Anybody watch 60 Minutes tonight?

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Sean Scott" <Its@secret> wrote in message
news:qa2dndweUok4T6vfRVn-qA@wideopenwest.com...
>
> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)> wrote in message
> news:aa-dnSRZfYVn_avfRVn-oQ@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Sean Scott" <Its@secret> wrote in message
>> news:RpqdnbwTxIPbgqvfRVn-3A@wideopenwest.com...
>>>
>>> "aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1110839304.253773.126080@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> Sean Scott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm all for a one child per family law, (with the exception of rare
>>>> cases of
>>>>> twins, triplets etc.) Too many people in the world starving and
>>>> homeless to
>>>>> add another person to the mix. China has the right idea.
>>>>
>>>> I disagree with that. Healthy, stable, intelligent people should be
>>>> encouraged to have children. However, since these people are the most
>>>> responsible, and are too busy working their lives away, they don't.
>>>> Such people have pride, and would never reproduce without being capable
>>>> of caring for their offspring. It's the less intelligent who are
>>>> reproducing without regard. It's the immigrants, legal and otherwise,
>>>> and people of African descent, who have high birthrates.
>>>>
>>>> Europe is officially dying. It's birthrate is far below replacement
>>>> levels. Whites, in general, are a dying race.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think it is less to do with whites not having children but more that
>>> the races are interbreeding.
>>
>> Your parents obviously interbred. Dumb ass.
>>
>
> Why would you even say something like that and what is with the dumb ass
> comment?


It was actually directed at Aether. My reader showed it as the continuation
of his message rather than a new one. Sorry for the confusion.

>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> China has an estimated population of 1.6 billion. That policy was
>>>> necessary for stability. Even still, it's not enforced everywhere. The
>>>> wealthier people don't always pay heed to it, and it's not uncommon for
>>>> those in rural areas where state officials are loathe to go, or aren't
>>>> around, to have more than one child. Despite the one-child policy,
>>>> China's population is expected to increase for the next 50 years.
>>>>
>>>> Negative eugenics is a start. You begin by sterilizing violent inmates
>>>> in prisons. Then move on to the state hospitals. Get them before they
>>>> reproduce, or at least before they have more. Eventually, this will
>>>> happen. I know this because it must happen before humanity moves on.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110839304.253773.126080@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> Sean Scott wrote:
>>
>> I'm all for a one child per family law, (with the
>> exception of rare
> cases of
>> twins, triplets etc.) Too many people in the world
>> starving and
> homeless to
>> add another person to the mix. China has the right idea.
>
> I disagree with that. Healthy, stable, intelligent people
> should be
> encouraged to have children. However, since these people
> are the most
> responsible, and are too busy working their lives away,
> they don't.
> Such people have pride, and would never reproduce without
> being capable
> of caring for their offspring. It's the less intelligent
> who are
> reproducing without regard. It's the immigrants, legal and
> otherwise,
> and people of African descent, who have high birthrates.
>

Don't forget uneducated fundies who are having tons of
babies that they can not afford to educate. The cycle
continues.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)> wrote in message
news😱I-dndZtmqK2favfRVn-sg@comcast.com...
>
> "Sean Scott" <Its@secret> wrote in message
> news:qa2dndweUok4T6vfRVn-qA@wideopenwest.com...
>>


>
>
> It was actually directed at Aether. My reader showed it as the
> continuation of his message rather than a new one. Sorry for the
> confusion.
>

No hard feelings then. ;p
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:z_BZd.70619$r55.36993@attbi_s52...
>
> "aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1110839304.253773.126080@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>> Sean Scott wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm all for a one child per family law, (with the exception of rare
>> cases of
>>> twins, triplets etc.) Too many people in the world starving and
>> homeless to
>>> add another person to the mix. China has the right idea.
>>
>> I disagree with that. Healthy, stable, intelligent people should be
>> encouraged to have children. However, since these people are the most
>> responsible, and are too busy working their lives away, they don't.
>> Such people have pride, and would never reproduce without being capable
>> of caring for their offspring. It's the less intelligent who are
>> reproducing without regard. It's the immigrants, legal and otherwise,
>> and people of African descent, who have high birthrates.
>>
>
> Don't forget uneducated fundies who are having tons of babies that they
> can not afford to educate. The cycle continues.
>
>

