[leal]

I voted no but could make an exemption for lawyers.

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'w')ould you choose to let your father die to save yourself and your sister or would you take them with you?

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('venky', ' ')There is a difference between actively killing and doing nothing and letting it happen. I think moral culpability is only on the perpetrators of the deed.

[Dukat_Reloaded]

The chinese already do it.

Webpage Title

Webpage Title

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'O')h now we're all soft & squishy about killing folks for our own benefit?

Pfft...

Happens everyday, and everyone reading this is guilty as sin.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'w')ould you choose to let your father die to save yourself and your sister or would you take them with you?

[MonteQuest]

So, if some was rockclimbing with their sister and their father and there was an accident which resulted in them having to cut the rope that separated them and their sister from their father to save themselves, should they do so, letting their father fall to his death?

Or should they all just die?

Changes the question, doesn't it?

Anyone care to respond?

[venky]

edit

[MonteQuest]

And your point by quoting me , Venky?

Do I need to add.... I am not in favor of actively killing burdensome people, no matter how you choose to distort my writings.

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'S')o, if some was rockclimbing with their sister and their father and there was an accident which resulted in them having to cut the rope that separated them and their sister from their father to save themselves, should they do so, letting their father fall to his death?

Or should they all just die?

Changes the question, doesn't it?

Anyone care to respond?

[holmes]

stanton is dead-on the target. The future of man is set now. We had our chance. we chose DEATH. get that D E A T H. And boy will we get it. wait we already are in it.
If you have a healthy strong child he will be stressed beyond your wildess dreams. Its how it works. The weak and the greedy are consuming VAST amounts of the resources NOW. get it, thats today? we are catering to the unborn of today not the unborn of seven generations from now. And through all this glutony and "Quality of Life" only a very few have the most benefits. while these Oh the horror! types find the crowds growing, spaces shrinking, water poison, air cancerous, soil eroded, food quality sinking like the titanic,. must I go on. It is only going to go dowwnhill the more bodies to the heap. Morals and values. fucks agree with invading sovereign countries to get resources to keep the bloat and detachment going for a few more years. paving the rainforests to get wood and resources for their shit and asshole bellies.
LOL. this charade has only a short time left anyway. enjoy the ride and buy kevlar and fertile land for your healthy strong kid. Well thats if you have one. most are being born fucked up now anyway. you know poison int he womb aint helping this overindustrialized gene pool. LOL. keepthinking your kid will have a better quality of life you have talk about detachment. I agree with all of montes proposals. and he never intended them to enforced. But for high IQ's to think and change habits for the better. maybe build a less dramatic sustainable tribe. or maybe we are addicted to the drama. addicts tend to do that. co dependency NO MORE!

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'S')o, if some was rockclimbing with their sister and their father and there was an accident which resulted in them having to cut the rope that separated them and their sister from their father to save themselves, should they do so, letting their father fall to his death?

Or should they all just die?

Changes the question, doesn't it?

Anyone care to respond?

[johnmarkos]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'N')ow, come on, Johnmarkos....people have to make those kind of decisions all the time. Sounds like you just wish to avoid answering the question.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', ' ')I do not think so ... but one can always disagree with others. You should read the full article though. In any case check http://ergosphere.blogspot.com/2005/04/ ... ey-on.html
to see how he derives his calculations ... his "future" england of 2 million would have an energy consumption of 98KW per person which is what? 8 times the current US rate? Even his assumptions about renewable energy technology (i.e. a wind turbine will generate less electricity in the future) is an indication that he has divorced his thinking process from rationality OR that he has an agenda which does not involve "saving lives". With proponents such as him, it is no wonder why people who advocate population control are not taken seriously.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('johnmarkos', ' ')Maybe the climbers should have sat down before they went on their trip and agreed beforehand on whom each would sacrifice to save the other if it came down to it. I don't know. It doesn't really have any bearing on the "kill-off" policy Stanton proposes.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', ' ')May I ask you a question: you want to advance a sustainable life on earth, under the carrying capacity. But carrying capacity is represented in numbers and is examined within the confines of a quantitative reasoning program. Don't you think that the calculations have to be correct? IF they are not, and in spite of the obvious errors they are being repeated what conclusions should I reach? Either that the guys do not know what they are talking about OR they have an agenda that used (instead of caring) about the numbers. The latter are simply a smokescreen. Wouldn't you agree with that?

[holmes]

Hey enrgy spin, keep doing the numbers. I and many others did them long ago. And you know what its all playing out as we expected. So keep doing them as it all falls apart. Youll need alot of numbers in 20', 50.s , 100' dollar bills to keep the masses on life support. well as long as this economy is going. In a barter economy im not sure youll have the choice of all this compassion of the sanctity of life. And we have used up over 40% of the ecosystems on the planet. the carrying capacity is getting smaller and smaller each year. Remember we are using resources exponentially. you want to rehab the life support systems? It will take years. Folks will die in those years.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('holmes', 'H')ey enrgy spin, keep doing the numbers. I and many others did them long ago. And you know what its all playing out as we expected. So keep doing them as it all falls apart. Youll need alot of numbers in 20', 50.s , 100' dollar bills to keep the masses on life support. well as long as this economy is going. In a barter economy im not sure youll have the choice of all this compassion of the sanctity of life. And we have used up over 40% of the ecosystems on the planet. the carrying capacity is getting smaller and smaller each year. Remember we are using resources exponentially. you want to rehab the life support systems? It will take years. Folks will die in those years.

[johnmarkos]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'O')nly a blind fool would need any numbers to see that the earth is in overshoot. We know the population has to do down, not up. And since we are over by billions, the hard numbers aren't even relevant until such time as we approach sustainablity.

[JohnDenver]

It think CrudeAwakening's idea (from the HOF thread) is more realistic than the mountain climber example:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f two people are competing for the same food source, which is only enough to support one of them, how do "universal rights" enter into this? One lives, the other dies. One's right to live infringes on the other's right to live.