Should Fat People be allowed to Breed?

[KeinMitleid]

If obesity is a 'genetic' problem as so many fat people claim, then why don't we simply bar them from breeding?

[Bloodnigger]

That's a good point.

But advocating eugenics would get you shot by Commissar Obongo.

[KeinMitleid]

That's a good point.

But advocating eugenics would get you shot by Commissar Obongo.

Oh believe me I'm fully aware of the consequences of being right :D

[Rædwald]

I think fat people are such a drain on the healthcare system; with all that extra surface area. Being over a certain weight should automatically volunteer yourself to donate skin graphs for people who give a damn about their bodies, but were injured in unfortunate circumstances.

[FeederOfRavens]

No and fat people should be forced to become fit or be imprisoned.

[Guapo]

Good morning north america

[Reign of True Hayasa]

Eugenics - A touchy subject I'd like to explore (http://www.thinkatheist.com/forum/topics/eugenics-a-touchy-subject-id)

I have some pretty strong feelings about eugenics (it's a good and necessary practice), but I find it very, VERY difficult to talk about it with anyone since I'm instantly labeled a Nazi for supporting it. I'm hoping the folks on Think Atheist will be more inclined to intellectual discussion than name-calling and dismissal.

The start off, some disclaimers: genocide is wrong; taking human rights away from people of a race/religion/hairstyle you don't like is wrong; concentration camps are wrong; violence in wrong.

There. Now to the actual discussion.

When I talk about eugenics, I'm talking about the practice of systematically removing debilitating genetic traits and defects from a population by means of regulating the reproduction of its citizens. Do you have Schizophrenia? Did you know that this ailment is genetic and very easy to pass on to you children? Please, do not punish an innocent child with this problem. Are you genetically healthy, intelligent, and talented? Do you have special immunities that make you less likely to get sick? By all means, spread these traits to future generations, either by having children yourself or donating to a sperm or egg bank. Do you want children but should not carry your genetic problems onto them? Adopt. Adoption will always be available no matter what the society (just because someone has good genetic material does NOT mean they would make a good parent). Do you say that adoption is not the same? Then I suppose you care more about satisfying your selfish desires than the well being of a child.


Eugenics is, at its base, very simple - think about the future first.

I'm leaving this post now for what I'm hoping will be thoughtful and anti-inflammatory discussion.

[Pjeter Pan]

Good morning north america its 10:55pm :roll eyes:

[Guapo]

Good morning north america.

[Ars Moriendi]

The State need not be concerned with such menial matters, other than procuring healthy food instead of greasy junk, and educating active physical education and proper habits socially.

If there are indeed unfit people, they will progressively dissapear on their own provided the State doesn't promote disgenesic measures: Forced fertility for sick people, impotence medicines, articial conception.

Humans are too mediocre to decide what's best for them, so the only wise thing to do is to promote natural health, and let nature do its part.


Eugenic human programs are bound to fail by their own weight, and can only happen within an apparatus that is deeply corroded by dementia.Typical example of ivory towers with clay foundations.

[Reign of True Hayasa]

http://theweightofthenation.hbo.com/

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/fast-food-fat-profits-obesity-america/

http://www.watchdocumentary.tv/fast-food-fat-profits-obesity-in-america/

[Rædwald]

The State need not be concerned with such menial matters, other than procuring healthy food instead of greasy junk, and educating active physical education and proper habits socially.

If there are indeed unfit people, they will progressively dissapear on their own provided the State doesn't promote disgenesic measures: Forced fertility for sick people, impotence medicines, articial conception.

Humans are too mediocre to decide what's best for them, so the only wise thing to do is to promote natural health, and let nature do its part.


Eugenic human programs are bound to fail by their own weight, and can only happen within an apparatus that is deeply corroded by dementia.Typical example of ivory towers with clay foundations.

If people were so weak that they could only exist in such a nanny state, then they probably shouldn't exist in the first place.

[Cristiano viejo]

Bad thread for Dumbra :lol:

[Ars Moriendi]

If people were so weak that they could only exist in such a nanny state, then they probably shouldn't exist in the first place.