Robin, what are fundies?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)> wrote in message
news:kOednXhc6Z7CAqrfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>
> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:z_BZd.70619$r55.36993@attbi_s52...
>>
>> Don't forget uneducated fundies who are having tons of babies that they
>> can not afford to educate. The cycle continues.
>>
>
> Robin, what are fundies?

Fanatics from Jesusland.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Mean_Chlorine <mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in
news:b4ra31hrdjf6v6kjs4fuv0mf3q3l1r7kke@4ax.com:

> Thusly Paul Heslop <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> Spake Unto All:
>
>>Those who've
>>committed random acts of violence, <and individuals with obvious
>>(apparent) mental handicaps (including mental illness),> should not be
>>permitted to reproduce
>
> Eugenics isn't nazism, but the nazis embraced eugenics as a tool to
> further the confused nazi ideas about race, and ultimately led to its
> total discrediting, but it existed independently of nazism. If you
> check you'll find that pretty much all industrialized countries prior
> to WWII (and often some time thereafter), including the US, committed
> forced sterilizations of people whose reproduction was seen as
> undesirable to society.

You seem to think that's a *bad* thing.


stePH
--
If it cannot break the egg's shell, a chick will die without being born.
We are the chick. The world is our egg.
If we cannot break the world's shell, we will die without being born.
Smash the world's shell! For the revolution of the world!
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly stePH <acetheta@earthlink.net> Spake Unto All:

>> to WWII (and often some time thereafter), including the US, committed
>> forced sterilizations of people whose reproduction was seen as
>> undesirable to society.
>
>You seem to think that's a *bad* thing.

Well, I'd really like eugenics if I got to decide who were neutered
and who were encouraged to breed. And I still, to this day, think that
surgical, not chemical, sterilization of repeat sexual offenders is a
good idea.

However, I *don't* like eugenics considering that it'd be various
incompetent psychologists and/or politically motivated judges who'd
actually be doing the deciding, and god only knows who's balls they'd
be snipping, and on what grounds.

Like socialism, eugenics is one of those ideas that's good in theory,
but in practice stinks.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Thoth" <thoth@notlisted.net> wrote in message
news:00OZd.5974$uk7.1094@fed1read01...
> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)>
> wrote in message
> news:kOednXhc6Z7CAqrfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:z_BZd.70619$r55.36993@attbi_s52...
>>>
>>> Don't forget uneducated fundies who are having tons of
>>> babies that they can not afford to educate. The cycle
>>> continues.
>>>
>>
>> Robin, what are fundies?
>
> Fanatics from Jesusland.
>

What he said.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:geOZd.136885$4q6.6369@attbi_s01...
>
> "Thoth" <thoth@notlisted.net> wrote in message
> news:00OZd.5974$uk7.1094@fed1read01...
>> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)> wrote in message
>> news:kOednXhc6Z7CAqrfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:z_BZd.70619$r55.36993@attbi_s52...
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget uneducated fundies who are having tons of babies that they
>>>> can not afford to educate. The cycle continues.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Robin, what are fundies?
>>
>> Fanatics from Jesusland.
>>
>
> What he said.
>
>

Fundamentalists?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
news😛w4Yd.645$KK5.335@fed1read03...
> In article <422e2c95$0$62113$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>,
> fredliken@toocool4school.com says...
>>
>>"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:qqoXd.1238$uk7.725@fed1read01...
>>
>>> See Fred that little word you used...somewhat...clues us in that your
>>> one
>>> of
>>> these right wing fanatics that are out to control our lives.
>>
>>Hilarious! I guess I missed the part where Liberman, Daschel, et al,
>>switched from the Left Wing to the Right Wing.
>>
>>You're dumb.
>>
>>
>>
> Idiots in both parties. The problem with you repubs is that you actually
> drink
> the koolaid that your leaders serve you.

