Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

idiotapocalypse    

Rank #17540 on Comments
idiotapocalypse Avatar Level 168 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Offline
Send mail to idiotapocalypse Block idiotapocalypse Invite idiotapocalypse to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:8/06/2010
Last Login:8/01/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#17540
Highest Content Rank:#14152
Highest Comment Rank:#7390
Content Thumbs: 38 total,  110 ,  72
Comment Thumbs: 696 total,  768 ,  72
Content Level Progress: 71.18% (42/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 10% (1/10)
Level 168 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 169 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Subscribers:0
Content Views:12784
Times Content Favorited:2 times
Total Comments Made:127
FJ Points:719
Favorite Tags: Pokemon (2) | Yellow (2)

Show:
Sort by:
Order:

funny pictures

  • Views: 1243
    Thumbs Up 22 Thumbs Down 3 Total: +19
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 07/18/12
    Bender's a dick. Bender's a dick.
  • Views: 1674
    Thumbs Up 17 Thumbs Down 8 Total: +9
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 11/03/12
    FoxNews FoxNews
  • Views: 1344
    Thumbs Up 19 Thumbs Down 11 Total: +8
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 1
    Uploaded: 07/11/12
    Nostalgia Revamp Nostalgia Revamp
  • Views: 999
    Thumbs Up 11 Thumbs Down 5 Total: +6
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/03/12
    Omegle Alone Omegle Alone
  • Views: 1459
    Thumbs Up 9 Thumbs Down 6 Total: +3
    Comments: 2
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 05/19/13
    So, I decided to add a non-Steam game. So, I decided to add a non-Steam...
  • Views: 1824
    Thumbs Up 9 Thumbs Down 8 Total: +1
    Comments: 8
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 01/14/13
    Dat Wire Dat Wire
1 2 > [ 7 Funny Pictures Total ]
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

youtube videos

  • Views: 1271
    Thumbs Up 8 Thumbs Down 3 Total: +5
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/01/12
    Maximum Over-Nig Maximum Over-Nig
  • Views: 626
    Thumbs Up 1 Thumbs Down 4 Total: -3
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/09/13
    Right in the feels Right in the feels

latest user's comments

#83 - No one goes to court for making jokes. Sure you may offend som…  [+] (4 new replies) 06/05/2014 on Peter Dinklage on a scooter 0
User avatar #84 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
you underestimate americas lawyer culture
User avatar #220 - sirgawain (06/06/2014) [-]
So, you'd prefer Eugenics? Okay Adolf, whatever you say...
User avatar #248 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
whats wrong with stopping natures mistakes from having kids

they can still adopt and give a koid a chance at a good family, but without their own fucked up genes in the human pool
#109 - refaim (06/05/2014) [-]
You overestimate it. Show us one court case that is decided in favor of someone who was offended by a joke......don't worry we'll wait.
#72 - None of what you said is a good reason to stop them having chi…  [+] (6 new replies) 06/05/2014 on Peter Dinklage on a scooter +6
User avatar #76 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
i see....so if a midget makes a joke about someone else, thats okay....someone makes a joke about midgets, poof theyre in court
great equality and common decency
User avatar #83 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
No one goes to court for making jokes. Sure you may offend someone, but what doesn't offend someone. It just may not be wise to make a midget joke right to their face, it kind of called being a massive douche. So sure, go ahead and make a midget joke, they're in rather short supply. This difference is that isn't taking away anyone's basic rights.
User avatar #84 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
you underestimate americas lawyer culture
User avatar #220 - sirgawain (06/06/2014) [-]
So, you'd prefer Eugenics? Okay Adolf, whatever you say...
User avatar #248 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
whats wrong with stopping natures mistakes from having kids

they can still adopt and give a koid a chance at a good family, but without their own fucked up genes in the human pool
#109 - refaim (06/05/2014) [-]
You overestimate it. Show us one court case that is decided in favor of someone who was offended by a joke......don't worry we'll wait.
#67 - So you're basing your argument on the fact that more midget se…  [+] (19 new replies) 06/05/2014 on Peter Dinklage on a scooter +2
User avatar #69 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
well for a start,. how many things do we take for granted that are much more difficult for midgets to do because of size

driving a car requires special seat boosters and pedals for them to see over the wheel and still use said pedals, object we'd carry normally are difficult and heavier for midgets with smaller/shorter arms...and hell even just to sit on a barstool for a drink requires them to climb up it
and also given liberal laws we have to tread lightly around them in case they get offended by normal people over some little incident and cry discrimination
User avatar #75 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
only one of the 200 causes of dwarfism is hereditary. and its a recesive gene
User avatar #95 - thesovereigngrave (06/05/2014) [-]
Actually, just figured I'd let you know, but the most common cause of dwarfism is actually caused by a dominant gene.
User avatar #239 - sketchE (06/06/2014) [-]
thats my mistake then i must have misread something
User avatar #81 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
yes but still....how do you go about legit testing every midget to make sure which ones pass it on and stop them?
User avatar #82 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
you dont even try. are we gonna start hunting down people with cancer and castrating them just because it may increase chances of their kids getting cancer? mp amd thats a fatal disease dwarfism just makes things more difficult
User avatar #86 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
bad example

you can fight/cure diseases...can you cure midgets?

granted one day science wil finally work things out and grant people the power to avoid defect pregnancies, till then we're stuck with them and their burden and why should we be happy to have them?
User avatar #89 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
so hows getting into art school going adolf?
User avatar #90 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
implying midgets are a race?
fail

they arent limited to any racial group....any people can have natures mistakes
User avatar #170 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2014) [-]
Nature doesn't make mistakes. However she does make ignorant assholes.
User avatar #97 - syrenthra (06/05/2014) [-]
You must not know, Hitler took anyone with a defect and put them into the camps, not any specific race
User avatar #249 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
wel when did i ever say cut them out of human life

they can live alongside us just not have kids, aka they can do their thing and then fade away without poisoning the gene pool
User avatar #72 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
None of what you said is a good reason to stop them having children. Those aren't "liberal laws," the phrase you're trying to find is "common decency," as in, not treating someone has sub human because they're different.
User avatar #76 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
i see....so if a midget makes a joke about someone else, thats okay....someone makes a joke about midgets, poof theyre in court
great equality and common decency
User avatar #83 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
No one goes to court for making jokes. Sure you may offend someone, but what doesn't offend someone. It just may not be wise to make a midget joke right to their face, it kind of called being a massive douche. So sure, go ahead and make a midget joke, they're in rather short supply. This difference is that isn't taking away anyone's basic rights.
User avatar #84 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
you underestimate americas lawyer culture
User avatar #220 - sirgawain (06/06/2014) [-]
So, you'd prefer Eugenics? Okay Adolf, whatever you say...
User avatar #248 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
whats wrong with stopping natures mistakes from having kids

they can still adopt and give a koid a chance at a good family, but without their own fucked up genes in the human pool
#109 - refaim (06/05/2014) [-]
You overestimate it. Show us one court case that is decided in favor of someone who was offended by a joke......don't worry we'll wait.
#64 - What you seem to be missing is the fact that midgets having se…  [+] (21 new replies) 06/05/2014 on Peter Dinklage on a scooter +6
User avatar #65 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
yeah....that whole crap "if it doesnt hurt you dont worry about it."....nice isolationist ideal of only ever thinking about what affects ones self and giving no fucks about humanity as a whole
great argument kid
User avatar #67 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
So you're basing your argument on the fact that more midget sex=more midgets=bad. Why would that be bad? How would humanity as a whole be negatively affected.
User avatar #69 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
well for a start,. how many things do we take for granted that are much more difficult for midgets to do because of size

driving a car requires special seat boosters and pedals for them to see over the wheel and still use said pedals, object we'd carry normally are difficult and heavier for midgets with smaller/shorter arms...and hell even just to sit on a barstool for a drink requires them to climb up it
and also given liberal laws we have to tread lightly around them in case they get offended by normal people over some little incident and cry discrimination
User avatar #75 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
only one of the 200 causes of dwarfism is hereditary. and its a recesive gene
User avatar #95 - thesovereigngrave (06/05/2014) [-]
Actually, just figured I'd let you know, but the most common cause of dwarfism is actually caused by a dominant gene.
User avatar #239 - sketchE (06/06/2014) [-]
thats my mistake then i must have misread something
User avatar #81 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
yes but still....how do you go about legit testing every midget to make sure which ones pass it on and stop them?
User avatar #82 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
you dont even try. are we gonna start hunting down people with cancer and castrating them just because it may increase chances of their kids getting cancer? mp amd thats a fatal disease dwarfism just makes things more difficult
User avatar #86 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
bad example

you can fight/cure diseases...can you cure midgets?

granted one day science wil finally work things out and grant people the power to avoid defect pregnancies, till then we're stuck with them and their burden and why should we be happy to have them?
User avatar #89 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
so hows getting into art school going adolf?
User avatar #90 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
implying midgets are a race?
fail

they arent limited to any racial group....any people can have natures mistakes
User avatar #170 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2014) [-]
Nature doesn't make mistakes. However she does make ignorant assholes.
User avatar #97 - syrenthra (06/05/2014) [-]
You must not know, Hitler took anyone with a defect and put them into the camps, not any specific race
User avatar #249 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
wel when did i ever say cut them out of human life

they can live alongside us just not have kids, aka they can do their thing and then fade away without poisoning the gene pool
User avatar #72 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
None of what you said is a good reason to stop them having children. Those aren't "liberal laws," the phrase you're trying to find is "common decency," as in, not treating someone has sub human because they're different.
User avatar #76 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
i see....so if a midget makes a joke about someone else, thats okay....someone makes a joke about midgets, poof theyre in court
great equality and common decency
User avatar #83 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
No one goes to court for making jokes. Sure you may offend someone, but what doesn't offend someone. It just may not be wise to make a midget joke right to their face, it kind of called being a massive douche. So sure, go ahead and make a midget joke, they're in rather short supply. This difference is that isn't taking away anyone's basic rights.
User avatar #84 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
you underestimate americas lawyer culture
User avatar #220 - sirgawain (06/06/2014) [-]
So, you'd prefer Eugenics? Okay Adolf, whatever you say...
User avatar #248 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
whats wrong with stopping natures mistakes from having kids

they can still adopt and give a koid a chance at a good family, but without their own fucked up genes in the human pool
#109 - refaim (06/05/2014) [-]
You overestimate it. Show us one court case that is decided in favor of someone who was offended by a joke......don't worry we'll wait.
#58 - People with birth defects don't need justification. In the cas…  [+] (113 new replies) 06/05/2014 on Peter Dinklage on a scooter +11
User avatar #59 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
yeah they can lead productive lives but that doesnt mean glorify or pity them, and alot of people would prefer defects dont reproduce

people are tired of this politically correct shit of letting natures mistakes keep messing up the gene pool
#270 - chudy (06/06/2014) [-]
You are either trolling or simply that retarded and morally flawed. The gene pool is big enough for you not to feel threatened by people with birth defects. To be honest, I would call you a birth defect for being a piece of shit for a human being. Besides physical traits genetics are responsible for inheritance of psychological attributes ike intelligence or basic emotional stability. Your character is mostly the result of upbringing but you have a natural affinity to develop certain behaviors. That being said I would rather see the world overflowing with midgets than to see the result of your upbringing. Peter Dinklage is a successful rich man by now, and I am most
certain that your retarded internet ramblings didn't get you anywhere near him. It's ironic that for his inferior height he's a much bigger person than you will ever be.

