It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Wow. Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. You might be blowing this out of proportion if you simma down and think about this logically.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
In addition, you may have missed the question about your thoughts on legislating men who drink alcohol and take drugs that cause chromosomal damage. You know, as contrasted to putting this all on the women.
Originally posted by SevenBeans
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Wow. Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. You might be blowing this out of proportion if you simma down and think about this logically.
He said no exceptions, even when asked specifically about parents who kill their kids... maybe you should think about this logically?
Originally posted by rogerstigers
And yet, you jumped to the most heinous thing you could think of in an attempt to paint me as a monster. Fine. Get out your brushes.
Originally posted by rogerstigers
No Exceptions. I do not think that our actions should be relegated to the musings of a few wealthy and powerful people of questionable ethics who deem to consider their morals better than everyone elses.
If that means there wil be communities where people rape and murder, then that's the way it is. I tend to have more faith in the families and friends who would take steps to stop such actions. If a friend of mine raped or murdered their child, I would consider it my duty to hold that person accountable.
If we lived in smaller communities where people were more involved then we would not need laws to regulate every aspect of our lives. Troublemakers would be dealt with. The problem with the "what about this" approach is that everytime you claim moral authority over an entire group of people, you open that community up to yet another seizure of rights.
I think communities are more than capable of taking care of themselves. Native tribes all over the world are doing just fine without "Fearless Leader" watching over them. When a person becomes a troublemaker and starts doing things to endanger others, they are simply dealt with.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Yes but your questions were straw men. As in this was nothing he or she said and simply things rolling around in your mind apparently without much thought.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
There are already laws covering most of what you are positing.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
And so you would be for legislating all Americans to the genetic level? Perhaps you wouldn't really be opposed to that breeding farm after all?
Originally posted by SevenBeans
Ok, what you're talking about than is not "leave them be" you just want yourself/the immediate community to be the one's to "hold that person accountable."
Thank you for clarifying...
Originally posted by SevenBeans
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
And so you would be for legislating all Americans to the genetic level? Perhaps you wouldn't really be opposed to that breeding farm after all?
Can you explain what you mean by legislating americans to the genetic level? What would an example of that be?
Breeding farm? No.edit on 22-2-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
That goes to my question to you that you answered. Chromosomal damage = genetic level.
Breeding farm or license to breed...you pick. That's where I see this leading if we follow the path you seem to believe needs to be followed.