So what is it?
Less intrusion fom the State so that nature can do its selection freely without artifical sustenance for negative features, or more intervention from State so that humans can forcefully alter their own biological development using only human points of view and human objectives as a standard?

I already stated the natural path: Promote good habits, and do not fund disgenesic measures so that individuals harm the collective for selfish reasons. Simple.

Self-righteous vainglory will always fall due to its own weight. It is inevitable.

[Guapo]

blacks are biggest racists

[KeinMitleid]

The State need not be concerned with such menial matters, other than procuring healthy food instead of greasy junk, and educating active physical education and proper habits socially.

If there are indeed unfit people, they will progressively dissapear on their own provided the State doesn't promote disgenesic measures: Forced fertility for sick people, impotence medicines, articial conception.

Humans are too mediocre to decide what's best for them, so the only wise thing to do is to promote natural health, and let nature do its part.


Eugenic human programs are bound to fail by their own weight, and can only happen within an apparatus that is deeply corroded by dementia.Typical example of ivory towers with clay foundations.

I disagree. SOME humans are too mediocre to know what is best for them. There are others who are fit to decide the fate of those below them. And why do you say eugenics programs fail?

[Ars Moriendi]

I disagree. SOME humans are too mediocre to know what is best for them. There are others who are fit to decide the fate of those below them. And why do you say eugenics programs fail?

No, it's not some. The human species is not competent enough to understand the nature of the cosmos, the way time will change everything that exists, or even the reason behind plenty of events (not even dark matter is understood).

You are not superior to other humans, just like anyone else is not superior enough to pretend otherwise.

Petty self-grandiose behaviour irreparably ends in calamity, for a simple reason that has always been true since days immemorial: Arrogance always ends in misery and disgrace.

Human eugenic programs have never lasted for a reason, and that is the inherent failure they carry with them.

Even the Spartan method, the toughest and most vertical of all systems eventually ended up being unable to pass the test of history.

[Rædwald]

So what is it?
Less intrusion fom the State so that nature can do its selection freely without artifical sustenance for negative features, or more intervention from State so that humans can forcefully alter their own biological development using only human points of view and human objectives as a standard?

I already stated the natural path: Promote good habits, and do not fund disgenesic measures so that individuals harm the collective for selfish reasons. Simple.

Self-righteous vainglory will always fall due to its own weight. It is inevitable.

Which do you think would be seen as less immoral. Deciding who gets to pass on their genes, or letting people decide by taking the warning labels off everything; letting natural selection run it's course.

It's a pretty clear hypothesis.

[Bloodnigger]

So what is it?
Less intrusion fom the State so that nature can do its selection freely without artifical sustenance for negative features, or more intervention from State so that humans can forcefully alter their own biological development using only human points of view and human objectives as a standard?

I already stated the natural path: Promote good habits, and do not fund disgenesic measures so that individuals harm the collective for selfish reasons. Simple.

Self-righteous vainglory will always fall due to its own weight. It is inevitable.

If anything actual enforced eugenics imply a very serious attempt at central planning by the state and we all know how well that went everytime. God knows, I'm no libertarian, but going at it indirectly rather than directly would solve the issue faster and with considerably less butthurt from those about to be purged genetically.

Don't forget that actual recreation is more than simply muh-diking (unless you are black I guess) your way through the 'ho population. Your children are the most telling mark you have left upon the world and also a form of your continuation after your death. (which is why race mixing has a wrong feeling to it even to the average non apricity resident Melonhead: children are supposed to look like those who came before them)

EDIT:


Even the Spartan method, the toughest and most vertical of all systems eventually ended up being unable to pass the test of history.

Which is the most telling. After Sparta (and the whole of greece for that matter, even today) acquired actual money, they crashed so hard into the decline that the only thing resembling sparta afterwards was it's name. And as for the few kings that tried to reverse the trend with direct methods, all they managed to do was accelerate it.