And btw. your text color is fucking annoying i have to highlight it every time in order to read without hurting my eyes.
User avatar #274 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
right because taking a piss in the pool is perfectly okay as long as its mostly clean right?

and why cant we have intelligence and emotional stability WITHOUT drawbacks like defects making people lesser able in other areas

btw im stuck with this txt till october when it runs out
#280 - chudy (06/06/2014) [-]
You can't expect to control everything. World is not a predictable fairytale where everything has a happy ending. In a world of 7 bilion people some inconsistencies are bound to happen and for the time being it's beyond our reach to contain them. In a few centuries or a few millenia we might be able to perfect our genetic code but today you'll just have to accept it and move on. I hate all the talking about inferior gene pools and whatnot. As long as you contribute positively to the society it doesn't matter. Many great people would fit into your category of inferior genes. People like Einstein or Tesla diagnosed with autism, aspergers - a birth defect, one that nonetheless didn't stop them from changing the world. This entire bullshit sounds like some extreme nazi shit - Master race and all that..
User avatar #281 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
yeah theres always gonna be problems but why not at least try a bit of damage control to slow down the shit from happening

no point trying to save the gene code when by the time they do it we might be living in a world of mutant freaks and not have enough normal humans to make a difference

im not saying kill them in saying steralize.....they can be productive as they have been but cut them off there so they dont deposit their warped genes back into the pool

if nature fucks up on its own, thats the variable we have to deal with, but we shouldnt be permitting those affected to contribute to helping nature keep fucking up
#298 - chudy (06/06/2014) [-]
First of all you just can't objectify people and treat them like an expendable resource. Second let the nature run its course - Evolution of species is based on random genetic mutations, provided they are useful. I don't think deformities and physical defects are gonna be a major problem anytime in the future. People like that tend to have a hard time finding a partner - I mean your exterior look still plays a major role in our society. The most likely scenario is splitting into separate sub-races or eliminating unwanted genes before you are even born. There's even a movie that portraying this very issue - "Gattaca". Anyway genetics are far too random to successfuly predict mutations. They happen all the time even if both parents are completely healthy and unburdened by hereditary diseases.
User avatar #299 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
kinda subjective, some people do play the pity card and get into relationships with freaks
hell though not genetic, wasnt there that kid who shot his face off trying to copy kurt cobain but lived and he eventually found love despite being ugly as fuck from the reconstructive surgery

and ive personally seen some girls hooked up with natures actual mistakes......

yeah healthy people can have mutant kids, but then thats a variable, as opposed to mutants passing their genes over........plus the ideal of 'its okay to be a freak' doesnt sit too well in socity, theres always going to be that stigmata from being different.....its hard to teaach kids in school to be tolerant of kids born different

ive seen one guy, born without legs, just one foot sticking 6 inches out of his hip, walks by weaing shoes on his hands.,,...safe to say he got alot of shit when he was young for being a freak
#300 - chudy (06/06/2014) [-]
It's not impossible for such people to find a mate, however like the saying goes "Takes one to know one" it's more likely they would find someone falling into a simillar category. As with everything there are of course exceptions, but I don't think they are common enough to screw up the entire human genome. It takes thousands of years in favorable conditions to actually make a difference. Take pygmies for example, a tribe of people separated from their own kinsmen a couple thousand years ago. Their average height of 140 - 150 cm would be considered freakish by our standards, but their bodies being proportional to that of a "regular sized" human they're definitely not at an disadvantage - it seems a mutation responsible for their size even allowed them to thrive in the deep jungle they inhabit. I understand though that certain mutations won't do us any good, but it's hard to predict the direction our entire race is heading biologically speaking whether unchecked or not. It's rather unfair to judge a person because he was born this way. Hell they are people too, they deserve the same as everyone else, they're fucked over from the very beggining and it's hard enough for them as it is. Why deny them their humanity? It's a natural instinct to leave behind progeny. They know their risks, and it's their burden to carry not yours, and relative to the healthy population it's but a very small fraction of people. With every passing day our civilization more and more prefers "mind over matter", and tbh. I like it that way. In the past being smart or different could've landed you in a bonfire and nowadays everyone enjoys a greater degree of freedom and people can make their own purpose in lfie. I long for the day when we finally leave prejudice and ignorance behind us. To conlude this statement i don't think genetic superiority/inferiority should be a real concern, as history shows nature has a way of resolving itself and people anyway are still far from being in control.
User avatar #301 - konradkurze (06/07/2014) [-]
well theres the problem, too many people only focus on their selfish selves instead of mankinds natural heritage of the tribe/clan/community
back when mankind had to work for a living, they left behind the mutations because they were less capable of fulfilling roles in the group or died because of their shortcomings....midgets usually were the ones who got attacked by animals because they couldnt outrun them

and for mind over matter...take a look at how more stupid people have become over the last couple centuries as they rely not on actual learning but having school drum very weak basics into them and tell them thats all they need....plus how many kids go out and play anymore? theyre all at home on the consoles....humanity is becoming soft useless weak and stupid, hence why the PC brigade have been so successful convincing people to carry the burden of the less able useless,

theres no longer any real methods of weeding out the defects because mankind has conquered nature and made life a realm of easy convenience, and also where lesser abled are given priority above the normal people, and the only vague type of weeding the weak out is when some of the normal get a fucked up idea in their head to attak the lesser
(case in point, one place i do security at, one of the staff is blind and for some fucked up reason a homeless guy took offence to him being blind and beat him up a couple times)
#302 - chudy (06/07/2014) [-]
As for mind over matter thing, It's more about opportunities for higher learning and our focus on science/technology as a whole. Sure there are people that have fallen prey to comfort and convienience, and there's a whole lot of them but the percentage of educated people is higher than ever before. Many of us just don't give a shit about knowledge and prefer to live a simple life, it has always been that way and nowadays it's just taken on a different meaning given the countless options to entertain ourselves. Judging by our astonishing rate of advancement we are heading towards a direction where psychic prowess is more valued than the physical one. The less abled aren't necessarily given priority to - think of it more as creating a world of equal chances, they get to have some things made easier to them because for us it isn't much of an obstacle. Also humanity was always somewhat stupid - you just didn't get to experience it on such an enormous scale. In short - The Internet (look up what Stanislaw Lem said). I don't think we should give a flying fuck about our long forgotten heritage, we're heading towards the stars and not reverting back to picking berries and hunting animals to survive a day longer. It's only natural for people to evolve new ideas, new ways of living over the years, in the end to bring people together and create a united worldwide tribe. Categorizing people is just creating unnecessary divisions, not helping with the whole cooperation thing. We can't just abandon our kinsmen because they are less abled, not with all the options available today and in the near future - It's sending out a wrong message. Picture this: Would you like for the companies of tommorow to be motivated by survival of the fittest gaining more and more power or to be more altruistic and care about the customer - to support technologies, products that however uncomfortable are for them will greatly benefit mankind. Sometimes it's just The Idea that keeps people going.
User avatar #303 - konradkurze (06/07/2014) [-]
educated vs programmed
stil a debate whether or not schools actually educate or simply brainwash kids to comform....and also given schools are in some cases cutting out some practical things that grant kids hands-on learning

we're not reverting back to foraging for food days but corporations are fucking nature over with producing modified food at the cost of destroying nature

the way mankind has changed to from each man being skilled and capable of surviving on their own and contributing , to being a enslaved culture of specialists relying on each other just to survive each day, having some skils but lacking others and needing the next man who has those skills,. when disaster hits, people at large have no clue how to handkle things and when lacking the specialists they panic....we are lesser as a culture than we used to be and if man cannot truly care for themselves then how are we to truly drag the lesser able along when they are a liability
#304 - chudy (06/07/2014) [-]
Branching out into many specializations is an inevitable fate, one man cannot possibly keep up with all the knowledge in our carefuly constructed world. We can only hope that our walls are strong enough to withstand any blow. As you said, humanity is doomed if one day our "great" civilization collapses under its own weight or due to exterior forces. We were brought into this world, and this is the environment we struggle in to survive. It's a trade off - we don't have to worry whether we're safe tonight or not, whether we'll eat or not and it has made us weaker in certain aspects but also stronger in others. I doubt our ancestors were able to appreciate the beauty of engineering, astronomy, physics (name any science) the way we are. We have more time on our hands to pursue higher goals than that of simply surviving another night. We've replaced our own hands with gears and bolts and it serves us well - at least for now. It's only a necessary step in the evolution of human intelligence. One day we'll find a way to survive beyond this world and another one. Speaking from the perspective of a single individual we are weaker but as a race capable of so much more than we were ever able to. In our world mutations can be countered if not cured, and we're seeking a way to eradicate them. In our age we don't have to abandon anyone because they're weak, sickly, ugly, not fit to survive. From a biological point of view this may be seen as a threat, but one can only wonder where it will get us. Perhaps some day we'll be the masters of our own evolution.
User avatar #305 - konradkurze (06/07/2014) [-]
well right now we dont have to worry, but what if the farms go to shit like they occasionally do....then all the people in cities who cant grow food are fucked

if the factories fail, also has happened, look at chicago,,,relied on the car industry then that failed and theyre now in poverty

mutations can be cured or avoided....but liberals scream not to do so. and just let natures mistakes happen and carry the burdens forever and pretend those who physically and mentally rely on others just to exist are 'lives worth living'...as if some vegetable stuck in a bed or wheelchair who cant even feed themselves is a valuable life

