Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#435452 - 10/18/10 06:59 PM Chlorinating the gene pool
MoongleMoose Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 11/09/09
Posts: 76
Loc: South O' Sydney


Quote:
A drug addict has become the first man in Britain to take part in a controversial project which saw him get cash to be sterilised.

The 38-year-old, who wishes to be known to only as John, was given £200 in exchange for a vasectomy.

John - who has been addicted to opiates for 15 years and has been involved with drugs since he was 11 or 12 - said the cash incentive spurred him into going ahead with the procedure.

The addict, who is featured in BBC London's Inside Out programme on Monday night, said: "It was kind of what spurred me into doing it in a way. It was something that I'd been thinking about for a long time and something that I'd already made my mind up that I wanted to do. Just hadn't got round to it."

John, who admitted he had stolen things in the past and dabbled in dealing drugs, said that he was going to spend the money on overdue rent and shopping.

The controversial American charity - Project Prevention - was set up by Barbara Harris, from North Carolina, who adopted four children born of a crack addict mother. She watched the children struggle with the addiction passed on to them by their mother.

"I got very angry about the damage that these drugs do to these children," she said on the program. "It was unbelievable. Isaiah could not sleep, he couldn't eat, his eyes were big, noise bothered him, light bothered him. It broke my heart. I was angry at the mum, And then my anger turned a little bit to where why did we allow her to do that?"

The charity, which has already paid more than 3,500 American men and women addicted to drugs or alcohol not to have children, is offering the service to addicts in the UK and has set up a helpline for those interested. The project also pays addicts to get long-term birth control including intrauterine contraceptive devices or a contraceptive implant.

When John called the helpline he had 30 days to think about his decision. He underwent the procedure on the NHS in mid-September.

He added: "It came as a bit of a shock to me knowing I was the first in Britain. I would have thought people would be snapping up the offer as soon as it came apparent as it was there. I won't be able to support a kid. I can just about manage to support myself. Just about got it together to do that."



SOURCE


What a wonderfull idea, Darwin's theory of natural selection through intelligent design! (intelligence being the human race of course)
More power to them in my opinion.

Top
#435453 - 10/18/10 07:17 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
Brilliant! I don't think we could implement that kind of program here in the States--the conservatives would cry about money being given to leeches, and the liberals would cry about human rights and human dignity.
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#435456 - 10/18/10 07:37 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: TrojZyr]
Machismo Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 02/05/10
Posts: 1132
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: TrojZyr
Brilliant! I don't think we could implement that kind of program here in the States--


They're based in the USA. Here's their web site: Project Prevention

Great idea, in my opinion.
_________________________


Top
#435457 - 10/18/10 07:39 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: TrojZyr]
SomethingLikEvil Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 08/25/08
Posts: 579
Quote:
The charity, which has already paid more than 3,500 American men and women addicted to drugs or alcohol not to have children, is offering the service to addicts in the UK and has set up a helpline for those interested. The project also pays addicts to get long-term birth control including intrauterine contraceptive devices or a contraceptive implant.


I would assume that the above quote would mean that, indeed, the program is active in the States.

Now, if only they could implement the same thing from idiotic and careless people, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
_________________________
Resigned -- again.

Top
#435465 - 10/18/10 09:31 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
anna Offline


Registered: 09/27/10
Posts: 219
Loc: Poland
Charity? This must be a joke.

I have nothing against encouraging people to use contraceptive pills, especially when they cannot afford to look after their children. Planning a family does not harm anybody and is a sign of responsibility. Better to use the pills than abort a child or, much worse, throw it away into the street sick and neglected.

But calling sterilization charity is just going too far. This is the kind of charity that the Nazis practiced.

Drug addicts can be cured, of course, if they want to. My relative was a drug addict, now she works and is a caring mother to her children. That was the man, who helped her

Official promotional website of the Republic of Poland


Natural selection can be praised by some but charity is something completely different. It is about helping weak people not weeding them out.


Edited by anna (10/18/10 09:40 PM)
Edit Reason: problems with links
_________________________
Just gonna stand there and watch me burn. Well that's alright because I like the way it hurts.

Top
#435469 - 10/18/10 10:45 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Phineas Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 8265
I suggest you obtain a fuller understanding of this organization before arriving at conclusions.

http://www.projectprevention.org/

http://www.projectprevention.org/united-kingdom/


Our Mission

Project Prevention offers cash incentives to women and men addicted to drugs and/or alcohol to use long term or permanent birth control. Project Prevention is a National, 501 (C) 3 organization using your donations to stop a problem before it happens. We have paid addicts in 50 States and the District of Columbia.