[Cristiano viejo]

blacks are biggest racists

Guy of your avatar could participate in this thead for sure.

[KeinMitleid]

No, it's not some. The human species is not competent enough to understand the nature of the cosmos, the way time will change everything that exists, or even the reason behind plenty of events (not even dark matter is understood).

You are not superior to other humans, just like anyone else is not superior enough to pretend otherwise.

Petty self-grandiose behaviour irreparably ends in calamity, for a simple reason that has always been true since days immemorial: Arrogance always ends in misery and disgrace.

Human eugenic programs have never lasted for a reason, and that is the inherent failure they carry with them.

Even the Spartan method, the toughest and most vertical of all systems eventually ended up being unable to pass the test of history.


Well we might not be aware of the workings of the cosmos, and we might be overall quite degenerated but that is because of the fact that we have been ruled by the idiocratic ideology of Judeo-Christianity and other such trash for the past few centuries. The Human race never got the chance to keep going forward. We were held back significantly. But nevertheless, I think there is most certainly a hierarchy of humans and knowing myself I am certainly higher than the inferior masses, not to sound too self-praising. And those programs were always hindered again by the Judeo-Christian and similar ideologies that prevent them from passing their early stages.

[Guapo]

Guy of your avatar could participate in this thead for sure.

Right, I'm 6 foot 1 185 lbs and you must a typical skinny med Ibero-faggot :laugh:

[Eileanach]

Yes, but perhaps you don't.

[Ars Moriendi]

Which do you think would be seen as less immoral. Deciding who gets to pass on their genes, or letting people decide by taking the warning labels off everything; letting natural selection run it's course.

It's a pretty clear hypothesis.

Why do you completely avoid my question, and in turn give an empty reply message with a question of your own that's practically a straw man satyre of what I previously stated?

Even then I can answer.
It's not becoming of humans to usurp the position of divinity, tasked with deciding the course of life and the course of the cosmos. It's bound to fail given the terrible and irreparable imperfections of this species. Just like it has inevitably failed whenever it's been tested. Even a hypothetic success would ultimately be a nightmare to imagine.

As long as there are no artificial delusions that turn people into self destructive behaviours, it's the nature and right of every human to attempt to live his life how he sees fit. It's the basic principle of free will. If the society that surrounds them isn't disruptive of nature, people will naturally be punished or rewarded by their choices. That is all there is to it. No

[Ars Moriendi]

Well we might not be aware of the workings of the cosmos

We're not, and we won't ever be, considering that such questions are beyond the spectrum of what humans mind can achieve. It isn't technical or scientifical (which is the sole form of progress humans have shown), it's metaphysical knowledge.
For that very reason, pretending that human science has the right to decide how life should be developed, or how the course of time should be isn't only folly, but it's also an atrocious and embarrasing display of arrogance and vainglory.


and we might be overall quite degenerated but that is because of the fact that we have been ruled by the idiocratic ideology of Judeo-Christianity and other such trash for the past few centuries.

This has absolutely nothing to do with what I was stating earlier. Bu just to keep the conversation going, I'll reply:

The overwhelming majority of technical progress was done precisely during a time that, Judeo-Christianity as you define it, existed as a given factor of human societies (at least the "Western" ones). Eugenic programs were also in vogue in the last century, the same century that you call degenerated.



The Human race never got the chance to keep going forward. We were held back significantly.

The Planet Earth hasn't been hit by natural disasters strong enough to disrupt human society for too long. Likewise, not a single earthly species or extraterrestrial species has forced humans to do anything, or prevented them from doing anything.

The only thing holding humans back, are humans themsleves. Which is really not a suprise, considering how irreparably imperfect the species is.


But nevertheless, I think there is most certainly a hierarchy of humans

There is, but even the most superior of humans isn't superior enough to decide how life should be directed. Hierarchy within humans doesn't change the fact that the human condition is bound to incapacity and imperfection.


and knowing myself I am certainly higher than the inferior masses, not to sound too self-praising.