playing life by that one page of darwins ideal survival of the fieest, then we arent meant to drag the useless behind us, were meant to leave them behind, for those who actually read the rest of darwin....survival of the fittest applies to the group survival,....but again, one has to question, whers the logic in dragging the useless or less useful along with us when they cant contribute their fair share to the group and are more liability than asset
#308 - chudy (06/07/2014) [-]
Cont. Anyway nowadays i would bet my money on a dwarf, or other genetic reject to get shit done. Mentality has a huge part in our contribution to the society. Being born into a healthy, wealthy family you automatically win at life - as such besides your enormous resources more often than not you have nothing to show for it. Miracles are achieved via hard work, and someone who was born with a handicap has to work extra in order to measure up to the rest, to be seen as equal. Of course there are defects that won't allow you to measure up ever, and that's very unfortunate. Such lives may not mean much to humanity as a whole, but are
still valued by family and friends. Our lives are not always ruled by cold logic. Why do we own some pets? For example rats, snakes, spiders, hamsters,
small dogs that aren't fit for hunting or guarding. One could say it's just a waste of resources, but it doesn't stop us from caring for them and loving them as one of our own. Besides survival there are many instincts that constitute a human being emotions being one of such evolutionary mechanisms. We're not just tools to be judged by one's genetic usefulness. By the cold logic of group survival not only "mistakes" shouldn't be allowed to live but many healthy individuals that contribute absolutely nothing to the society like bums, junkies, the lowliest of criminal scum etc.
User avatar #310 - konradkurze (06/08/2014) [-]
well it comes down to society shouldnt have to rely on specialists to be more islands of one for certain things, people should have a variety of skills, yes there will be those with deeper training into said things to do more specific work but we should all be skilled on approximate similar levels

waiting for a midget to practically have to do bodybuilding to lift the same objects average people do, or them studying furiously to get an academic career to compensate for their lesser physical side, just promotes more specialism,,,.....yeah they can figure out problems but cant do much to physically carry them out
#311 - chudy (06/08/2014) [-]
I'm not saying that a midget should seek out a career involving the use of physical strenght. There are countless other jobs he can be good at, that exceed his limitations. Even a low paying job like flipping burgers doesn't require you to carry heavy stuff around. As for specialism, you can't expect from people to be versed in all trades. Some were born to run, others to paint. The gene pool is big enough for people to be vastly different from one another. My brother for example is a friggin math genius able to count much faster and with much more ease than anyone I know. When everyone else is thinking of an answer he'll give you one off the top of his head, which seems as natural to him as breathing is to you and me. I was provided with the same basic education he was, and obviously came from the same gene pool, yet my affinity is more of an artistic/philosophical nature and it came to me completely naturally. What you're saying has place - say in a construction environment where one man is restricted only to writing stuff down, another one to operating a forklift, and yet another one to securing the payload. All of those tasks could've been performed by one man, and sometimes such painful branching out can slow down the whole process. In order for people to be equal in skill we would have to be equally able, and it's just not possible if we are to promote genetic diversity. Some people are just better suited to perform given tasks, and some are not suited at all. Even in ancient times people fulfiled certain roles - there were hunters/gatherers, sheperds/farmers, shamans etc. Some of the trades are big enough to become a full time job that takes years or even entire lifetimes to perfect. The world is too vast to visit all the places...You can only choose a few skills to learn on a level that's good enough but not perfect and sometimes the only way to make a major breakthrought is to devote yourself entirely to the subject.
#307 - chudy (06/07/2014) [-]
I'm from Poland tbh. so I'm not quite as informed about what's going on in the U.S., but aye crops can wither, factories can shut down but as long as there are other, even the slightest possibilites within reach it's not impossible to overcome - if not, then we're fucked . Our history is littered with disasters whether man made or natural, and even in the face of extinction we managed to bounce back again. If anyone is concerned with survival, there's this mindboggling thing called the internet, at everyone's disposal, (well at least in the civilized parts of the world)
a library containing most of our knowledge that can fit inside your pocket. So there's the obvious advantage of knowledge, if one is willing to learn. Sure it won't do us any good when all goes to shit but you can milk it while it's possible. Concerning the main topic, it's not entirely true that the less able cannot contribute enough. It all depends how crippling their disability is- if it's a completely vegetative state, to live for the sake of living I don't think many people in a position like that enjoy their stay enough to care if they die or not. This I can agree on, euthanasia should be a legit choice. However if it's dwarfism lets say (from which the topic originated in the first place) it only affects your physique not your mind, and there are plenty of ways to be useful to the society. I mean look at Stephen Hawking - He wouldn't last a day day without a whole staff of people working around him all the time. Yet still what lurks beneath his skull is worth all the extra work and resources spent to keep him alive - it's one of those examples that defy logic and point out that everything is possible. It's nice to immagine a world where everyone is happy and perfect but tough luck - it's just a dark shithole with a few rays of light shining throught. I like to think that everything that is bad with this world gives us a frame of reference, allowing us to enjoy the good things - a balance.
User avatar #349 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well theres the problem, the books written for mankind were done by corrupt people who wanted to brainwash people, easily done because sheep believe in everything the government prints in its books, and having people read those books from youth means they grow up believing in bullshit without question and ridicule people who think freely

and as you said, teslas ideas were held back, the why being that the greedy corrupt people in power are threatened by things they ccant control or profit on so hold technology back...we are so far behind in tech because anything that cant be sold for a dollar is hidden by the puppetmasters and we're kept in a state of dependance on what crumbs they give us

#350 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
Precisely, thats why I said we need to fix ourselves starting on the inside. As long as fame, money, power are there in place we're not fit to live our lives as we should. Those concepts should be replaced by something that benefits more than a single individual, or an isolated group of people. What we need is a billionaire genius scientist with enough money on his hands to not care about additional profits, thus sharing his ideas freely. Too bad that's not gonna happen anytime soon, seeing as scientists are mostly poor fucks dependent on investors.
User avatar #347 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well thats just it, nature CANT fix us while we livei n unnatural artificial places, paving over everything with concrete disrupts the natural process our lives and souls are meant to live in and people have been too brainwashed into thinking living that way is the only way to live....living in nature is "uncivilised"

and as long as we live this way we cant fix inner or outer selves
#348 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
As we progress through the ages we'll eventually find a compromise. We don't have to give up comfort or technological advancement in the name of harmony, and being one with the nature. We are heading towards the "Goldilocks zone", to find a spot that's just right for us. We're not there yet, we may not be actively trying to get there. Anyway not all of us are, but it'll come eventually when we're ready for it. Knowledge isn't a constant, it's ever flowing like a river, but most people are stubborn and believe for everything to be set in stone. They prefer to view the world by the books that were instrumental in instructing them how the world works, however they refuse to believe that even in the course of 10 years or so many of the things they were raised into believing are false by now. It's a sad truth, but nevertheless truth. Think about how advanced we would be by now if not held back by the society and its state of mind at any given time. We're just now, over a 100 years later incorporating some of Tesla's ideas about wireless electricity - It took people that long to realize, this guy had some great ideas and Edison was full of shit after all. Were Tesla alive he would usher us into a new age of technological advancement, but he's gone and so is his genius instrumental in understanding the principles we are only beginning to rediscover. We've sown the seeds but now we must wait for crops to grow, and reaping them is an entirely different subject.
User avatar #345 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
and in saying that, my ideals based on not only logic but by a sense of purpose, ability and practicality

whether im programmed this way or its my free choice, possibly more free chouice since i make a determined effort to avoid media sources so left to my own devices my opinion has formed this way that i question the 'why' of keeping defects with us

much as the story of evolution is a lie, we still have clear signs in nature that the lesser are usually discarded by other animals...rats wont breed with defective rats, mother birds wont feed smaller weaker babies, animals born with missing or deformed limbs are on their own and generally get killed/eaten by predators

even eskimos in canada had a system of taking the defects and elderly outside in the middle of the night and leaving them in the snow to die in the cold rather than have them being a burden on the tribe
#346 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
As i said your ideals are yours to stand by, mine are just that - Mine. I believe that nature will eventually resolve itself, as it always did without forcing our hand. We've created an artificial environment for us to live in, we've achieved something that could be considered unnatural, but we cannot say for sure if it's just not the logical step in evolution of intelligent life or if we've really strayed away from the nature and its machinations. Time will tell for sure who's the cat and who's the mouse in this scenario. As of now there are many other priorities, like fixing the way "normal" people live like. Setting our values straight, getting rid of unwanted flaws that have been allowed to run freely in our society, like greed, selfishness, ignorance, hatred, prejudice and many others. I believe that the first step we have to take in fixing humanity up is to fix our inner selves, than consider our outer selves.
User avatar #343 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well again it comes down to only a tiny few of defects ever acheive anything because only a few try, and the majority just make peoples lives shit because modern society pretty much gives them a free ride

so we end up with countless people being put through the hell of coping with the defects and getting nothing out of it save being mentally hardened and drained

again ill support the ideal of isolating the less useful defects so they cant cause problems for normal people and im a compromise we could allow the defects who are motivated to doing useful things
but still, forbidding them from having children unless we work out ways to ensure they wont have more defects

until we as humans are at a stage where the human souls are repaired enough so we natually dont have defect kids, we should block defects and corrupt normal people from reproducing and let the natural order have a period ot time to heal
#344 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
By now we've incorporated a great deal of metaphysics into actual logic of controlling our own development as a species. I'll stand by my ideals, and you'll stand by yours it's simple as that, and there's nothing you can do to stop that from happening. Again even if free will is an illusion, you'll have to admit it's a pretty damn good one. It gives you the ability to question not only the world around you, but yourself, and your own consciousness. I don't give a fuck, If i'm just programmed to be this way by the greatest engineer of all - which is nature itself. As long as I can seek my own purpose, whether it's logically implied by my implanted behavioral reactions, and a natural affinity to choose certain thought patterns over others. Even if my own Soul is just an illusion sparked by raw brain power, an ability to run multiple threads at the same time - call it a multi - core processor that's allowing me to question my own programming and see myself as an individual, instead of a machine that just serves its purpose. One that's allowing me to learn, to improve, update my software regularly , see the world as it is at this very moment, and not as it was implanted by birth. Given such ability to reason, to question, to simply think I'm pointed to many possible outcomes, from which i may choose. And i choose to stand by ideals that are ideal to my programming - say a personality, we're all logical beings defined by individual experience and emotions pertaining those experiences, and your everyday life. Even with all our numbers we're far too random to define what's "Normal". We're different from one another, some differences are big enough for others to notice them outright, or be scared of them. But I'm not. While I do care for the humanity as a whole, I'm not concerned about our genetic make up, I mostly care if we're able to cooperate and to turn those different ideas into new ones that will take us higher and higher.
User avatar #341 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well on the issue of free will, we cant accurately determine that as the NWO has programmed society to be split between outright hatred or outright tolerance of things, and as such mankind doesnt have its own free will because people making up their own minds about things would end up making them actually unite against the political and corporate puppetmasters who stir up this shit

usually the 3rd party people who have free will are either labelled liberals by the right wingers or fascists by the left wingers for not being on a polar extreme like most people

ive spoken to my flatmate who's keyed up on the condition of the human soul, and he feels most people are flawed by modern society and out natural soul energies are polluted by the influence of false ideals and distractions taught to us by the corporate run schools and further damaged by media influence as we grow up