Our mission is to continue to reach out to addicts offering referrals to drug treatment for those interested and to get them on birth control until they can care for the children they conceive. We are lowering the number of children added to foster care, preventing the addicts from the guilt and pain they feel each time they give birth only to have their child taken away, and preventing suffering of innocent children because even those fortunate enough to be born with no medical or emotional problems after placed in foster care face often a lifetime of longing to feel loved and wanted.



Study the above links carefully, and you will see they are indeed, by definition and practice, a charity.

This is the kind of charity that the Nazis practiced.

No, it isn't. With the Nazis, it was compulsory, with severe penalties attached for refusal to comply. The other is entirely voluntary.
_________________________
"Consensus is the absence of leadership." Margaret Thatcher

"I'm fascinated with how primitive the human mind still is. It can be misdirected so easily." John Gaughan


"Success is uncommon. Therefore, not to be enjoyed by the common man." Cal Stoll

Top
#435475 - 10/19/10 02:47 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Midnight Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 11/27/09
Posts: 111
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Originally Posted By: anna
Planning a family does not harm anybody and is a sign of responsibility.

"Hey let's have a kid"
"Fuck yeah, think of all the money we can get from the government on welfare"

Where's the sign of responsibility in that?

It doesn't sound like anyone is being forced to take up this type of contraception so where is the problem? Besides drug addicts there is a heck of a lot of people in this world having children for the wrong reasons, in the wrong situations or because they just don't care.

Why should a child have to suffer from that if they don't have to?

Originally Posted By: anna
It is about helping weak people not weeding them out.

If a person is weak by their own choice why should we HAVE to help them? If you WANT to help then that is fine but there is nothing HAVE to about it!

The more you help the 'weak' the weaker they seem to get! When unfortunate events happen to people, charity can be a huge help, but when the unfortunate event is self induced then why should they receive help. mad

If everyone took responsibility for themselves then we wouldn't have to spend so much money on charity!!!!!!!

Think of what that money could be spent on...

Hail Satan!
Midnight.
_________________________
A man who dares to waste one hour of time has not discovered the value of life. - Charles Darwin

Top
#435489 - 10/19/10 06:38 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Colonel Kurtz Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 12/09/07
Posts: 192
[quote=anna]

Drug addicts can be cured, of course, if they want to.

[quote]

Now they can be spayed and neutered. If they want to.

Top
#435508 - 10/19/10 02:19 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Phineas]
anna Offline


Registered: 09/27/10
Posts: 219
Loc: Poland
Thank you, Magister, for posting links. That these people should be under temporary birth control is quite reasonable, but sterilising them, even if they agree, is ,at least in my opinion, barbaric. It is for these people a life sentence. If they happen to overcome their addiction they can regret their decision.

It is voluntary, but are drug addicts able to make lifelong decisions? They are sick people and should be given some treatment, therapy, instead of just ostracising them.

Drug problem is too complex, birth control will not solve it.
_________________________
Just gonna stand there and watch me burn. Well that's alright because I like the way it hurts.

Top
#435510 - 10/19/10 02:44 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Zaftig Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 09/23/06
Posts: 3406
Originally Posted By: anna
It is voluntary, but are drug addicts able to make lifelong decisions?


Such as the decision to have children? They certainly decide to do that, and the children suffer.

Originally Posted By: anna

Drug problem is too complex, birth control will not solve it.

It is not a solution to drug addiction. It is a solution to the unwanted children of drug addicts.

Top
#435513 - 10/19/10 03:14 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
inky Offline


Registered: 03/18/09
Posts: 103
Loc: USA
Originally Posted By: anna
This is the kind of charity that the Nazis practiced.


Last I checked the Nazi party wasn't a charitable organization. They based they're actions on Eugenics. A practice which was, oddly enough, developed in the United States (specifically an asylum in New Jersey.)

Also, no one is forcing sterilization on any one. This is simply an option offered to people suffering from addiciton who do not, and probably should not, want to bring children into this world. This is, in my opinion, a great example of responsibility being taken.

Addicition can't be cured, but it can be treated and eventually managed. Having had a parent who struggled with drug and alcohol addiction, I can say with all certainty that nothing ever cures it.

I know what the arguement your formulating will be. "Well what if one of your parents did this and you were never born. How would you feel about that?" Truth is I have no feelings about it because frankly it didn't happen that way. Even then, it's difficult to be angry about potentially not existing when in fact I do, and trust me, the world is a much brighter place with me in it. devilchili

Top
#435514 - 10/19/10 03:17 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Skjalandir Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Posts: 92
Loc: England
The only treatment drug addicts should get is a long train ride with a shower at the end.