You do sound very self-praising, but it's not a surprise. Over the years I've learnt that all those most eager to beat the world around and impose their petty wills, not only have a delusional sense of self-grandeur, but also have done absolutely nothing to prove their own superiority.

If anything, your own assertion of being superior, shows how not superior you truly are.
Furthermore, your rampant contradictions make it even harder to believe, as a person that states "Natural Order" as a political principle would probably not be expected to support massive State intrusion and artificial design and manipulation of life.


And those programs were always hindered again by the Judeo-Christian and similar ideologies that prevent them from passing their early stages.

Baltant lie.
The Spartan system was developed prior to the birth of Christianity.
The Hitlerist eugenic system was profoundlky anti-Christian, as Hitler himself stated his spite for Christianity and coherently supported a religious replacement, favouring an abstract religion that would praise "The Blood". In other words, the adoration of men by men themselves.

Eugenicism was never hindered by religion, seeing as it was precisely developed against the point of view of most religions.

[de Burgh II]

I would have to say in the grand scheme of things; backwards hominids that bring their backwards, primitive mannerisms to other countries should all be euthanized indefinitely by doing nature a favor for what should have been done in the first place. They do nothing, but leech off countries and are nothing besides a crouch the inhibits any possible growth to progress in one's country.

[Bloodnigger]

I would have to say in the grand scheme of things; backwards hominids that bring their backwards, primitive mannerisms to other countries should all be euthanized indefinitely by doing nature a favor for what should have been done in the first place. They do nothing, but leech off countries and are nothing besides a crouch the inhibits any possible growth to progress in one's country.

The problem is that those backwards hominids are the end of our cycle. They are the germans to our rome.

[de Burgh II]

In what context? They are nothing more than a hindrance to a society. Simple as that. If you want to see your first world country to revert to a third world shithole with these abominations of nature; then you might as well flood your entire country with them until it self destructs which would be a shell of its former self then. Whenever eugenics is brought up; everyone is so ingrained with the trivial generalization that your a "nazi" or some pointless, spineless simplistic phrase to shut someone down because they don't have the mental capacity to think as an individual whereas there are too much sheeple in this world as it is that wallow in their own ignorance. It comes a time in a person's life to make decisions for yourself and the very injustices that exist in this world that the corrupt politicians will do nothing, but destroy the essence of one's own country. Sometimes our own decisions will never confirms with the biased societal standards that are in place, but to pressure you to be one of the very sheeple out there with no sense of individual whatsoever. We all have to make a choice in life; would you rather make a choice in your life knowing you thought was right for the best for yourself and other you care about/ as well for the country's best interests so you can at least die with a sense of dignity or would you rather die knowing you didn't stay true to yourself/or your ideals you held dearly? The choices is yours in the end.

[Gustave H]

They are people too. Who are we to say that they can or cannot breed? It's up to them.

[Kale]

It should be the opposite in some cases. Borreby types seem to be fat no matter what. They, if anything, are using calories more efficiently. Efficiency is a good thing.

[FeederOfRavens]

It should be the opposite in some cases. Borreby types seem to be fat no matter what. They, if anything, are using calories more efficiently. Efficiency is a good thing.

No human phenotype is naturally fat, borrebies are usually muscular and only become fat if they don't take care of themselves.

[Amud]

Not allowing fat people to breed would make the Borreby master race go extinct. What a horrible idea. If anything, it's skinny gracile meds who we don't want to be reproducing.

[Scandalf]

If obesity is a 'genetic' problem as so many fat people claim, then why don't we simply bar them from breeding?

It is obviously not genetic, it is their choice. As such, they should pay more for healthcare just like smokers and people who intentionally hurt themselves and increase healthcare workload. BTW, I smoke, it's my problem and I don't blame the State for high sales taxes on it.

[de Burgh II]

http://fahadmaniar.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/somatotypes.png

In the case of fat people; like someone stated before they are people too. We can't control our natural body builds. Some people are ectomorphs, mesomorphs and endomorphs
and should be give the same respect they deserve like anyone else for the matter that proves themselves worthy of such a thing.