thats one of the reasons why people turn evil and why some souls are so corrupt that when they get reincarnated they come back as defective because as a soul leaves its old body and moves to the new one its corruption becomes more pronounced and warps the unborn body in the womb so it gets born deformed

so again, we need damage control.......defects cause too many problems in mainstream society so the best thing to do would be to isolate them, prevent them from having kids so they dont cause another corrupted soul to be reborn, and over their lives, retrain them to be good so when they die they wont come back corrupt again
User avatar #340 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well youre argument does come across as "move forwards at the speed of the slowest members and hope they can learn to move faster but not expect it from them"

personally i think the reincarnation issue applies....people who have done alot of negative shit with their minds in a previous life come back as retarded as punishment and people who committed crimes of the flesh come back as mutants
either way suffering now for crimes of a previous life

on that note it raises the standing issue of changing how fucked up human society is so we dont have dregs of society coming back as defects in the next run

there are some defects that have mental issues where they are compelled to fuck with other people like the psychos, the schizos, and more....are they worth keeping around if all they live for is to destroy others lives?
#342 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
You cannot be so certain in judging how one's life affects others, while it may ruin them financially, tire them out mentally, and physically those are experiences that will strengthen you in a way that cannot be always predicted. I believe that everything has it's purpose, whether it's becoming a tool for one's evolution - elevating people into individuals that are respected, looked up to by the rest of us. Becoming a symbol is not always an easy way, it's almost never a straight road ahead but in order to be one you'll have to overcome difficulties that are seen as impossible by the majority of people. Again with the hypotheticals, but then again this whole conversation has been one ruled solely by imagination. There are many people you'll find across our history that didn't really care much for liabilities that certain people would prove to be. Their purpose was to help those people out, no matter what in a truly altruistic matter. What we're given in this world is a free range to exercise ourselves not only physically but also mentally/spiritually. And given certain contrasts in our world, we've been able to elevate ourselves beyond tribal packs, and start appreciating concepts like "the greater good" - one that you cherish so much as to hate on people that would break your idea of "perfect world". But as with all things we cannot forget - For every action there is an reaction. I believe in a concept like Karma, It may sound stupid, however it has never failed me so far. Of course there are random things that cannot be helped at all, but including those your life and your happiness are yours to make, depending on how concerned are you about happiness and lives of others. I'm not saying we should slow down for the "slower" to catch up. I'm only saying we should give them a chance at reaching the final line. Life shouldn't be race, and it's only sad some people would consider it such. Life is a marathon, we're all here for the long run after all.
User avatar #337 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well yes animals have consciousness, alot of what mankind has learned to do is from witnessing animals do it and in some cases cooperating with animals when they do it....like how some places work with dolphins to herd fish into nets

youre kinda confusing retards with others like idiot savants and autistics who arent full retard
Tropic Thunder (5/10) Movie CLIP - Never Go Full Retard (2008) HD
#338 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
Well given your faith in chaos, which tbh. I also share to some degree, mistakes are bound to happen, and taking care of those mistakes are just another random variable. One that cannot or even shouldn't be stopped by artificial means, leaving the fate to resolve itself - what I was trying to say at some point, We're at an uncertainty about our future but we're conscious enough to ask ourselves questions whether we should interfere with the natural order or not. Another question is whether all we've come to cherish - free will and all of its aspects like gaining knowledge, questioning things are not just an elaborate mechanisms that are unique to certain kinds of life and are no more than a tool used by evolution. If all of this will one day bring us closer to perfection or total decimation, if it's not just a natural cause of intelligent life dying out or if it's not just another step of evolution forcing us to leave behind our flawed bodies. There are countless ideas like that in science fiction already. Uploading our consciousness into an virtual bank, or making an artificial immortal shell, it kind of forces us to think which way we're really heading.. Are our bodies in the long run really worth taking care of, aren't our genes something that can be just rewritten, perfected, replaced with something else, something better. After all what we all strive for is to be better not only physically but also mentally and spiritually - to become perfect at every aspect of life that is currently known to us. You can't deny that our mentality will be different in a 100 years, let alone a millennium from now. Certain aspects that were overlooked by now will become something of a day to day matter. We weren't asking ourselves whether there's a creator or not a thousand years ago we were certain that world was molded by the hands of a God or Gods for that matter. We don't know what lies in our future, but one thing is sure it looks pretty bright from where we stand now.
User avatar #336 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well taking a look at some religions, they come across as tools of the new world order, making people content with living in a world of shit because they think theres something better after they die..the majority of people dont know this but the fanatics take it to the extreme of using their religion as a means to isolate and segregate out people they dont want in the future world order

hence why i think the faith of Chaos (cosmogony) is the best faith because it sits between science and religion, focusing on that everything came from the same source.....though chaos is random chance, there are always aspects that by string of random probabilities, turn out to embody several weaknesses and liabilities that make them fall into a niche that is so specizlised they have little no no place in the core structure of life

take a mutant with no arms or legs, pretty much a living paperweight......unless theyre given specialized skills in order to cope somehow, they have no practical place.....or a retard whos permanently havinf a child mentality, they'd need special training to cope in the adults world if they cope at all

trying to help the defective is pretty much trying to jury-rig broken parts into working in some ad-hoc way like a societal McGyver way they arent really supposed to fit but are artificially made to for a time
all the while, all this specialist attention to them puts them at a higher priority above the regular people goig as far as defects getting better help and education than normal people, which is against nature
#339 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
Well my answers are not much of an answer to the whole defects thing. But what I can agree on its that logically its not something we need at the moment, and definitely not something we'll ever need in our development as a species. But there's always "but" - take morality, a concept very ideal based on a fact that for every action there's a reaction - a basic rule of physics one that in this case was applied to out very definition of "human', and that would be our "Spirit". Whatever people think this is, whether we'll come back in another time and another body, if our "signature energy" will come back to haunt another generation - a concept of reincarnation seems the most likely scenario for me if we're speaking of something such controversial as a Soul. I don't know whether i'm coming back or not but I'm trying to live my life to the fullest, since I might or might not get another chance, it doesn't hurt to try everything that is worth trying out there. And standing up for ideals that are worth standing up to. I'm speaking hypothetically out there and well mr. Beer is a very talkative fella, you can always live on in the memories of your loved ones, and as such make this life count for something. I do understand your ideal of "damage control" and while in the long run it may be beneficial to out genes, we're living our lives in a matter of a single century, not enough time to see such changes before your very eyes, not enough time to appreciate them. If we were to live forever, we would place much more value in our genetic make up and overall health of the society as a whole. While it might be lesser of two evils as i said before it's just "evil" by now,. and people only appreciate life for what it is to them at this very moment. Retards, defects, mutants - whatever they're called by us are living creatures too they're no different from a pet you care for - it's a living, breathing, feeling creature and that's what matters to people at most in the time being.
User avatar #333 - konradkurze (06/15/2014) [-]
well just because a tiny percent of defects can acheive anything legally or illegally doesnt change the fact they are still defects
i dont support a monoculture because everyone being the same would cause stagnation in genes and personalities, and like the hensel twins, there are some mutations that are quiet appealing

but then there are other mutations that are detrimental in body and mind.....like the general retards who stay childlike and useless ther whole lives, the schizos, the homicidals, the manic depressives, those born with deformed or missing limbs, etc

....yes science is slowly moving forwards with technologies to fix these things but as i said earlier....by the time they do, society will most likely be at a stage where its not politically correct to use them and nutjobs will take to the streets in protest against using them

its already bad enough we have religious nuts flipping out over blood or organ transplants to save lives, and others flipping shit over gay people....imagine how much worse theyll get when science comes out with ways to fix defects...theyll be up in arms screaming "dont fuck with gods creations" and even non-religious nutjobs will preach "tolerate natures mistakes because thats how nature made them"

there is a small number of mistakes we can accept and a majority we cant.........we're already dealing with societies mistakes like other races posing into the black culture to be 'cool', people using drugs as a way of life just because they can, and sheeple swearing their blind loyalty to corrupt politicians....without mankinds mistakes expanding into blind tolerance of everything that pops out of a womans vagina regardless of how warped it is
#335 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
The thing you're looking for is moderation. Religion is good "In Moderation" - there are many people of faith that are good and wise enough not to care about strict rules written in a book that's 3000 years old or more. Our society have come a long way from the time it was written, and even though their words are considered "holy" it takes common sense to recognize bullshit that comes from ignorance and lack of knowledge in given times. There are people ( sadly there are many of them) that will recognize the Bible, Koran, Talmud or whatever their holy scripture of choice is as the only truth in the entire world. Such mistakes are slowly eradicated by education, and explaining the world in a more rational way that can be predicted by logic. I mean as of now 15% of the world has no faith at all - they're either atheists or agnostics. And while not all of them are truly smart they're already enough to make a difference. Look at the pressure we've given as a Society on proper education - It's given almost freely to everyone that can afford a roof over their heads, and then there are countless books sold for pennies for the less fortunate to learn from if one has enough time on his/her hands. The difference is made by those that care to make use of their abilities in a way that can affect our progress and not by those that simply make a living. Even they have a purpose, to build and execute every higher idea that those that care about progress have. Religion is a penicillin for the masses - it's purpose is to give people hope and a certain goal in live, and also enforce some ideals on them, that well ought to moralize them but often work the other way around, and helps people in hating on other groups by providing some "data: to back them up. Sadly that's the way any philosophy of life works, no matter how well written people will always find a way to exploit it in their own of thinking.
User avatar #331 - konradkurze (06/13/2014) [-]
well youre talking about taking the hardest road of all....by and large people cant even agree what pizza topping is best and you believe people of all races and species can come together and put aside differences that have been a part of life since dirt

compassion doesnt apply to everyone....its a bit hard for issues like "im sorry your mommy drank while she was pregnant with you" and carry the defective kid through life hoping that they might achive something
and taking a look at the world, most of the people with mental or physical issues got somewhere by people saying they couldnt and they decided 'fuck you ill show you i can"......take einstein...his teachers said hed never get anywhere

thats another major flaw in modern society, pampering the disabled and handing things to them so they dont have that motivation to acheive anything like they used to,

hell even laws by and large dont get enforced on them, from personal experience, i knew a retard who lived on welfare and made a nice sum selling drugs, i did my job and called cops on him every time i smelled that shit, cops came, they found the drugs and just gave him a telling off, no arrest....because they knew the courts would let him walk because hes a potatohead....

so all in all, in modern society, we're seeing life bent over backwards for the disabled, with no sign of change for the better in sight
#334 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
About the consciousness thing I'm talking bout numerous accounts of animals showing they're well aware of their being. Like elephants, dolphins, whales (pretty much most of the marine mammals), also octopuses, crows, chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas. They've all shown some degree of knowing themselves and recognizing each as an individual, even naming each other and recognizing that name after many years of separation. I'll sound much gay right now but Dolphins are the most fucking amazing of all of them. They've been able to outsmart some of the researchers, well maybe not without them realizing in the end because of the whole surveillance thing but still there's an example for ya: The researchers have been feeding dolphins extra fish for cleaning the pool, and one of them came up with the idea to store a big piece of paper at the bottom of the pool, each time bringing just a scrap of the whole thing to receive a reward. They even went as far as to use some of the fish they received as a bait for seagulls, and soon enough the entire group was hunting for seagulls, learning this stuff from a single individual. The fact they're able to adapt this way and that they have their own language which is well - group specific: So they can't coordinate so well with individuals from other packs but still giving them a range of communication outranked by only ourselves. There are even cases of mutual cooperation with People - news.discovery.com/animals/whales-dolphins/helpful-dolphins-120502.htm or even military seeing their value in becoming vessels of destructive underwater power - there were news of dolphins being outfitted with deadly weapons and gone missing. Wonder whatever happened to them, and well they're also smart to kill just for the sheer fun of killing, or to rape people in underwater caves (I'm not kidding about this one - that's some really fucked up shit ) just because they'd like to fuck something else than each other. Well they also help sometimes;]
#332 - chudy (06/15/2014) [-]
Well one thing we can both agree on is we're both thinking about it in different angles. I'm fighting in the name of "human soul" if you can name it that way. We're not sure whether its a thing or not and science hasn't proven that so far nor disproved it completely, but still the essence that makes us living, feeling beings. And you're trying to point out the cold logic of survival and striving for perfection. While they are both very well present in our society, we just have to balance them out in a way that doesn't overpower the other one completely. I'm sorry for my incoherent ramblings but I'm pretty much drained mentally and physically from drinking all night. Yet you can't deny there's some hidden logic in there ;]. Yes Einstein and so many others we have chosen over the course of this entire conversation are handpicked examples, that do not necessarily apply to the majority of population. And while yes, having yourself kicked in the ass that way can take you in the right direction regardless of how smart or able you are. Motivation can do wonders, and if a fucking crow or a chimpanzee can solve complex logical problems than so can even the most retarded of people. Perhaps not in the way regular people are able to solve their problems, but still you're saying about a mentally deficient guy that's been able to set up a successful business, taking into account the benefit of some kind of immunity that his mental illness provides. Hell maybe in his retardation he's shown some degree of smarts by exploiting a flaw in the system and selling his drugs almost legally or it was an accidental decision. We can't tell what's going on in the minds of the less able ones. But if they're showing something that's until recently was reserved only to humans - consciousness they're definitely smart by earth's standards. We're learning more and more about our brains with each pssing day but it's still shrouded in mystery even after all this knowledge we've acquired over the yrs
User avatar #329 - konradkurze (06/11/2014) [-]
one question i overlooked till now....why are you so protective of natures mistakes.....

why do you seem to WANT them in society, what benefit do you see in them that normal people cant provide
#330 - chudy (06/13/2014) [-]
It's not about whether i want them or not, or whether they're more or less capable than a regular human. It's about pointing out that people are not fucking machines that can be viewed solely from an evolutionary standpoint. If strength and survival were our only concerns we wouldn't even bother to develop culture - things like art, music etc. would be pretty much completely obsolete. People are not only driven by logic but on a big (even bigger) part by emotions. In order for your ideas to be successful you would have to change the way we're thinking and it's just not gonna happen. People are not especially keen if someone is pointing out their weaknesses and telling them that they're a mistake that shouldn't be there in the first place. What kind of message you think you're sending ? You may think about it as a "lesser of two evils" but most of the people out there would consider it just evil. While in longer terms it may benefit us, for now we should be more concerned about bringing people together and putting aside differences, and creating more divisions doesn't help the cause. Sure people will mate out of pity, people will make mistakes but it's not like their numbers exceed the ones producing healthy offspring. Like 90% of people are shallow fucks who only want better, prettier etc. - I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I mean I'm also concerned by these things but it doesn't hurt to show a little compassion. To put yourself in their shoes for a while, and in the shoes of their parents - if they didn't want them around they wouldn't bother to keep them alive. A child is a child nevertheless.
User avatar #327 - konradkurze (06/11/2014) [-]
im not sugarcoating it, im saying preventing defects having kids is the kinder option than the alternatives
as you claimed 'human nature to have kids" then by and large the defects will have kids instead of stopping to think 'should they'.....they just go ahead and have them out of pretty much human tradition to have kids

people who get ridiculed over personality issues like nerdiness or physical problems like being fat, THOSE can be changed, and back to the older topic, its hard or impossible to change mutations, like how far can you reasonably apply limb lengthening surgery to a midget to make them taller before its unsafe to stretch them further, how can you help a guy born a midget with no arms or legs when his body isnt capable of accepting limb transplants because he was born deformed without proper shoulders and hips to have limbs.....how can you operate on a brain to change things like schizophrenia, psychosis, etc....you cant

not all purists are uneducated...look at germany, most of its political figureheads were doctors, lawyers, politicians, educated people who hated defects,,,,.....soviet union had little use for defects, if they were capable of doing menial labor in some base form thats whhere they went or if they were useless tough shit, the family has to work harder to provide for the useless

again, you were fat, you were able to change that....forest gump cant change being retarded, dwarves cant just stop being small

the only compromise would be artificial insemination where if defects want kids they get pure sperm/eggs put in to remove the chance of random defective samples causing pregnancy

btw female version is Masectomy
#328 - chudy (06/11/2014) [-]
Damn, I thought I said my final words but well... You underestimate people and their ability to thrive regardless of their disabilities. There are accounts of blind people learning to echo-locate, being able to see just as good and even better by seeing the world in 360 degrees. I don't know if you've seen paintings or drawings made with lips, foots etc. by people with missing limbs. It shows that you can even get a certain degree of accuracy and perfection without having the proper tools to do so. People don't need your help to get by, they will find a way to fit in somehow because that's just what people do. There are cases that cannot be helped by any means, mental cases for example. My friend has a schizophrenic father, and 3 sisters - only one of them developed schizophrenia later on in life. By the time you'll have kids with your partner it might be too late - it's not like you're born schizophrenic, so how to go about stopping them, testing every couple that wants to have kids ? Sometimes you just can't tell what is wrong with people, and it's like fighting an invisible foe.
You're talking here about soviets, germans - educated purists, but it's doubtful someone would run into such people in the course of their lifetime while taking a stroll in the park or attending school. Especially after the events of WW2 such ideals are frowned upon even more so than you are when seeing the defects reproduce, so lets be real here and think in the terms of present time. I mean look at the response you've been getting - and it's the internet ffs, people used to seeing and reading weird shit. As for artificial insemination - yes it's a good solution but people tend to fuck just for fun, and many pregnancies are not planned at all.
User avatar #324 - konradkurze (06/10/2014) [-]
its not about throwing them out its about preventing them from passing their issues onto the next generation
so they can live their lives for good or bad and just not cause more people to suffer

it is also immoral to permit them to have kids knowing that said kids will grow up being targets for bigotry as well, thats being intentionally cruel to little kids having them grow up in a society that will ridicule them...unless you put defects in their own areas which would be immoral segregation....

preventing them from having kids is the lesser of two evils

until science comes forwards with practical measures to prevent mutant kids and cure existing ones, the best we can do is try to lower the defect rate
#326 - chudy (06/11/2014) [-]
Anyway... Could've done that some time ago since we've been going at it in circles for some time, but well I do like arguing to give myself a proper mind excersise and to improve on my words. To conlude this conversation I'll get off my moralistic high horse for a while and level with you on a strictly logical level.
While it's true that contaminations are best fought beforehand, it's also true that people enjoy making their own choices and having freedom to do so.
The most you could do in today's world is to offer a free vasectomy and whatever is the female equivalent(i don't recall the word) to those afflicted without causing major outbreaks and outcries in the media. While it might or might not be enough is best left to speculation. You can't predict what earth and its people will look like in a hundred, let alone few hundreds years yet its understandable to be concerned about some aspects, and possible developments. There are far too many things to be taken into consideration to unanimously vote either way. You have a different outlook on things and so do I, and so do other 7 billion people inhabiting this planet.

Overall this conversation has been quite interesting, though unnecessary started by insults on my part.

I guess that's it.
#325 - chudy (06/10/2014) [-]
Now it seems you're sugarcoating it, why all the talk about genetic heritage and screwing over humanity then, if all you care about is for people to live happily and not being ridiculed for something they were born with. Did you stop to think anyway that some of them have a mind of their own, unless it's a mental case they're likely aware their genes might result in their kid having a rough life and might decide not to take the risk. It's not your decision to make whether they can reproduce or not - ideally it would be nice to see a world of beautiful, healthy, smart and equal people but that's just not gonna happen. You can be ridiculed for being a nerd for example, for being poor, or for having gay parents - kids are just cruel and will find a way to hurt the less fortunate, or those that stand out from the pack. That doesn't mean that your life is worth any less and we should teach kids to follow the majority step by step, to keep their profile low and try to be just like everyone else. If it's the adults we're speaking of then it's not worth hanging around such people since they're most likely ignorant, uneducated assholes and as such not worth the time or effort. Nowadays it's not that bad anyway, people had it much worse for a much longer period of time yet they lived somehow. There are few possible outcomes to being constantly scorned - a complete mental breakdown, suicide or acquiring a great deal of mental resilience.
I can speak from experience since I was an odd kid, kinda fat, Adhd, too sincere in expressing my emotions and too quick to anger - people constantly took advantage of the facts and ridiculed me up until i turned 15. It took me some years to grow into my own boots but now i don't give a flying fuck about people bad mouthing me and find it much easier to control my emotions and survive psychic trauma than most of my friends. Went a little off topic here, but you don't know how many of those people won't be grateful for having lived their lives
User avatar #322 - konradkurze (06/10/2014) [-]
you dont get the ideal of damage control do you......
yeah mainstream life kinda encourages mutations but then it'd mean we need to both porevent the mutants from having kids anjd also find ways to remove things that cause mutations to put humanity back on track of a safer gene pool