Fuck drug addicts. Sterilization is nothing. Death to the lot of them.

There is the 'solution'.


Edited by Skjalandir (10/19/10 03:19 PM)
Edit Reason: I made a viscera sandwhich. Two calm sentances which what I really mean in the middle.
_________________________
Einstein can't be classed as witless
He claimed atoms were the littlest
When you did a bit of splittingen-ness
Frighten everybody shitless
- Ian Dury

Top
#435516 - 10/19/10 03:25 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Skjalandir]
Original Sly Offline


Registered: 09/10/09
Posts: 205
Loc: New Zealand
I agree. Drug addicts are just disgusting, filthy, weak individuals who deserve no pity.

I have a cousin who used to be a filthy little criminal who would huff insect spray, physically fight with his girlfriend, smoke a lot of marijuana, and would get so off his face he'd smash the windows in his house and urinate in the corner.

Then, one day while opening the back of a truck incorrectly to unload some desks, 400kgs of said desks fell on him, breaking his neck and leaving him paralysed.

If you think a drug addict can't get his fix just because he can't move his hands, think again. The latest drama is that he is now addicted to what we here in New Zealand call "P" or pure methamphetamine.

Disgusting. And yet, starting next year, a 21 year old tetraplegic drug addict who can't take care of a dog is going to be marrying his girlfriend and starting IVF to conceive. Worst mistake ever.

I say congratulations to that organization for finally offering a solution to a massive problem. Hell, I'd say they should simply offer cash for sterilization to lower socio-economic scum who spend their days unemployed, drinking, and causing trouble.


Edited by Original Sly (10/19/10 03:26 PM)
_________________________
"It stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting sacrificial offerings" - Ellsworth Toohey, Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead p.637

Top
#435517 - 10/19/10 03:27 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Roho_the_Rooster Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/10/05
Posts: 6999
Loc: Pre-Apocalypolis
judging from the admittedly brief glimpse I gave the replies, this seems to be another one of those things any animal lover would do for their pets, but would deny humans. Put Fluffy to sleep because all she has left is suffering, but don't offer the same compassion to grandpa. Spay and neuter your pets, but leave human reproduction to dumb luck and chance.

I would have to interview everyone who has had kids to back this up, but I bet a dollar to donut that many people did not plan to get pregnant. How much less do you think a drug addict wants to have kids? This program is doing them a favor.
_________________________
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces

http://theepicureandilettante.blogspot.com/

"Life is the only race you lose by reaching the end." - M.M.

Top
#435518 - 10/19/10 03:31 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
John Prophet Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 04/06/09
Posts: 993
Loc: My suburban lair
There are a lot of things in this world that are significantly worse than being voluntarily sterilized in exchange for cash; and it's entirely possible that the children of drug addicts would be forced to endure many of them. That’s what this is about.

Any reasonable person understands that this is not a perfect world and that things often come down to a choice between one “barbaric” solution over another, even more unappealing one.
_________________________


Top
#435521 - 10/19/10 03:44 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Happy Birthday Jessyka Offline


Registered: 10/02/10
Posts: 8
Loc: Tennessee
I'm tired of people going on about how sick addicts are and how we have to protect them. They don't want help and they don't need our protection. Most of them know the risks of trying drugs, do it anyway and are too weak to deal with the consequences. Keep innocent children out of this equation.

If they get sober and want a child, wonderful. They should have thought about that before they traded that chance for $200 and an 8ball. Adoption is still an option.

I willingly went to rehab after my foray into the world of addiction after finding myself beaten up and bloody in a K-Mart parking lot.

If you can't read signs that clear, you probably shouldn't be having children in the first place.

My dad tried to convince me that alcoholism is a disease. I told him to tell that to a cancer patient and see if he knocks your lights out with the last of his strength.

Top
#435523 - 10/19/10 04:20 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Original Sly]
anna Offline


Registered: 09/27/10
Posts: 219
Loc: Poland
Quote:
Drug addicts are just disgusting, filthy, weak individuals who deserve no pity...I'd say they should simply offer cash for sterilization to lower socio-economic scum who spend their days unemployed, drinking, and causing trouble.


Who is scum and who isn't is a matter of personal opinion and depends on who is in a position of power to pass that judgement. Now the scum are weak and poor people and I wonder who will be the next to deserve that title.

I try not to judge who is worthy and who is unworthy of my pity. And I try not to despise people who are down there at the bottom of the society, because fortune is very changeable and unpredictable. Now the others fall and suffer, next time it could be me.

