Australian Politics Forum - Humanity V Human

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	Humanity V Human May 8^th, 2013 at 10:35am Which takes precedence ~ the human species or the individual human. Should individuals humans lose their rights so to guarantee the survival of the larger entity ~ humanity. Or should humanity possibly fail because of individual's rights.
Back to top	IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III Gold Member Offline Posts: 10266 Gender:	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #1 - May 8^th, 2013 at 10:49am I think you would have to place such a question into a context and deal with it on a case by case basis.
Back to top	IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #2 - May 8^th, 2013 at 10:57am

Then how about reproduction of the species.

By allowing inbreeding of the species genetics via restricting partners by concepts like marriage and monogamy, we are dumbing down and so reducing our species survival chances.

Should we start breeding programs so to strengthen our species by taking breeding rights away from the individual.

Quality over quantity.

Back to top

IP Logged

Quantum

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3373

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #3 - May 8^th, 2013 at 12:12pm

The overall discussion point is an interesting one worth having. There is certainly a tension between the rights of the individual and the collective that is being strained more than ever in the 21st century.

Too bad the motive of this thread will be to have another discussion about gay marriage, overpopulation, or banning religion.

Is there a reason why you can't just say what your thinking greens_win? Do you have to always make these vague threads that you will twist into something else by page 2?

Back to top

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #4 - May 8^th, 2013 at 1:11pm

Rather than shooting the messenger, how about discussing the topic.

As a starter I stated genetic corruption of the human race via customs that work against humanity. Nothing to do with gay marriage or banning religion. As for over population, customs have an impact.

If you don't desire to discuss the limitations on the human genetic pool via customs, you choose a topic for this humanity V human discussion to start.

Back to top

IP Logged

JC Denton Gold Member Offline Posts: 5471 Gender:	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #5 - May 8^th, 2013 at 4:13pm garbage thread
Back to top	IP Logged

FriYAY

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7395

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #6 - May 8^th, 2013 at 4:36pm

____ wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 10:57am:

Then how about reproduction of the species.

By allowing inbreeding of the species genetics via restricting partners by concepts like marriage and monogamy, we are dumbing down and so reducing our species survival chances.

Should we start breeding programs so to strengthen our species by taking breeding rights away from the individual.

Quality over quantity.

For a start we should make sure gays don’t breed…

Back to top

IP Logged

Annie Anthrax

Gold Member

Offline

Take the plan, spin it
sideways

Posts: 7057
Gender: female

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #7 - May 8^th, 2013 at 4:38pm

FriYAY wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

____ wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 10:57am:

Then how about reproduction of the species.

By allowing inbreeding of the species genetics via restricting partners by concepts like marriage and monogamy, we are dumbing down and so reducing our species survival chances.

Should we start breeding programs so to strengthen our species by taking breeding rights away from the individual.

Quality over quantity.

For a start we should make sure gays don’t breed…

Why single out gays? Why not criminals, blacks, Muslims or ugly people?

Back to top

I can't do this, but I'm doing it anyway.

IP Logged

JC Denton Gold Member Offline Posts: 5471 Gender:	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #8 - May 8^th, 2013 at 4:44pm yeah and why would you be worried about gays breeding given that homosexuality is a genetic dead end
Back to top	IP Logged

FriYAY Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7395	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #9 - May 8^th, 2013 at 4:47pm Oh FFS Why not, chinks, Christians or good looking people?
Back to top	IP Logged

FriYAY Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7395	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #10 - May 8^th, 2013 at 4:47pm JC Denton wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 4:44pm: yeah and why would you be worried about gays breeding given that homosexuality is a genetic dead end Well i'll be!!
Back to top	IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #11 - May 8^th, 2013 at 5:02pm

JC Denton wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 4:44pm:

yeah and why would you be worried about gays breeding given that homosexuality is a genetic dead end

A genetic dead end for heterosexual couples.

A good point for breeding to be taken out of the hands of individuals since gay children could be the symptom of inbred heterosexual parents.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 96346	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #12 - May 8^th, 2013 at 5:02pm JC Denton wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 4:44pm: yeah and why would you be worried about gays breeding given that homosexuality is a genetic dead end This is only true if you believe that science will never work out a way to create embryos in the old boy's rectum. I, for one, have much more faith in human progress.
Back to top	IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21872
A cat with a view

Re: Humanity V Human
Reply #13 - May 8^th, 2013 at 8:36pm

____ wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 10:35am:

Which takes precedence ~ the human species or the individual human.

Should individuals humans lose their rights so to guarantee the survival of the larger entity ~ humanity.

Or should humanity possibly fail because of individual's rights.

greens,

Once again, you are showing that you are a collectivist.

What ppl like yourself do, is always 'for the best',
.....and what you do is always wicked, because ppl like yourself have no moral compass, imo.

You are confused, .....and wrong!

Yadda wrote on Jul 25^th, 2011 at 12:35pm:

I can imagine that some may argue, that societal laws should protect the majority, and NOT specifically, the individual.

I disagree, strongly!!

If the detail of the law protects the rights of every individual, THEN AUTOMATICALLY, the interests of every person [of the majority], are also protected.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	Re: Humanity V Human Reply #14 - May 8^th, 2013 at 9:32pm "wicked", "no moral compass", and "wrong" labels, labels, labels ... now that's out the way, do the rights of so few dictate the downfall of the many. the micro version, should the rights of cells in the human body take precedents over the whole. Should we stop removing cancerous cells.
Back to top	IP Logged