and as far as minorities go, arabs, asians, hispanics, siberians, and native americans are part of humanity as they evolved alongisde us, what im talking about are the unevolved apes that have stayed primitive all this time, that we should be leaving out of the gene pool
#323 - chudy (06/10/2014) [-]
I understood you the first time, what i'm trying to point out that it's immoral to enforce such actions, and while it may be "for the greater good" you can't just view people as trash that needs to be thrown out. Take a brief look at history and every attempt to control things at the cost of our freedom or convenience or anything that's been taken away from our lives. A simple thing like prohibition did the exact opposite of what it was supposed to - an attempt to contain the disease that was alcoholism forced people to buy from untested sources thus putting their lives at risk even more than before and creating a nation of law-breakers. Just saying, things like that often come back to bite you in the ass. What we're doing anyway is making wild guesses about the future of humanity and we can say for sure that many predictions tend to be untrue in the end. Do you actually have statistical data to prove your point?
Do you know at what rate "the plague" is spreading, What is the percentage of birth defects compared to overall number of births, what is the actual chance of such individuals successfully passing on their broken genes etc.? Have you taken all those into account and calculated at what point it might become an actual problem?
It's like shooting a guy in the head because you think he overheard you plotting a heist - but it turns out he was deaf and mute and wasn't even looking your way. It might become a major problem, it might not. You can't justify your actions with assumptions and hate people for no apparent reason because it makes sense to you. There are tons of variables that cannot be foreseen unless you actually had an ability to look into the future. We don't have a slightest idea what will happen in the coming years, a fucking volcano might errupt, a food shortage so severe that it will force people to feast on their own kind, or we'll advance so much that nature becomes our bitch. For now all you can do is talk.
User avatar #320 - konradkurze (06/09/2014) [-]
well there are people so liberal that they let pity override common sense, like i knew a guy who was in with a manic depressive lady who kept trying to kill herself over small shit, or a lady i knew hooked up with a schizo guy who collected random shit out of rubbish bins because he mind told him the were other things (like he had a stack of those huge 5 gallon drums of cooking oil that fast food places use, stacked on top of each other and was calling it a filing cabinet)

defects wont go away, for as long as mankind lives in a society where we have food water and air filled with chemicals, barely checked drug use, medications called safe then later banned as unsafe, and more such problems, we have MORE defects occurring....

the only thing thats really dying out are white people...i see more and more blacks expecially indians, flooding into everywhere.....we'll lose white people to the cockroaches before we lose defects
#321 - chudy (06/10/2014) [-]
Well then by that logic stopping people from reproducing won't really do much, if more and more mutations are induced by ingesting chemicals and unseen health hazards that surround us. Passing on broken genes is only a one side of the whole story and producing them by living in unfavorable conditions is another one. You can only hope people will one day come to their senses and instead of filling their pockets while putting others at risk, they will listen to those with clean solutions that don't necessarily bring profit or that cost less for more - for now our very survival instincts (putting yourself in best possible conditions, could be also named greed) are our undoing. As for racial integrity, you can't do much about it. If humanity will ever stand united, it's only natural for many of its populations to intertwine and eventually combine in to a singular race. I don't mind minorities as long as they're fair to me - well I don't have to worry about that much seeing as my country ain't the best place to go looking for a job, also Middle-eastern Yurop isn't the most welcoming place for foreigners.
User avatar #318 - konradkurze (06/08/2014) [-]
well it shouldnt be a race for normal people to have kids faster than mutants, expecially since amongst normal people its usually the poor and stupid who have the most kids,......so not exactly helping normal humans along by the lowest class outbreeding intelligent people

we already have the problem of liberal minded people taking pity on the defects and some goign as far as to marry and have kids with them, and like alot of downward spirals through human history, it began with a small few starting a trend

it says alot about how bad humans are when RATS are more selective about what they mate with than humans are, rats wont touch defective rats, so why should humans be less picky than rats

plus how can we ensure a majority of healthy genes when we dont make any attempt to keep bad ones out
bad genes can skip generations and turn up later to haunt people...so even when mutants kids dont share the defects their parents do, the defects may pop up in a future generation and still cause problems
#319 - chudy (06/08/2014) [-]
Most people are picky about who they want to spend their lives with, most people appreciate comfort and wouldn't like to go a mile extra to take care of their other half because they're not able to themselves. While it's true that some genes may lay dormant for a generation, when finally a mutation occurs, the poor fellow is less likely to find a good partner than a healthy person. It's all a matter of circumstances, an unwanted gene has a bigger chance of eventually dying out than those sought after. An example of genes dying out is a gene responsible for blonde hair which at this moment is slowly heading towards extinction. Even though in some cultures it was desired thing, it started out as a random mutation that ran its course for some time and now it seems this time is almost over. If something as harmless as a hair color can eventually die out, we can safely bet that defects might aswell seeing as it's not something we ask for. As for the poor and stupid fucking like there's no tommorow you can only blame the system we live in that allows people to get a bigger paycheck everytime a new baby pops out.
User avatar #316 - konradkurze (06/08/2014) [-]
its simple, the longer we allow mutants to have kids the more difficult is becomes to save humanity, if we prevent defects from having kids then we are able to snip off the hereditary defects and be left with only the randomly occurring ones and then be able to sort out what causes these random mistakes and move towards scientific advances to stop them

its easier to deal with the minority of mutants than to housetrain the majority of normal people to be blindly tolerant of them.....hell people oin society flip their shit over small things like ive heard about a guy who flipped his shit when he ordered extra cheese on his hamburger and the cashier said that costs 50 sents more....or some guy tried to buy a cigar from a gas station, it cost 1.70, he put down a dollar, the chashier asked for the other 70cents and he tried to attack her.....

you think people are just gonna up and change to accept mutants? as i said its easier to prevent the small number of them from having kids

plus not just the physical defects, the mental defects are a higher priority to prevent from having kids, theyre even less useful to society....retards who cant understand alot of whats going on, or are permenently childlike,...people with anger issues who spark up hostility over small things or manic depressives who fall over and cry over unimportant or non-existant things.....
#317 - chudy (06/08/2014) [-]
As i said earlier healthy people reproduce at a much faster rate, not only because they are more plenty but because they don't have to struggle so much to find a suitable mate. Even with all the help they're recieving the genetically handicapped will not ever be able to overpopulate us, unless humanity flips its priorities and starts apprieciating deformed and undeveloped more than attractive, well built and intelligent. I mentioned about reproducing at a geometric rate - it means that parents will give birth to 2 kids lets say, those 2 kids will each start a family and have another 2 kids each, thus producing 4 of them, and then its 8, 16, 32 - I don't think that's the case. What are the chances, a healthy individual will choose a genetically flawed specimen over a normal person untouched by such things. Would you prefer a beautiful, smart girl over an oversized child or one that has a hard time comprehending such things as responsibilites or how to use a toilet properly ?
Let's say our poor guy will find himself a girl, they will have a child, and this child won't be so lucky which will result in his lineage dying out. There will never be more defects in our gene pool than there is normal functioning ones. It would require from us to be fucked in the head to choose bad genes more frequently than the good ones. And if people ever get tired of their odd neighbours the problem solves itself by violence, as you wrote you can't teach people to be tolerant you can only educate them and they will choose what to think for themselves. It's rather doubtful that our future will be populated by genetic mutants, seeing as we ultimately strive to be better. If living up to a standard of beauty wasn't a thing, we wouldn't have people shaving their privates, bodybuilding and overall trying to look good. There are raw numbers at play, and the defects are just a needle in a fucking enormous haystack.
User avatar #313 - konradkurze (06/08/2014) [-]
well yes, a wheelchair case can do management but to point back at the oringinal issue, they shouldnt be allowed to have kids so if their issue is genetically inheritable, that they dont pass that one to punish the next generation and so forth

yes science is moving towards being able to fix these defects but for now we should be trying to curb how many occur

its like having a housefire and letting people flick lit matches around adding to it, while you ponder how to build a better fire extinguisher......the longer you leave it the worse the problem is gonna get in the meantime
#315 - chudy (06/08/2014) [-]
Besides you're not able to predict what mutations will arise in the future, and the ones in existence provide us with a deeper understanding of our genome. When fiddling with our code you'll be at least informed about what not to do, and you never know if mutant genes won't be useful in curing future diseases.
#314 - chudy (06/08/2014) [-]
The house isn't on fire, it's only the smoke detector going wild because someone forgot to turn the oven off. Now the roast is ruined and the question is what to do now ? Can you salvage at least something or is it completely hopeless ? Lets say the roast is burned slightly on the outside - some people would consider it inedible, others more desperate and hungry won't shy away from it. Depending on how badly it's burned there's a lesser chance it will be ever put to good use, and most people that can afford clean, healthy food won't go near the thing. Sure there are no cave bears, or rabid wolves to "weed out the weak" but people are actually concerned with the health of their children, and physical attraction is there in place to ensure choosing the best genes. For them It's like winning a lottery - just because it happens doesn't mean you are going to win anytime soon because chances of that happening are actually slim. There are many variables to take into account, and even with increased chances of survival its not likely they're able to pass on genes at a geometric rate. The healthy population will always be proportionally bigger, because there's nothing to hold them back from reproducing. Sure if controlled we might even be able to put an end to it, but there are enough future concerns in the coming years to forget the ones that take into account thousands of years. At the moment personal freedom can benefit us more - to provide a satisfied population which can coexisist peacefully. The very second we would try to force our way, they would hold a grudge for being second rate citizens. I mean, If someone were to tell you - Sorry son, you're a genetic freak and we have to cut off your balls so you don't screw us up. I can assure you you'd be pretty pissed off. After all what makes us Human is our conciousness, and I doubt if anyone were happy to be judged by the effectiveness of his "meat-suit".
User avatar #309 - konradkurze (06/07/2014) [-]
well heaking is a bad choice, he has a vastly high iq..while other people with defects just have regular iqs so cant really do much more than the average person mentally

some with physical disabilities only improve their minds to compensate for what their bodies cant do, but if disasters...what will we need more....mutants in wheelchairs who can think out plans or physically able average people who can actually carry out the plans and more

say the scare of WW3 becomes a reality and we have to rebuild society from scratch, how will a potato on wheels help build houses, grow crops, move heavy objects, etc
#312 - chudy (06/08/2014) [-]
You don't know how many of them have a greater than average Iq. There's no such thing as "average mutant IQ", they fit into the same frame as the rest of us.
Anyway if a disaster were to strike at us, we need simply manpower. The guy in the wheelchair might not be able to carry much, but management is just as important. With proper logistics and planning you'll be able to divert more people to other jobs, cut loose ends and unnecessary assignments, set priorities right and do the job efficiently.
For all we know there might be more wheels than we bargained for - after all people do get injured during conflicts. The less abled might also die out during conflict
as civilian casualties given their limited mobility or awareness. We're speaking in hypotheticals here. It's hard to predict just how big the percentage of less abled
people might be in the future. Our technology is progressing quite fast, and that also concerns medical science and biology. Have you heard about Xna for example ?
It's a synthetic dna, grown in a laboratory, more resillent and less prone to damage than our current building block. In the future we might be able to reinforce our
genetic structure. Also replacing improperly functioning organs is not unheard of - I mean we're able to print a kidney FFS, and in 10 years or so we will be able to
print out a working heart. There's more where this came from - Mind controlled prosthetics, even entire suits like Hal 9000, a japanese invention working on the same principle (detecting signals from your brain) that's able to move a paralyzed person, and gives you the ability to lift a 40 kg weight like it's no big deal.
#114 - lolzordz (06/05/2014) [-]
both my parents are deaf. some would consider that a defect, people like you I guess. But then my parents learned to not give a fuck and worked harder to get what they want. As long as people with "defects" are happy, then why do you care? Is this midget bothering you? he's doing the opposite for everyone else it seems. Maybe you should learn from him?
User avatar #268 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
Lol. Being deaf is a handicap and speaking from the perspective of evolution, it should be erased.