lol. Like Kerry
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
news😛w4Yd.645$KK5.335@fed1read03...
> In article <422e2c95$0$62113$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>,
> fredliken@toocool4school.com says...
>>
>>"MS#1Fanboy-JoJo" <jojo@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:qqoXd.1238$uk7.725@fed1read01...
>>
>>> See Fred that little word you used...somewhat...clues us in that your
>>> one
>>> of
>>> these right wing fanatics that are out to control our lives.
>>
>>Hilarious! I guess I missed the part where Liberman, Daschel, et al,
>>switched from the Left Wing to the Right Wing.
>>
>>You're dumb.
>>
>>
>>
> Idiots in both parties. The problem with you repubs is that you actually
> drink
> the koolaid that your leaders serve you.

lol. Least it's not government cheese.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Jeff Holinski" <Holinski@shaw.ca> wrote

>>> So Call of Duty is also a murder simulator then?
>>
>>Obviously not, since in no place do you murder someone.
>>
> Sounds like you're playing a different game. When you snipe someone in
> the head and they don't even know you're there, it isn't exactly a
> fair fight.

So sad that you don't even know what murder is. It is perfectly within the
confines of law to snipe someone in the head in war.

> How about throwing a grenade into a bunker with a couple
> of germans playing cards? Murder or combat?

Certainly not murder, since it is legal to do that in that situation, my
ignorant friend.

If you want to argue your vauge pink-o definitions of murder, then you're
just wasting everyone's time.

>>> Actually, Call of Duty
>>> could much more accurately be called a murder simulator, since it makes
>>> some
>>> attempt to model real-world weapons and tactics.
>>
>>Yet no attempt to model murder. Please do look it up, my ignorant friend.
>>:)
>>
>>> Very seldom are you required to kill *innocents*
>>
> How would you define an innocent in a combat game?

Who cares? I didn't make that statement as the >>>'s clearly show.

> Someone with no
> weapon? (doesn't apply to game cops) Someone who doesn't want to
> fight? (pretty much anyone who's retreating) Someone who doesn't know
> they're in a fight? (pretty much any one-shot sniping victim)

Moot.

> If you think about it, Splinter Cell is much more of a murder
> simulator than GTA3. The main focus of the game is for an american to
> go to foreign contries and kill people without getting caught.

Laws, my son... laws.

Get a clue.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote

>> Please allow me to amend my original statement then:
>
>> "The report says violent entertainment (they don't single out video games
>> over movies or TV) can be a contributing cause, though it is
>> recognized as *possibly being* less of a contributor than several other
>> factors."
>
>> Feel better now?
>
> Of course he doesn't.

Doug, when you K/F me and then respond to my posts, it just makes you look
like a twat. Or, more like a twat.

Not having any valid arguments of his own, Fred
> will argue you down the very last comma and the dots over the "i"s in your
> post. He'll do just about anything to sidetrack and derail your argument
> in the hopes you'll keep replying to him simply because he craves the
> attention, and likes to read his old posts.

What a nice attempt to protect your ego from all the times you've attempted
to discuss something with me and have been wrong. You're pathetic.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)>
wrote in message news:c--dnYh2vYSRqaXfRVn-qg@comcast.com...
>
> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:geOZd.136885$4q6.6369@attbi_s01...
>>
>> "Thoth" <thoth@notlisted.net> wrote in message
>> news:00OZd.5974$uk7.1094@fed1read01...
>>> "Mattinglyfan" <Estoscacahuates@comcast.net (deez nuts)>
>>> wrote in message
>>> news:kOednXhc6Z7CAqrfRVn-rg@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:z_BZd.70619$r55.36993@attbi_s52...
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't forget uneducated fundies who are having tons of
>>>>> babies that they can not afford to educate. The cycle
>>>>> continues.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Robin, what are fundies?
>>>
>>> Fanatics from Jesusland.
>>>
>>
>> What he said.
>>
>>
>
> Fundamentalists?