And it wouldn't be nice to be called scum then. Would it?
_________________________
Just gonna stand there and watch me burn. Well that's alright because I like the way it hurts.

Top
#435524 - 10/19/10 04:29 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Colonel Kurtz Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 12/09/07
Posts: 192
Originally Posted By: anna
I try not to judge who is worthy and who is unworthy of my pity.


Give it a whirl sometime! You may like it.

Top
#435525 - 10/19/10 04:40 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Skjalandir Offline


Registered: 12/07/09
Posts: 92
Loc: England
Fuck that. Just to pull back a bit of pretty internet screen we all carry just for a minute and get real down and dirty; having been homeless and been a worthless member of society, the highlight was spending the night on the 'capital of heroin addiction' in England, a particular street in Derby, with a guy who's skull was showing through various skin diseases contracted through HIV, a 'change in fortune' has fuck all to do with drug addiction, and 'down on my luck' is a different type of scum to some asshole with no character that turns to drugs. Not once did I turn to drugs, and I say anyone that does should be hung publicly. Having rimjobbed the asshole of 'western poverty', there are far more important things I had to think about that getting high. I have even more disgust for someone who has had something and lost it through addiction.

Being despised at the bottom fueled me to pull myself up, and if the abuse causes the weak to cave in hopefully it'll lead to suicide and make it easier for any other Satanists that stumble into the financial kill zone.
_________________________
Einstein can't be classed as witless
He claimed atoms were the littlest
When you did a bit of splittingen-ness
Frighten everybody shitless
- Ian Dury

Top
#435528 - 10/19/10 04:49 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Zaftig Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 09/23/06
Posts: 3406
Anna, Satanism does exactly what you deride: pass judgements. That is precisely what we advocate. Whether your judgement or mine coincide or mine and another Satanist's coincide is almost irrelevant. The judgement is a freedom we happily exercise.

In this case, I openly, and without guilt, judge addicts who irresponsibly have children to be negligible people, and as such, I have no issue that they volunteer for sterilization. It is probably the most responsible thing that they will ever do.

And if you think that you do not judge who is and isn't worthy of your pity you are living with blinders on. Have you not decided that addicts are worthy of your pity? That is a judgement. It's just one we don't agree on, but it is a value attributed to an arbitrary situation nonetheless.

Top
#435533 - 10/19/10 04:58 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Bill_M Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 07/28/01
Posts: 11552
Loc: New England, USA
Originally Posted By: anna
Who is scum and who isn't is a matter of personal opinion

While the line between "scum" and "not scum" isn't set in stone and there's a lot of room for personal opinion, it's ridiculous to think there aren't any objective standards. If say we're comparing an illiterate serving time on death row for triple homicide, with somebody like Thomas Edison, there's clearly a difference.

Quote:
and depends on who is in a position of power to pass that judgement [sic]

I am indeed in a position to pass judgment on another human being, even if I can't enforce anything. Why wouldn't I be? It's MY life that I'm living, and anybody who think I can't examine other people and make decisions and conclusions based off those observations, is delusional.

Quote:
Now the others fall and suffer, next time it could be me.

And it wouldn't be nice to be called scum then. Would it?

What does the remote possibility of you being in their position have to do with anything? If I found myself in such a situation, then I'd do what I could to pull myself out. That's what makes me different from the scum.
_________________________
Reverend Bill M.

http://www.devilsmischief.com: Carnal Comedy Clips, Netherworld Novelty Numbers,
New hour every week. Download the mp3 now!

http://www.aplaceformystuff.org: Tales of Combat Clutter and other Adventures

(Wenn du Google's Übersetzer verwendest, um diese Worte zu lesen, dann bist du ein Arschloch.)

Top
#435538 - 10/19/10 05:41 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Hagen von Tronje Offline

CoS Priest

Registered: 06/28/01
Posts: 10122
Who is scum and who isn't is a matter of personal opinion and depends on who is in a position of power to pass that judgement.

So? Who is and is not fit to be your spouse is also a matter of personal opinion, but it's one we're all free to make. Satanism acknowledges that men are free to make judgement upon one another. This "only god can judge me" shit is ridiculous; besides the lack of such god, it implies a psychological desire for immunity from one's actions. Sorry, world doesn't work that way. Everyone judges everyone else, that is the way of the world.

Also, power is no small part of what Satanic philosophy is predicated upon. Yes, you will be judged differently based upon which social circle is doing the judging and what becomes of you based on that judgement is a result of who has the power to enforce their judgement. Again, so what? That's life in the real world.

