Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Samildanach · Jul 8, 2005, 07:20 am

Violence curbed through genetic therapy. at the moment it has only been used on mice, which should relieve any pacifistic cats, but I think it points the way forward. Instead of the electric chair maybe we should be using compulsory gene therapy.

http://www.betterhumans.com/News/New...1/Default.aspx

tman_ndsu08 · Jul 8, 2005, 10:52 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

There you go, Adolf.

lsbskins1 · Jul 8, 2005, 11:25 am

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

There you go, Adolf.

Wait...
Did you just compare someone to ...Hitler!!!!!!
Maybe I've forgotten the rules. Is it that no one is allowed to compare anyone to Hitler for any reason because it shows a complete lack of moral proportion or is it that only conservatives are allowed to compare liberals to Hitler because we have to play by a strict set of rules and you guys are so special that the rules don't really apply to you? Could we clear this up before we move on, because I don't want to make a mistake.

**Matt W** · Jul 8, 2005, 11:32 am

Tman just likes making snide/arrogant/rude comments in every post. Get used to it. :rolleyes:

Samildanach · Jul 8, 2005, 11:45 am

lol...I dont mind in this particular case as I am an advocate of eugenics...just not using hitlers methods. Besides he didnt mention hitler in the slightest...just some guy called Adolf

Osborn F Enready · Jul 8, 2005, 02:39 pm

He meant Hitler, and I agree with him 100%.

The facts of history show that eugenics was part of the Master Race Plan, and it was endorsed and fed along by many in this nation, to Hitler, before he even wrote Mein Kampf.

There were many businessmen and politicians who corresponded with Hitler, prior to his public movements to overtake control of the world.

Once again, here we are talking about perfecting society through the use of gene manipulation. What makes you sick people tick, anyway? What could possibly make you think we all want the same things from life? Violence is a valuable assett in this life, and as long as anger exists, violence will exist. You assume all violence is unfounded, and not just. While I implore senseless violence, I relish the thought of being turned loose on those who have sought to dismantle my Constitution, for the explicit intent of performing violence, because in my eyes violence is the only way to enact justice for the crimes that have removed the rights, liberty and life of so many people.
While I of course wouldn't do this without public endorsement (due process, legal authority )under normal circumstances, should revolution break out, you would see me with an assault rifle and a smile as I drove/marched/jogged/limped/crawled to Washington.

Cheers mate.

P.S.
You will never, ever, under any law or benevolent intention fondle my genes or the genes of my loved ones.

**Jack** · Jul 8, 2005, 03:08 pm

Did some of you somehow miss the fact that Samildanach was talking about violent offenders? Or maybe the topic upsets you because you are violent offenders? Talk about extrapolating to a ridiculous degree.
And I'm really amazed by the mind of anyone who has to resort to comparing anyone with an opposing point of view to Hitler. I'm amazed, that being so tiny, it doesn't just fall out when they turn their head to the side.

Osborn F Enready · Jul 8, 2005, 03:18 pm

I think Samdilnach is a pacifist, and I am not, therfore compared to him, I DO ENDORSE violence in some situations.

I depise utopic thinking, when people talk about making it effect MY LAWS.

Osborn F Enready · Jul 8, 2005, 03:19 pm

I also think it would be cruel, and unusual punishment to say the least, since who do they derive their authority to mess with peoples genes?

lsbskins1 · Jul 8, 2005, 04:33 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Osborn F Enready

Once again, here we are talking about perfecting society through the use of gene manipulation. What makes you sick people tick, anyway? What could possibly make you think we all want the same things from life? Violence is a valuable assett in this life, and as long as anger exists, violence will exist. You assume all violence is unfounded, and not just. While I implore senseless violence, I relish the thought of being turned loose on those who have sought to dismantle my Constitution, for the explicit intent of performing violence, because in my eyes violence is the only way to enact justice for the crimes that have removed the rights, liberty and life of so many people.
While I of course wouldn't do this without public endorsement (due process, legal authority )under normal circumstances, should revolution break out, you would see me with an assault rifle and a smile as I drove/marched/jogged/limped/crawled to Washington.

Are you a Christian, Osborn? If you are or aren't makes no difference to me, I make no moral judgements based on your choice of spirituality, I only ask as a matter of judging your level of ethical consistancy. Because the attitude implied in this section of your post is in complete opposition to Christian Teaching, or rather, the teachings of Christ. It indicates a level of anger than I believe most would consider unhealthy and I wonder at it's origins.

Quote:

Quote by: Osborn F Enready

I depise utopic thinking, when people talk about making it effect MY LAWS.