[Ramos]

What does it really matter? Fat people dont get as much sex. Theres so many people in the world what does it matter who reporduces? Just hangout with ur own people

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

What does it really matter? Fat people dont get as much sex. Theres so many people in the world what does it matter who reporduces? Just hangout with ur own people

sounds like a fat person speaking

[KeinMitleid]

We're not, and we won't ever be, considering that such questions are beyond the spectrum of what humans mind can achieve. It isn't technical or scientifical (which is the sole form of progress humans have shown), it's metaphysical knowledge.
For that very reason, pretending that human science has the right to decide how life should be developed, or how the course of time should be isn't only folly, but it's also an atrocious and embarrasing display of arrogance and vainglory.



This has absolutely nothing to do with what I was stating earlier. Bu just to keep the conversation going, I'll reply:

The overwhelming majority of technical progress was done precisely during a time that, Judeo-Christianity as you define it, existed as a given factor of human societies (at least the "Western" ones). Eugenic programs were also in vogue in the last century, the same century that you call degenerated.




The Planet Earth hasn't been hit by natural disasters strong enough to disrupt human society for too long. Likewise, not a single earthly species or extraterrestrial species has forced humans to do anything, or prevented them from doing anything.

The only thing holding humans back, are humans themsleves. Which is really not a suprise, considering how irreparably imperfect the species is.



There is, but even the most superior of humans isn't superior enough to decide how life should be directed. Hierarchy within humans doesn't change the fact that the human condition is bound to incapacity and imperfection.



You do sound very self-praising, but it's not a surprise. Over the years I've learnt that all those most eager to beat the world around and impose their petty wills, not only have a delusional sense of self-grandeur, but also have done absolutely nothing to prove their own superiority.

If anything, your own assertion of being superior, shows how not superior you truly are.
Furthermore, your rampant contradictions make it even harder to believe, as a person that states "Natural Order" as a political principle would probably not be expected to support massive State intrusion and artificial design and manipulation of life.



Baltant lie.
The Spartan system was developed prior to the birth of Christianity.
The Hitlerist eugenic system was profoundlky anti-Christian, as Hitler himself stated his spite for Christianity and coherently supported a religious replacement, favouring an abstract religion that would praise "The Blood". In other words, the adoration of men by men themselves.

Eugenicism was never hindered by religion, seeing as it was precisely developed against the point of view of most religions.

Okay, first off I'm really not sure that the workings of the cosmos are a matter of the metaphysical realm anymore. I think it is much more of a scientific question. With the way science is going, it is very possible that we will have a higher understanding of the universe in time. And why shouldn't we be able to decide our own fate? I mean not all of us have that ability as some of us aren't self-aware enough to do so, but for those of us who do that is not at all wrong.

And when you talk about the advancements under Judeo-Christianity there were also many steps backward. And if Paganism was never replaced then we might have advanced far more.

Yes, you are absolutely right, we have been hindered as a species by other members of our species. But that doesn't mean that there aren't members of the species who can do something positive for the species and undo some of the damage done by other members of the species.

And there are humans who are fit to rule human societies. The human condition may be 'imperfect' but what do you view perfection to be? Its subjective.

Mine is not a petty will. It is a will to purge humanity of its inferior elements. And as for the natural order, I am referring to the fact that the strong dominate the weak, and the clever dominate the strong. And my views are fully in line with that statement.

And I'm not saying religion hindered Eugenics programs, as Pagan religion encouraged it, I'm saying that certain religions, namely the Abrahamic ones, hinder them.

[KeinMitleid]

It is obviously not genetic, it is their choice. As such, they should pay more for healthcare just like smokers and people who intentionally hurt themselves and increase healthcare workload. BTW, I smoke, it's my problem and I don't blame the State for high sales taxes on it.

Well that was the sort of the point of this thread before it became a eugenics debate. Which is fine, I love eugenics debates, but anyway. The initial point I was making was that fat people always claim that its the fault of genetics that they're fat, not their own fault. So if this is true, then why shouldn't we just put breeding restrictions on them?

