08 Mar 07
Originally posted by ZahlanziYour ignorance is appalling. Please read a book.
you fail to remember that many such retards were so convinced they were the sons of Ra that they didn't participate in the decisions. and that the dynasties were constantly changing, adding fresh blood. plus the progress was hardly the pharaoh's fault. it wasn't the pharaohs who built the pyramids, it was the architects
08 Mar 07
Originally posted by no1marauderthat's it? that's your big argument? well, if you can do this why did i went through all the trouble presenting proofs and arguments? it is certainly easier to say "you are stuuuuuupid. you are wrong", than to argue.
Your ignorance is appalling. Please read a book.
at least enlighten me oh great one. what did i say wrong.
neaaah forget it. have a child with your mother if it suits you and it is your fundamental right
08 Mar 07
well, Charles II had a LOT of inbreeding, maybe just one instance in a line is not so bad. i was looking for a discussion of proportion of genetic disorder vs. inbreeding but didn't find it. i think the novel Beyond This Horizon might have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreeding
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_This_Horizon
"The novel depicts a world where genetic selection for increased health, longevity and intelligence has become so widespread that the unmodified 'control naturals' are a carefully managed (and protected) minority. The world has become an economic utopia; the "economic dividend" is so high that work has become optional. The chief economic problem is in finding a way to use up the economic surplus: much goes into scientific research, but this has the side-effect of further increasing productivity a decade or three later, so long-term projects with no possible economic return are favoured. Dueling and the carrying of arms is a socially accepted way of maintaining civility in public. "
08 Mar 07
Originally posted by sonhouseThe article noted that 2 of the siblings kids, had impairment of some description. Hereditary factors are not always screenable and to a large extent, you may only be alerted to a potential problem when you have your first child.
One thing I don't see mentioned here is what is the status of the 4 children already here? Wouldn't the state's case be diluted if it turns out those kids are all perfectly healthy? Or vs versa.
On the other hand with siblings having kids the probabilities of producing a disabled child are much more common, such that having a handicapped child from that union is as a result of much shorter odds than other typical disablement. The comparison would have to be made with premature babies born under 25 weeks old to find a group of kids who have similar propensities for health problems or permanent disablement. In the case of siblings the disablement usually results from genetic defect but in the case of severely premmie babies the disablement stems from the child not having developed all their proper physiological systems.
08 Mar 07
1 edit
The post that was quoted here has been removedyou retard. we already do it in china. and not to prevent idiot children to be born, but to prevent more children than we can feed to be born. if they deny them the right to breed like rabbits, and we deny an AIDS woman to have children, then why is incest any different? this is one subject where i won't refrain myself from offending.
plus i didn't say forbid people with hereditary diseases to having children but forbid people who are at a very hard risk of passing this gene on. democracy has so much addled your brain that you cannot see that it is not comprised of just fundamental rights, but of fundamental responsibilities and restriction as well. one of them is to not do anything that would hurt anyone. and having a child with your sister really hurts the child.
but i don't expect such a lowlife like yourself to understand. so if you feel you are should, go have sex with your mother.
08 Mar 07
Originally posted by orfeoi never said that. i never tried to imply that. i will call anyone an insensitive wart if they imply this or accuse me of implying this. the disabled are not necessarily so because of hereditary diseases. i am not talking of a blind or paralyzed person. i am talking about a person that cannot surpass the intelligence of a dog. i am talking about the little retarded girl that got mentioned in a thread here a while back and who got operated so she can be a child forever so that her parents would have a better time feeding her and moving her around. i am talking about huntingtons disease and more.
Having worked in the area of disability discrimination, and having heard the views of people with disability, I can honestly say that many of them regard the suggestion that their lives are somehow less fulfilling and less valuable than those of 'normal' people as deeply, deeply offensive.
you people are hypocrites. if i ask you what do you think about abortion, i am sure you will respond that you're for it. so why in the world do you call me a nazi because i don't want a child that will suffer all his short life(or long if he is unlucky), make his parents suffer, and be absolutely of no use to society.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
08 Mar 07
Originally posted by ZahlanziThen perhaps the parents should be punished when this is found out, depending on how badly the disability develops.
there is a chance the children are not handicapped in any visible way. perhaps they develop a disease later on. or they can't synthesize insulin very well, or whatever. or maybe they are perfectly ok. if a guy fires an uzi in a crowd and nobody gets hurt, he still gets thrown in jail for breaking the law.
08 Mar 07
The post that was quoted here has been removedlol. funny. but i think nobody will ever need a blowjob so badly so as to ask their sister.
on a more serious note, if we let morals aside, there is no reason brother and sister do not marry. as long as the union remains sterile. we used to think homosexuality was abnormal and discusting so we outlawed it. we realised however that it isn't. but incest is and is proven scientificaly. that is why it is and should remain a crime.