Do you always exhibit this same level of possesiveness towards public policy. The laws govern and protect you, but they do not belong[u] to you. If, in the democratic republic you call home, duly constituted authorities pass legislation that changes the law, (the law, not your law, it is not yours), you have an obligation as a citizen to obey those laws. You do also have the right to protest those laws and should you chose to accept the consequence, you may have a moral obligation to civil disobidience, but I know of no thinking party who would suggest, that in a democratic society that is opperating within the confines of the definition of said society, you have the right to armed usurption of the laws because you do not like them.

Samildanach · Jul 8, 2005, 05:54 pm

In my original statement I referred to gene therapy as an alternative to the death penalty. I didnt expect it tobe used in every day cases for jaywalking or roadrage. I just thought it might be a good thing to try where instead of executing someone we alter them to be less violent. I am also far from a pacifist. There are certain situations where violence is highly justified. However there are lots of situations it is not.

tman_ndsu08 · Jul 8, 2005, 07:27 pm

Quote:

Quote by: lsbskins1

Wait...
Did you just compare someone to ...Hitler!!!!!!
Maybe I've forgotten the rules. Is it that no one is allowed to compare anyone to Hitler for any reason because it shows a complete lack of moral proportion or is it that only conservatives are allowed to compare liberals to Hitler because we have to play by a strict set of rules and you guys are so special that the rules don't really apply to you? Could we clear this up before we move on, because I don't want to make a mistake.

Adolf is sam's nickname, genius.

**Jack** · Jul 8, 2005, 07:53 pm

Quote:

just some guy called Adolf

Since he posted not long after and said nothing about a nick, how were we to know that? Anyway, if that's the case, I apologize to presuming otherwise.

Osborn F Enready · Jul 9, 2005, 01:22 pm

Ibskins said:
Are you a Christian, Osborn? If you are or aren't makes no difference to me, I make no moral judgements based on your choice of spirituality, I only ask as a matter of judging your level of ethical consistancy. Because the attitude implied in this section of your post is in complete opposition to Christian Teaching, or rather, the teachings of Christ. It indicates a level of anger than I believe most would consider unhealthy and I wonder at it's origins.

I say:
ROFLMAO.....excuse me. That was funny.

Ummmm, no, I am not a Christian, or a Catholic or any other religion. I would actually have to wonder where you would have picked that up with reference to me.

Ibskins said:
Do you always exhibit this same level of possesiveness towards public policy. The laws govern and protect you, but they do not belong to you. If, in the democratic republic you call home, duly constituted authorities pass legislation that changes the law, (the law, not your law, it is not yours), you have an obligation as a citizen to obey those laws. You do also have the right to protest those laws and should you chose to accept the consequence, you may have a moral obligation to civil disobidience, but I know of no thinking party who would suggest, that in a democratic society that is opperating within the confines of the definition of said society, you have the right to armed usurption of the laws because you do not like them.

I say:
Actually, I am not speaking about laws, I am speaking about rights, and they DO belong to me, regardless of what laws may be passed in direct opposition.

That is what makes our Republic different than so many others. We have a CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED republic, which states that no matter what laws the republic passes, they are inherantly limited by the Constitution, which may, make even newly made laws, null and void on face value if they are passed, but in direct contradiction to the Constitution.

We are NOT a democratic society. WE elect our leaders in a democratic fashion. We also are not operating within the "Confines" that we claim we are. We claim to be a Constitutional system, in alignment with our Constitution, this is a bald faced LIE.

I also can completely justify my anger, because in early times of this nation people would have been shot on sight for removing my rights the way this system has done.

Milton Bradley · Jul 9, 2005, 03:31 pm

Now would be a good time time to ask what Milton's favorite question is.

Right from my signature ...

How can we have a "Constitutionally Limited Republic" without the constitutional limitations?

Please remember to phrase your resposnses in the form of a question.

Jul 8, 2005, 07:20 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
Samildanach Pragmatist Location: UK London Posts: 1,979	A solution for violent offenders? Violence curbed through genetic therapy. at the moment it has only been used on mice, which should relieve any pacifistic cats, but I think it points the way forward. Instead of the electric chair maybe we should be using compulsory gene therapy. http://www.betterhumans.com/News/New...1/Default.aspx I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs and insanity for everyone, but its always worked for me. Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime." (Ernest Hemingway)

Jul 8, 2005, 11:32 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
Matt W Moderator Location: Reading, UK. Posts: 6,107	Tman just likes making snide/arrogant/rude comments in every post. Get used to it. :rolleyes: I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. -George Best, on being asked what he did with his footballing fortunes.