[Reign of True Hayasa]

blacks are biggest racists

http://rabble.ca/babble/news-rest-us/fine-racism-against-white-people-exists%E2%80%A6it-just-doesn%E2%80%99t-matter

[Kale]

Well that was the sort of the point of this thread before it became a eugenics debate. Which is fine, I love eugenics debates, but anyway. The initial point I was making was that fat people always claim that its the fault of genetics that they're fat, not their own fault. So if this is true, then why shouldn't we just put breeding restrictions on them?

Because there's two reasons you can be fat.
- Gluttony
- Efficient usage of calories

1) Is bad
2) Is good

[Scandalf]

Well that was the sort of the point of this thread before it became a eugenics debate. Which is fine, I love eugenics debates, but anyway. The initial point I was making was that fat people always claim that its the fault of genetics that they're fat, not their own fault. So if this is true, then why shouldn't we just put breeding restrictions on them?

Yeah, it makes me go crazy! I knew this girl, she was on a diet and was always complaining about the fact she didn't seem to lose weight (she was obese). When she took me for a ride in her car, there were candy bars everywhere! "I have a glandular problem!". Oh please!!!

[Raven_]

If obesity is a 'genetic' problem as so many fat people claim, then why don't we simply bar them from breeding?

I think more often it's (non genetically) inherited lifestyle and eating habits rather than a genetic predisposition to obesity. I am not sure if reaching out specifically to parents would solve this issue. Judging from my observations, fat people feel more comfortable around other fat people, even if it means turning a blind eye to a family member. You simply can not feel comfortable about your own habits and encourage someone else to act differently at the same time.

[Linebacker]

NO.

Under any circumstances.There is nothing more useless on planet earth than lard asses.

[Kale]

NO.

Under any circumstances.There is nothing more useless on planet earth than lard asses.

What's worse, sumo or rap? We got bigger problems here lol

[Beit El]

The start off, some disclaimers: genocide is wrong; taking human rights away from people of a race/religion/hairstyle you don't like is wrong; concentration camps are wrong; violence in wrong.


Why?

[Linebacker]

What's worse, sumo or rap? We got bigger problems here lol

Sumo is a shame to combat sports and every fighter and gladiator worldwide.

Two fatballs pushing each other...

[KeinMitleid]

I think more often it's (non genetically) inherited lifestyle and eating habits rather than a genetic predisposition to obesity. I am not sure if reaching out specifically to parents would solve this issue. Judging from my observations, fat people feel more comfortable around other fat people, even if it means turning a blind eye to a family member. You simply can not feel comfortable about your own habits and encourage someone else to act differently at the same time.

See that's the thing. Fat people breed with other fat people, thus creating fatter offspring, and poisoning the gene pool :D

[Kale]

Sumo is a shame to combat sports and every fighter and gladiator worldwide.

Two fatballs pushing each other...

But it require discaprin! Body rike stone, mind rike-a meatroaf!

Rap is just monkeys flinging feces at each other.

[Scandalf]

But it require discaprin! Body rike stone, mind rike-a meatroaf!

Rap is just monkeys flinging feces at each other.

Rap can be very dangerous then!

[Óttar]

Good morning north america

Nigga balls know how it do...

http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/sex/t1506.gif (http://yoursmiles.org/t-sex.php) http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/sex/t1506.gif (http://yoursmiles.org/t-sex.php) http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/sex/t1506.gif (http://yoursmiles.org/t-sex.php)

[Óttar]

Yeah, but they should be prohibited from bitching. Drop the fork bitch. Easiest thing ever.

[Ramos]

sounds like a fat person speaking

You really shouldn't act like fat people dont get a lot of sex. You don't know if they do or dont.

[Sveta]

In a society where fatness is forbidden, fats are all liberals.

[Ramos]

Fatness can be sexy too.

[Kale]

Fatness can be sexy too.

Not according to properly functioning human biology.

[Omega]

Do not have sex with them or that will happen:
http://youtu.be/XBwR6DWOovY