Yes.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

In alt.games.video.xbox Paul Heslop <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> I agree that people should be encouraged to only have one child, but
> your 'law' would have to be worldwide and is impossible to enforce
> unless you allow for enforced sterilization or abortion, neither of
> which is moral.

Uh, if people only had 1 child, the population is going to decrease pretty
quickly.

Besides, have you read about the side effects of China's children
restrictions? It's not pretty. And now India's trying to do the same
thing, but WHO members are running up against very strong opposition from
tradition that states that women should basically be used to pop out as
many children as possible - or face beatings from the inlaws.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:113ul42s4cam577@corp.supernews.com...
> In alt.games.video.xbox Paul Heslop <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I agree that people should be encouraged to only have one child, but
>> your 'law' would have to be worldwide and is impossible to enforce
>> unless you allow for enforced sterilization or abortion, neither of
>> which is moral.
>
> Uh, if people only had 1 child, the population is going to decrease pretty
> quickly.
>

That is the idea, the world is overpopulated right now. There is no need to
have so many children.

> Besides, have you read about the side effects of China's children
> restrictions? It's not pretty. And now India's trying to do the same
> thing, but WHO members are running up against very strong opposition from
> tradition that states that women should basically be used to pop out as
> many children as possible - or face beatings from the inlaws.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Doug Jacobs <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> Spake Unto All:

>> I agree that people should be encouraged to only have one child, but
>> your 'law' would have to be worldwide and is impossible to enforce
>> unless you allow for enforced sterilization or abortion, neither of
>> which is moral.
>
>Uh, if people only had 1 child, the population is going to decrease pretty
>quickly.

That's the whole point.
There's just too fricking many of us.
about 1 billion can live at US standards indefinitely. 7 billion
can't. 12 billion can't even live sustainably at Romanian level.

>Besides, have you read about the side effects of China's children
>restrictions? It's not pretty.

They should offer free abortions and free contraceptives. If parents
chose to selectively abort female foetuses, that's even better, as the
growth rate of a population is determined by the number of females,
not by the number of males.

>thing, but WHO members are running up against very strong opposition from
>tradition that states that women should basically be used to pop out as
>many children as possible - or face beatings from the inlaws.

That'd be in... Texas?
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

Doug Jacobs wrote:
>
> In alt.games.video.xbox Paul Heslop <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I agree that people should be encouraged to only have one child, but
> > your 'law' would have to be worldwide and is impossible to enforce
> > unless you allow for enforced sterilization or abortion, neither of
> > which is moral.
>
> Uh, if people only had 1 child, the population is going to decrease pretty
> quickly.
>
> Besides, have you read about the side effects of China's children
> restrictions? It's not pretty. And now India's trying to do the same
> thing, but WHO members are running up against very strong opposition from
> tradition that states that women should basically be used to pop out as
> many children as possible - or face beatings from the inlaws.

Nobody's saying it's an agreeable option, but even good old Spike
Milligan saw the need for population control. Simple fact is many
countries can't or won't help care for these kids. When you think that
there are more extreme methods employed by some countries

"On Friday, July 23, 1993 eight young "street children"--or meninos de
rua--were gunned down as they slept near the Candelária Church in
downtown Rio de Janeiro. The Candelária massacre brought renewed
attention to the plight of street children, their "elimination" at the
hand of death squads, and the wrenching poverty that has come to
characterize life for vast numbers of urban residents in Brazil."

and obviously this is just one incident.

I'm not saying I like the idea of enforcing any controls, or that
everyone should agree, hell, I'm not sure I would agree either, but
poverty has to be tackled and if the rich won't give a little to help
then the poor must help themselves, and having buckets of mouths to
feed isn't the answer
--
Paul (That’s what keeps me down)
------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom