a problem classifying obesity as a "disease" in the same way that I have a hard time classifying a heroin addiction as a disease. If you take THE fattest person in the world and wire their mouth shut, they WILL die thin.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922
Healthcare goes against disease. Disease is something that is a form of abnormal condition that is harmful; it's not necessarily created by viruses or bacteria or other pathogens. You are saying that morbid obesity is a genetic problem, and must be eliminated in the name of healthcare.
But this is just semantics; my main point still stands. Eugenics cannot eliminate obesity, as it cannot eliminate genetics.
And also, to poke some fun into the matter, is obesity a choice then? Choice vs. genetics......
But this is just semantics; my main point still stands. Eugenics cannot eliminate obesity, as it cannot eliminate genetics.
And also, to poke some fun into the matter, is obesity a choice then? Choice vs. genetics......
Last edited by YH on Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Deacon
- Shining Adonis
- Posts: 44234
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Lakehills, TX
While technically, according to secondary definitions of the word in general dictionaries, "disease" does apply to obesity, the connotation of the word is that it is an affliction brought on by outside forces (malaria) or deterioration of bodily tissues and/or function (heart disease), things that are reasonably outside the direct control of the person. In other words, classifying something as a disease is almost in effect relieving the "victim" of responsibility for their condition, often causing people to feel sorry for the person, as though the fat cells are invading their body and lodging themselves under the skin, and there's nothing they can do about it. To me, it's akin to suggesting that a skater with a broken arm from a poorly executed trick is a victim of disease.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922
-
StruckingFuggle
- Redshirt
- Posts: 22166
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 6:18 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Austin / San Marcos, Tx
Upon further thought, I realize there's a problem with this whole situation, in that they're offering it to "Fat people", in general, without testing to see if their obesity is purely by choice, or if it's in some part due to genetic predisposition ... which should be the key in deciding who gets the vasectomy or not, because snipping a bunch of weak-willed people isn't really going to improve anything ...
Because the issue isn't "fat = unfit to breed", which becomes the issue when simply "being obese" is the requirement, the issue is supposed to be "discouraging genetic predispositions to obesity by offering a free way for people to remove those flaws from the gene pool".
Though I think YH raises a good point - money spent on this plan would be much better spent researching how to genetically reprogram the unborn to remove such genetic tendencies, thus hopefully accomplishing the whole point, or at least a signifigant chunk of it, in one or two generations ... because while it's a nice thought, and in no way wrong (or a bad form of discrimination, because yes, it's discrimination, but contrary to what Idiot Lefties have been trying to tell us for decades, discrimination is not inherently wrong), ... it's not going to be very effective in getting rid of genetic predispositions towards obesity.
Because the issue isn't "fat = unfit to breed", which becomes the issue when simply "being obese" is the requirement, the issue is supposed to be "discouraging genetic predispositions to obesity by offering a free way for people to remove those flaws from the gene pool".
Though I think YH raises a good point - money spent on this plan would be much better spent researching how to genetically reprogram the unborn to remove such genetic tendencies, thus hopefully accomplishing the whole point, or at least a signifigant chunk of it, in one or two generations ... because while it's a nice thought, and in no way wrong (or a bad form of discrimination, because yes, it's discrimination, but contrary to what Idiot Lefties have been trying to tell us for decades, discrimination is not inherently wrong), ... it's not going to be very effective in getting rid of genetic predispositions towards obesity.
Last edited by StruckingFuggle on Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"He who lives by the sword dies by my arrow."
"In your histories, there are continual justifications for all manner of hellish actions. Claims of nobility and heritage and honor to cover up every bit of genocide, assassination, and massacre. At least the Horde is honest in their naked lust for power."
"In your histories, there are continual justifications for all manner of hellish actions. Claims of nobility and heritage and honor to cover up every bit of genocide, assassination, and massacre. At least the Horde is honest in their naked lust for power."
-
Deacon
- Shining Adonis
- Posts: 44234
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Lakehills, TX
[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="472522"]snipping a bunch of weak-willed people isn't really going to improve anything ...[/quote]
I disagree.
I disagree.
Uhhh...a vasectomy is quick, easy, and inexpensive (less than $10k). This Gattaca concept is honestly much more complex and obviously still a large part theory and science fiction, and the research behind it, IMHO, is not something the government should be funding, and not just because it would be incredibly more expensive in comparison.money spent on this plan would be much better spent researching how to genetically reprogram the unborn to remove such genetic tendencies
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922
-
StruckingFuggle
- Redshirt
- Posts: 22166
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 6:18 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Austin / San Marcos, Tx
More expensive, but would produce a much better effect, ... probably greater than "proportionate".
"He who lives by the sword dies by my arrow."
"In your histories, there are continual justifications for all manner of hellish actions. Claims of nobility and heritage and honor to cover up every bit of genocide, assassination, and massacre. At least the Horde is honest in their naked lust for power."
"In your histories, there are continual justifications for all manner of hellish actions. Claims of nobility and heritage and honor to cover up every bit of genocide, assassination, and massacre. At least the Horde is honest in their naked lust for power."
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests