Eugenics?

[timesjoke]

 

Let's cut the bull and say it like it is man. If we wanna keep our population alive and thriving, we don't need to kill of anyone but the extra live stock races like the entire freaking African continent.

 

I believe and endorse Eugenics, however, I don't think for a second I'm qualified to fit into the master plan.

 

So first of all, if you really believe in this why do you also believe in welfare?

 

The too lazy to work should be the first group of people removed from the genetic pool under your plan.

 

 

It seems to me your contradicting yourself.

 

 

To use a popular style of question, "Please explain".

 

[phreakwars]

I was thinking Christians & Conservatives, and basically followers of ANY religion in general. It's a disease of the mind practiced by insane people with no sense of reality.

.

.

[timesjoke]

Enough of a grip on reality to provide you with a community to exist right?

 

Without religion no society, even Dawkins had to admit religion is a moderating factor for society and as we see now, as more and more people move away from religious beliefs, morals decline.

 

If your going to erase religion, then you have to take responsibility for the loss moral structure that goes with it.

 

 

Take your wish to kill anyone who has faith for example, to you we deserve to die just because we do not believe what you believe. That is the very definition of a bigot.

[phreakwars]

Yep, it's bigotry all right, but not as bad as all the damage Religion has done to this world in the first place.

 

All Eugenics are bigotry. You can't get around that. Someone will always lose out.

 

And so what if morals decline anyway. Big deal. Morality based off of delusion is dangerous and deadly, that's why we have extremists.

.

.

[timesjoke]

The problem is societies cannot exist without at least the framework of a shared faith principle. Rome first started falling apart when they tried to change their faith and were split between old and new religions.

 

Politics, and declined morals followed and the fall of Rome was done, all domino effect from the loss of shared religion.

 

 

Hitler pretended to have religion until he had full control of his Nation then he admitted he was an atheist and even though they became powerful, it was not enough to keep them from imploding after they turned away from religious morals. Pol pot, Stalin, Mao Zedong, all of these mass murderers were driven by their lack of religious beliefs to provide strong morals and keep them from doing such horrible things.

 

 

Right now the only people who will go to places like Rwanda just because it is the right thing to do is Christians. You have never heard of an atheist group doing anything like that, but you will find thousands of them mocking prayers at a church or fighting over a nativity display during Christmas, now there is some great concern for society.

 

 

Face it, while I can prove millions of great things religious people do for community and mankind like soup kitchens and food banks as well as missions to places like Rwanda, Athiests cannot point to one single thing they have ever done for community and mankind, not one. There is the real problem........selfishness, that is the only product an atheist offers society, and I give them credit, their offering has been spreading like wild fire all over the place.

 

 

The negatives some claim about religion are things like the crusades but digging deep we see only about 100k to 200k people died from the crusades but Pol Pot caused the death of almost 2 million people by himself, all under the name of pushing the atheist agenda.

 

 

No, religion is not the cause of major problems in the world, an atheist with an army is the most harmful element this world has ever seen.

[snafu]

The problem is societies cannot exist without at least the framework of a shared faith principle. Rome first started falling apart when they tried to change their faith and were split between old and new religions.

 

Politics, and declined morals followed and the fall of Rome was done, all domino effect from the loss of shared religion.

 

 

Hitler pretended to have religion until he had full control of his Nation then he admitted he was an atheist and even though they became powerful, it was not enough to keep them from imploding after they turned away from religious morals. Pol pot, Stalin, Mao Zedong, all of these mass murderers were driven by their lack of religious beliefs to provide strong morals and keep them from doing such horrible things.

 

 

Right now the only people who will go to places like Rwanda just because it is the right thing to do is Christians. You have never heard of an atheist group doing anything like that, but you will find thousands of them mocking prayers at a church or fighting over a nativity display during Christmas, now there is some great concern for society.

 

 

Face it, while I can prove millions of great things religious people do for community and mankind like soup kitchens and food banks as well as missions to places like Rwanda, Athiests cannot point to one single thing they have ever done for community and mankind, not one. There is the real problem........selfishness, that is the only product an atheist offers society, and I give them credit, their offering has been spreading like wild fire all over the place.

 

 

The negatives some claim about religion are things like the crusades but digging deep we see only about 100k to 200k people died from the crusades but Pol Pot caused the death of almost 2 million people by himself, all under the name of pushing the atheist agenda.

 

 

No, religion is not the cause of major problems in the world, an atheist with an army is the most harmful element this world has ever seen.

 

That's true.