Jul 8, 2005, 11:45 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
Samildanach Pragmatist Location: UK London Posts: 1,979	lol...I dont mind in this particular case as I am an advocate of eugenics...just not using hitlers methods. Besides he didnt mention hitler in the slightest...just some guy called Adolf I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs and insanity for everyone, but its always worked for me. Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime." (Ernest Hemingway)

Jul 8, 2005, 02:39 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	He meant Hitler, and I agree with him 100%. The facts of history show that eugenics was part of the Master Race Plan, and it was endorsed and fed along by many in this nation, to Hitler, before he even wrote Mein Kampf. There were many businessmen and politicians who corresponded with Hitler, prior to his public movements to overtake control of the world. Once again, here we are talking about perfecting society through the use of gene manipulation. What makes you sick people tick, anyway? What could possibly make you think we all want the same things from life? Violence is a valuable assett in this life, and as long as anger exists, violence will exist. You assume all violence is unfounded, and not just. While I implore senseless violence, I relish the thought of being turned loose on those who have sought to dismantle my Constitution, for the explicit intent of performing violence, because in my eyes violence is the only way to enact justice for the crimes that have removed the rights, liberty and life of so many people. While I of course wouldn't do this without public endorsement (due process, legal authority )under normal circumstances, should revolution break out, you would see me with an assault rifle and a smile as I drove/marched/jogged/limped/crawled to Washington. Cheers mate. P.S. You will never, ever, under any law or benevolent intention fondle my genes or the genes of my loved ones. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

Jul 8, 2005, 03:08 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Jack formerly Isherwood Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 12,870	Did some of you somehow miss the fact that Samildanach was talking about violent offenders? Or maybe the topic upsets you because you are violent offenders? Talk about extrapolating to a ridiculous degree. And I'm really amazed by the mind of anyone who has to resort to comparing anyone with an opposing point of view to Hitler. I'm amazed, that being so tiny, it doesn't just fall out when they turn their head to the side. The Forum Rules Radical Atheist Heathen Queer Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be. (Ashleigh Brilliant)

Jul 8, 2005, 10:52 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics There you go, Adolf.

Jul 8, 2005, 03:18 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	I think Samdilnach is a pacifist, and I am not, therfore compared to him, I DO ENDORSE violence in some situations. I depise utopic thinking, when people talk about making it effect MY LAWS. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

Jul 8, 2005, 03:19 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	I also think it would be cruel, and unusual punishment to say the least, since who do they derive their authority to mess with peoples genes? Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

Jul 8, 2005, 05:54 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
Samildanach Pragmatist Location: UK London Posts: 1,979	In my original statement I referred to gene therapy as an alternative to the death penalty. I didnt expect it tobe used in every day cases for jaywalking or roadrage. I just thought it might be a good thing to try where instead of executing someone we alter them to be less violent. I am also far from a pacifist. There are certain situations where violence is highly justified. However there are lots of situations it is not. I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs and insanity for everyone, but its always worked for me. Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime." (Ernest Hemingway)

Jul 9, 2005, 01:22 pm	#14 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	Ibskins said: Are you a Christian, Osborn? If you are or aren't makes no difference to me, I make no moral judgements based on your choice of spirituality, I only ask as a matter of judging your level of ethical consistancy. Because the attitude implied in this section of your post is in complete opposition to Christian Teaching, or rather, the teachings of Christ. It indicates a level of anger than I believe most would consider unhealthy and I wonder at it's origins. I say: ROFLMAO.....excuse me. That was funny. Ummmm, no, I am not a Christian, or a Catholic or any other religion. I would actually have to wonder where you would have picked that up with reference to me. Ibskins said: Do you always exhibit this same level of possesiveness towards public policy. The laws govern and protect you, but they do not belong to you. If, in the democratic republic you call home, duly constituted authorities pass legislation that changes the law, (the law, not your law, it is not yours), you have an obligation as a citizen to obey those laws. You do also have the right to protest those laws and should you chose to accept the consequence, you may have a moral obligation to civil disobidience, but I know of no thinking party who would suggest, that in a democratic society that is opperating within the confines of the definition of said society, you have the right to armed usurption of the laws because you do not like them. I say: Actually, I am not speaking about laws, I am speaking about rights, and they DO belong to me, regardless of what laws may be passed in direct opposition. That is what makes our Republic different than so many others. We have a CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED republic, which states that no matter what laws the republic passes, they are inherantly limited by the Constitution, which may, make even newly made laws, null and void on face value if they are passed, but in direct contradiction to the Constitution. We are NOT a democratic society. WE elect our leaders in a democratic fashion. We also are not operating within the "Confines" that we claim we are. We claim to be a Constitutional system, in alignment with our Constitution, this is a bald faced LIE. I also can completely justify my anger, because in early times of this nation people would have been shot on sight for removing my rights the way this system has done. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready Last edited by Osborn F Enready; Jul 9, 2005 at 01:31 pm.

Jul 9, 2005, 03:31 pm	#15 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	Now would be a good time time to ask what Milton's favorite question is. Right from my signature ... How can we have a "Constitutionally Limited Republic" without the constitutional limitations? Please remember to phrase your resposnses in the form of a question.