I'm not saying they can't live, what I'm saying is that you have to realize he is right in his point of view, and that he's wrong in yours. If you think otherwise, you're just dumb.
User avatar #284 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
you think evolution is all about the hunter and the hunted. Evolution is bigger than that. We compete with ourselves, and you know who die out nowadays? those who can't handle difficulty. (and ugly people)
User avatar #287 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
>"and ugly people"
That was a joke, right?
>"More than hunter and the hunted"
that's not my point. my point is that without hearing, they are really not fit to live. maybe in modern society they CAN, but they will inevitably be effected by this one way or another.
1. a rabid dog attacks them from behind and bites them in the leg and they die of rabies
2. a speeding drunk hits them when they're looking the other way
3. they get stabbed in the back repeatedly because they can't see behind them

you really are reading what you want to read, not what I'm saying.
User avatar #290 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
ultimately, people want stronger, better faster and more good looking children. Thats why I mentioned ugly people having difficulty breeding.
deaf people dont have difficulty breeding. They dont have difficulty being businessmen and they dont have difficulty raising children. Anything that is relevant in this society, they do not have much of a problem doing. My dad's a car panel beater and my mums a civil servant.
They do have difficulties given ridiculous situations youre setting out hypothetically but then again a tree could fall on your head and it'd be a shame you didn't have that super panoramic vision to save yourself.
User avatar #292 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
Bad comparison. There are many more situations in which one can die when one is deaf and I doubt anyone would really want deaf children, so if both your parent's are deaf, it's not a coincidence. They bred because nobody else wanted to. Same thing applies to 'ugly' people. Sometimes, it's subjective. Some people really ARE uglier than others, but most times it's really just based on personal opinions. Either way, there will always be two ugly people to breed.

You are naive and idealistic. Are you deaf, by the way?
User avatar #294 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
im not deaf and my dad wasnt born deaf, it happened in an accident at an early age but he got familiar with the deaf community and met my mum. Turns out the deaf community is a beautiful hidden culture and he liked it. I was born into it and can tell you all the differences between the hearing/deaf world. If im the one speaking from experience and youre not, how can I be the naive one? chickidy check yourself, you twat.
User avatar #295 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
>if im the one speaking from experience and youre not"
that is the exact reason why. you've got loved ones in that situation, therefore you are pretty heavily biased as they are most likely the most loved ones you have considering they are your parents
you seem to be heavily romanticizing it. I don't believe that it's as good as you say and the point still stands, deaf people are less suited to survive, ugly people might be less suited to reproduce, but hey, an ugly person could get kids with a blind person and an ugly person. tough shit, turns out your comparison wasnt as rigid as you thought it to be
#296 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
End of the day, it's real and it happened, in the real world. and all youre doing is saying why it shouldn't happen in some ideal alternate world you created in your head. As if anyone ever cared about what you think.
User avatar #297 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
I have no idea what you're saying right now, I'm not saying it shouldn't happen. I'm saying it's less likely to happen. Not many non-deaf people not in love would reproduce with a person who is deaf, that's the simple truth. You could apply this as well to ugly people, but you're making it sound like just because it happened to your parents, it's more likely or something. Could have been a random chance event, you're lucky. Everyones lucky.

"cared about what you think"
It doesn't matter
You may not care about the sun, but it is still there and will be until it dies. Facts are facts, you are not entitled to your own facts. You seem very in denial, but I'll leave you. I don't mind if people with genetic defects breed, in fact, I think it should be everyones right to breed. It's just that you must be able to objectively see why some of the children may be less fit for survival. >implying you're going to read any of this and take any of it to heart
User avatar #253 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
Deaf: CAN be fixed with medical science

Dwarfism: cant be

and drop that selfish isolationist shit, its that 'only care about yourself' attitude that makes the world shitty
#262 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
that 'only care about yourself' attitude is inevitable.
User avatar #269 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
Oh, and that isn't the exact same thing as Konrad is doing then?
User avatar #282 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
no
User avatar #283 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
You lack introspection.
User avatar #285 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
k
User avatar #286 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
Pathetic, you go around insulting other people, then you act all self righteously and when somebody calls you on your bullshit you go "k" as if that disregards the whole point a person is making.

Man, don't be such a lame ass
#288 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
jesus, I dont want to argue because your original comment was retarded and i'd feel like im wasting my time. But okay, here we go.

Konrad is saying, "those people shouldnt be allowed to breed" implying theyre slowing us down as a species. I'm like no, this midget is doing well for himself, he's surviving, happy, and he doesn't give a fuck what people like you think. There is nowhere in there which is in any way remotely similar to what konrad was saying.
User avatar #289 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
No it's not, I'm right. You are basically 'only caring for yourself' while konrad is also 'only caring for himself'.

I never said you were saying the same thing as him, dumbass, I said "doing". You ARE. You are only 'caring about yourself'. I bet you that if you didn't have deaf parents, you would not give a shit either way and maybe even thumb him up. You can lie to yourself all you want that your beliefs would be the same, but in the end we both know I'm right.
User avatar #291 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
him - midgets should not breed
me - dont be a moron

the difference is, even if i "only care for myself" (which by the way, is a false absolute). It doesnt mean i should have a say on what other people do. Are we understanding yet?
User avatar #293 - revengeforfreeze (06/06/2014) [-]
"that 'only care about yourself' attitude is inevitable. "
You said this. Now you're saying you don't "only care for yourself".

I never said I agree with him, I'm just saying you aren't more right or wrong than him. You are both helping in the way you consider best.
User avatar #265 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
sad but true, the human race is fucked
User avatar #266 - lolzordz (06/06/2014) [-]
that attitude is natural and innate in every creature bro. If you are advocating strength in mankind (which by the way, I am all for and believe technology will be the downfall of mankind) then you should know that the 'only care for yourself' attitude is what allows any creature to rise above its own death. Its the original survival instinct.

User avatar #267 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
as if no animal on earth ever traveled in packs for group safety and survival

yeah there are alphas in the pack but still a pack
User avatar #64 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
What you seem to be missing is the fact that midgets having sex isn't affecting you or anyone but the people having sex. It's not a question of political correctness, it's more to do with basic human freedoms and rights.
User avatar #65 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
yeah....that whole crap "if it doesnt hurt you dont worry about it."....nice isolationist ideal of only ever thinking about what affects ones self and giving no fucks about humanity as a whole
great argument kid
User avatar #67 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
So you're basing your argument on the fact that more midget sex=more midgets=bad. Why would that be bad? How would humanity as a whole be negatively affected.
User avatar #69 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
well for a start,. how many things do we take for granted that are much more difficult for midgets to do because of size

driving a car requires special seat boosters and pedals for them to see over the wheel and still use said pedals, object we'd carry normally are difficult and heavier for midgets with smaller/shorter arms...and hell even just to sit on a barstool for a drink requires them to climb up it
and also given liberal laws we have to tread lightly around them in case they get offended by normal people over some little incident and cry discrimination
User avatar #75 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
only one of the 200 causes of dwarfism is hereditary. and its a recesive gene
User avatar #95 - thesovereigngrave (06/05/2014) [-]
Actually, just figured I'd let you know, but the most common cause of dwarfism is actually caused by a dominant gene.
User avatar #239 - sketchE (06/06/2014) [-]
thats my mistake then i must have misread something
User avatar #81 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
yes but still....how do you go about legit testing every midget to make sure which ones pass it on and stop them?
User avatar #82 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
you dont even try. are we gonna start hunting down people with cancer and castrating them just because it may increase chances of their kids getting cancer? mp amd thats a fatal disease dwarfism just makes things more difficult
User avatar #86 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
bad example

you can fight/cure diseases...can you cure midgets?

granted one day science wil finally work things out and grant people the power to avoid defect pregnancies, till then we're stuck with them and their burden and why should we be happy to have them?
User avatar #89 - sketchE (06/05/2014) [-]
so hows getting into art school going adolf?
User avatar #90 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
implying midgets are a race?
fail

they arent limited to any racial group....any people can have natures mistakes
User avatar #170 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2014) [-]
Nature doesn't make mistakes. However she does make ignorant assholes.
User avatar #97 - syrenthra (06/05/2014) [-]
You must not know, Hitler took anyone with a defect and put them into the camps, not any specific race
User avatar #249 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
wel when did i ever say cut them out of human life

they can live alongside us just not have kids, aka they can do their thing and then fade away without poisoning the gene pool
User avatar #72 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
None of what you said is a good reason to stop them having children. Those aren't "liberal laws," the phrase you're trying to find is "common decency," as in, not treating someone has sub human because they're different.
User avatar #76 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
i see....so if a midget makes a joke about someone else, thats okay....someone makes a joke about midgets, poof theyre in court
great equality and common decency
User avatar #83 - idiotapocalypse (06/05/2014) [-]
No one goes to court for making jokes. Sure you may offend someone, but what doesn't offend someone. It just may not be wise to make a midget joke right to their face, it kind of called being a massive douche. So sure, go ahead and make a midget joke, they're in rather short supply. This difference is that isn't taking away anyone's basic rights.
User avatar #84 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
you underestimate americas lawyer culture
User avatar #220 - sirgawain (06/06/2014) [-]
So, you'd prefer Eugenics? Okay Adolf, whatever you say...
User avatar #248 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
whats wrong with stopping natures mistakes from having kids

they can still adopt and give a koid a chance at a good family, but without their own fucked up genes in the human pool
#109 - refaim (06/05/2014) [-]
You overestimate it. Show us one court case that is decided in favor of someone who was offended by a joke......don't worry we'll wait.
#62 - anonymous (06/05/2014) [-]
you make it sound like you are the perfect specimen of a human.
i have heart problems, i don't think that i should be condemned to not continue my family tree just because i am not perfect.
User avatar #66 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
i dont claim to be the perfect human, but i support keeping humanity strong, not allowing corruptions to weaken the gene pool

the way science is going one day they could fix genetics so people with medical issues dont suffer things like bad hearts
curing midgets is a little harder......
User avatar #91 - rickyhooverslobes (06/05/2014) [-]
If you support keeping humanity strong, then why do we have pathetic human beings like you around still? You're a sad, sad kid. I wish you the best in life, even though you live such a miserable existence, I still wish you the best, and maybe, just maybe, one day you will grow up.
User avatar #92 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
*claps*/
great argument child
as if personal ideals affect the human gene pool

clearly youre retarded and also need out of the pool
#94 - rickyhooverslobes (06/05/2014) [-]
User avatar #112 - revengeforfreeze (06/05/2014) [-]
>you're a sad, sad kid. i wish you the best in life, even though you live such a miserable existence, i still wish you the best
>"no, you're the one who's mad!"
User avatar #71 - killthebilly (06/05/2014) [-]
Hi, mister national-socialist.

"keeping humanity strong, not allowing corruptions to weaken the gene pool". You sound like a propaganda from Nazi-Germany in the 1930's and early 40's.
User avatar #80 - konradkurze (06/05/2014) [-]
humans: whites, asians, arabs, hispanics, sibeians, native americans

midgets are one of natures mistakes, not limited to any race, so how is that nazi wanting the human races to be pure and strong regardless of origin?
#118 - anonymous (06/05/2014) [-]
I like how you live out black people. Fuck you.
User avatar #252 - konradkurze (06/06/2014) [-]
anonfag
i said humans and i stand by that

if you want to cry about blacks, then Peta is the best group of people for you to speak to
#164 - Which one's Jon Snow? 06/04/2014 on Martin's desk 0
#82 - It wasn't very effective 04/27/2014 on Electrode 0
#79 - Do you have Parkinson's?  [+] (2 new replies) 01/24/2014 on Parkinson 0
#103 - xcoreyx (01/24/2014) [-]
You can never be too prepared
#84 - anonymous (01/24/2014) [-]
IIIiiiiiii ddddoooooooo

tttakkeeeeeee mmy monneeeyy
#382 - Theories are simply a possible, unproven explanation for somet… 01/02/2014 on Kid is smarter than the... 0
#344 - It does say, "the most correct answer." As God is pa…  [+] (28 new replies) 01/02/2014 on Kid is smarter than the... +3
User avatar #453 - HonkIfIDriveWell (01/02/2014) [-]
It's more of a widespread assumption. A theory actually has to have a body of evidence to back it up. So while it may be the common answer, it is by no means the most correct.
User avatar #376 - mightymooseking (01/02/2014) [-]
I don't think that the fact that answer 'C' is a widely accepted theory makes it any more correct than any other widely accepted fact or theory such as the famous 5 second rule hoax with food. (google it if you don't know what I mean)
One might also argue that Zeus would be a valid answer as he was the main god of three of the world's biggest empires or republics, the greek empire where Zeus was actually called Zeus and the Roman Republic and Empire where he was refered to as Jupiter.
Another argument would be that some scientists and theoreticians actually believe that earth was either created or that evolution was influenced by extra terrestrial beings which would mean that 'C' and 'D' would be correct as they are currently by some people accepted theories.
Only 'B' is completely wrong as Hercules was not involved in the creation of earth in greek mythology.
User avatar #382 - idiotapocalypse (01/02/2014) [-]
Theories are simply a possible, unproven explanation for something. Due to this level of uncertainty, it stands to reason that one theory can have a greater chance of being true than another. The 5 second rule wouldn't be one because we can test it and observe the results.
User avatar #353 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
An Atheist playing devil's advocate.

I'm sure there's something there....
User avatar #363 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
We actually like to do it a lot...fitting, I suppose, since everyone sees us as the bane of all religions...
User avatar #366 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
I was just making a joke.

Atheism is a faith, just like anything else.

Hell, even agnosticism constitutes <some> kind of decision. So we're all in the same boat in the end.
User avatar #368 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
I know you were just joking. And atheism is actually just the opposite. It's the lack of faith. We don't believe in anything. A lot of us just believe in that which can be proven by science, so there really isn't any believing at all.
User avatar #375 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
To expand further,

A "lack of faith" as you put it, really only fits certain forms of agnosticism which choose to abstain from any formal religious claims.
User avatar #373 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
Well, any formal statement about God, whether it be belief for or belief in an absence of, requires some leap of faith (granted some more than others).

So Atheism does in fact, require faith. (note that's with a lowercase "f" I'm not saying it's a religion)
User avatar #377 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
How exactly does atheism require faith? Also, textbook definition of atheism is as follows.

"disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods"
Google

" a disbelief in the existence of deity
the doctrine that there is no deity"
Merriam-Webster
User avatar #378 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
As soon as you make the intellectual decision that there is no god, you are making a claim without proof.

In any case where someone makes such a claim we say it is "made on faith."

Like I said, the fact that there will never be proof for a lack of something (read: pink elephants) means that the amount of faith could be considered smaller, but it is, nevertheless, a belief of some kind.
User avatar #462 - HonkIfIDriveWell (01/02/2014) [-]
"Intellectual decision that there is no god."

That would not be an intellectual decision, and you don't have to make that decision to be an atheist.

As for agnosticism, well, I would only find use in that word if there was competing evidence for both the positive and the negative.

But seeing as there's no evidence, the only "intellectual decision" I can make is to reject the proposal. The assertion needs evidence for me to consider it.

To not believe in god is the same as not believing in anything else. It's simply where I sit because I've not been given any reason to sit anywhere else.

Apparently the word "atheist" is necessary because god is such a big deal to so many people. If atheism ever becomes the norm, the word will likely fade out of use.
User avatar #573 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
I don't know where you're getting your info, but it's not right.

Atheism is an active disbelief. A person who has never been taught any religion, for instance, would not be an atheist.

All an agnostic is is someone without set religious beliefs <or> someone who doesn't believe in a certainty of god or the absence of such. So saying the word is useless is just bizzarre.
User avatar #577 - HonkIfIDriveWell (01/03/2014) [-]
Sorry, but that's rubbish. Yes, there are atheists who do say "there is no god" but it's not a requirement. Disbelief =/= Belief in lack of.

There's no special word for people who don't believe in Santa or the Tooth Fairy, because not believing in those things doesn't generate any controversy and doesn't require a term.

It's only logical to disbelieve something until it's supported by evidence.

In a court of law, the crime must be evidenced before the defendant can be considered responsible. Innocent until proven guilty. The thing didn't happen unless it can be proven to have happened.

Atheism is just a result of that same principle, much like the scientific method when it comes to testing any hypothesis. Nothing is true until it is.
User avatar #578 - alfrebecht (01/03/2014) [-]
Ok, see I understand what you're saying, but the great thing about the English language is it doesn't care about your opinion about it.

An Atheist MUST disbelieve god, it's what the word means.

To reword something I've said before: if you take a man, put him in a society, and make no religion, such that that man does not have an opinion on God, he is not an atheist. He cannot be an atheist until religion exists in his society and he chooses, not only not to associate with it, but to believe it's wrong.

This is not a debate about correctness or procedure, just definition.
User avatar #581 - HonkIfIDriveWell (01/03/2014) [-]
Yes, an atheist disbelieves in god. The definition of "disbelief" in this instance is "the inability or refusal to believe something is true".

The "inability" part covers anyone with no knowledge or understanding of the subject.

So yes, seeing as that atheist simply means "not a theist", and being a theist requires active belief in god, the hypothetical man you mentioned, having never heard of god, would indeed be functionally an atheist.


User avatar #583 - alfrebecht (01/03/2014) [-]
Alright, I've said what I believe to be true about the English language, so we're just going to have to disagree.
User avatar #585 - HonkIfIDriveWell (01/04/2014) [-]
Okay. Still though, things are either true or are they aren't. What you "believe to be true" about the definition of words is kind of irrelevant, especially when the factual definitions are readily available.
User avatar #586 - alfrebecht (01/05/2014) [-]
Yes, that is what I said earlier.
User avatar #379 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
However, I make the decision based on many other factors that I can measure, touch, and feel. There are things I look at in modern existence that prove to me we don't have any need for a god, and that he can't exist according to the laws that I live my life by. There are also many many other more personal and emotional things we don't need to get into...

Now, I'm not saying Christianity is wrong, or that any other religions are wrong. Believe what you want. Just don't shove it down my throat.
User avatar #381 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
I'm an agnostic you silly person. I don't believe in God. The fact that you jump there to defend yourself and say I'm shoving something down your throat....

Anyway. You made that decision to disbelieve, the only thing we were discussing was whether or not you made a decision based on faith. Since we're using google definitions, faith is simply "complete trust or confidence in someone or something." In your case, the something is an absence. If you didn't have faith in it you wouldn't be <able> to disagree with people. Debate them yes, but not disagree. You actively "believe" as we were debating before, that there is not a god.

This is purely a semantics question. Not an ideals one.

Are you religious? No. Do you harbor a series of beliefs? I don't know. Do you harbor at least one? Yes, the belief that there is no god.

That's not a "lack of beliefs" A lack of beliefs would be an absence of opinion.
User avatar #384 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
I never said you were shoving anything down my throat. I was stating my view towards religions.

And through a clever play on words, you've confused the ever loving fuck out of me...it is obviously not a good idea to argue about such things when I've recently taken a panic attack medication...fucks with my head. I've been stubbornly avoiding the word faith, and I'm slowly losing my train of thought, but I'm going to concede with you because I can no longer keep this up. Well played sir...well played. You get some internets from me...have a good night, and a Happy New Year. I hope we may cross blades again sometime.
User avatar #386 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
Sorry, I misinterpreted your last line then. I apologize.

Happy new year to you as well!
User avatar #388 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
No apology needed, just acceptance. Sorry for being such a stubborn pain in the ass though.

And I saw your deleted comment. Careful who you're calling a "young atheist" ;P
User avatar #389 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
lol, not why I deleted it, the idea wasn't done. and I had paged away thinking it was. In general though, I've found that in my experience more atheists at the age 30+ tend to agree they hold "beliefs" while younger ones tend to believe they are "anti-belief"

but that's not a universal rule.
User avatar #390 - fortehlulzing (01/02/2014) [-]
I think I just misinterpreted the use of a couple words...like I said, I'm pretty drugged....and I do get a bit defensive on the whole belief thing, but there's this guy I know that if I wasn't that way, I'd never survive his constant bible thumping at me being an atheist.
User avatar #393 - alfrebecht (01/02/2014) [-]
I dunno, I always found the best way to drive those people away was "I have my beliefs and you have yours."

After that if they didn't leave I would.
#370 - alfrebecht has deleted their comment.
[ 104 Total ]

user's friends

User avatar matttmoss    
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1350

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#3 - matttmoss (12/31/2012) [-]
Aha! Nick. One of your items is AIDs. I see the irony....

....african
#1 - SonicTeam (08/24/2010) [-]
Raped Your Virginity
Raped Your Virginity
 Friends (0)