Now the scum are weak and poor people and I wonder who will be the next to deserve that title.

The weak, the poor, the stupid, the pathetic, the helpless, the whiny, the useless, the gullible...the list goes on. Why wonder when you can merely ask?

Satanism is not a white light religion. We do not endorse propping up the worthless in the manner that Christianity does. That does not mean we won't help those we care about, but we also acknowledge that we do it for selfish reasons (as in, they mean something to us personally). Our generosity to friends and family can be considerable, but our charity to the wretched is nonexistent.

I try not to despise people who are down there at the bottom of the society, because fortune is very changeable and unpredictable. Now the others fall and suffer, next time it could be me.

"But for the grace of god, there goes I." What a self degrading platitude that one is! Don't want to end up drunk in a gutter like the hobos? Then don't be a worthless, no working, good for nothing drunk! To imply that folks who do their part and are responsible are just a dice throw away from being among the useless is insulting. Certainly good fortune is nice to have, but to rely on it for a decent life is akin to relying on the lottery for your retirement - in other words, it's really fucking stupid.

I'm aware that you are not a Satanist, but you did come here saying you wanted to see what we're about. So why the surprise? Did you really think we were all singing kumbayah around a campfire or something?
_________________________
"The devil I'll bring you," answered Hagen. "I have enough to carry with my shield and breastplate; my helm is bright, the sword is in my hand, therefore I bring you naught."

Top
#435539 - 10/19/10 05:51 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Adveser Offline


Registered: 06/27/04
Posts: 429
Loc: California
I personally think offering people desperate for money anything to put over a social agenda is a bit fucked. I don't care what it is or my personal opinion of the "offending behaviour."

People can choose to do whatever they want with their lives. Just because someone doesn't live up to the standards I set for myself does not mean I have the right to control them. Apparently this organization thinks Big Brother knows best.

Eugenics and manipulating people are things I don't think should mix. They are practically buying and paying for a big score for someone so their agenda that anyone that uses drugs deserves sterilization can be fulfilled.

I liked the intelligent design analogy, but these people don't strike me as intelligent nor capable of designing the next evolution whatsoever.

Seems like everyone is in favor of this as long as it meets their moral sensibilities. (i;m gonna use the slippery slope argument, despite its fallacy because it is true in this case) What if next month another organization decided gay people, handicapped people, people that steal, crossdressers, whatever were a burden to children that don't exist and offered them something they knew they would rather have NOW instead of a decision they likely haven't even considered, to determine their future.

Top
#435540 - 10/19/10 05:54 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Adveser]
Hagen von Tronje Offline

CoS Priest

Registered: 06/28/01
Posts: 10122
So you're saying that offering people desperate for money a chance at money to voluntarily not do something that damages not only their own life but the life of a child is fucked? And you equate this kind of voluntary offer to "Big Brother?"

No, clearly you don't fit in here too well, and you also apparently never read 1984.

But to fill in the blank in your mind, I (personally) would support compulsory sterilization of drug addicts. Fuck 'em.
_________________________
"The devil I'll bring you," answered Hagen. "I have enough to carry with my shield and breastplate; my helm is bright, the sword is in my hand, therefore I bring you naught."

Top
#435541 - 10/19/10 06:15 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Adveser Offline


Registered: 06/27/04
Posts: 429
Loc: California
Respectfully, that assumes every person who does drugs will continue to do so forever and it also assumes any drug use will affect children that have not been born yet, either directly or through genetics. Some people will always be destitute, moreso from their psychological profile than their behaviour and will numb their horrible existence with anything they can find. Other people can choose to stop boozing or whatever their affliction is or decide to do or not to do something.

Let's do an honest comparison here. Alcohol afflicts FAR more people than elicit drugs do. Who makes the decision that one drinks too much? Every textbook definition of alcoholism that I have run into (hearsay) pegs damn near everyone that drinks as such. Considering how many Satanists drink and do it proudly (me too!) to no one elses' peril and with virtually no concern to their health because of the non-excessive nature of it, I wonder how many people think they deserve sterilization as well. The smart money says this kind of organization believes someone enjoying a 6 pack over a long afternoon will eventually be chugging fifths of vodka when they get out of bed. That is just the nature of anti-alcohol advocates. They truly believe any drinking is alcoholism at its core. The entire spectrum of people that are productive, creative and responsible occasionally using drugs is avoided entirely as if it is a fairly tale. Everyone knows the drug issue is a legal one with Satanism, so if people have a beef with lawbreakers, that's another issue.

On the other side of the argument, I wonder if they have a medical license this org has to dispense medical advice with.

Top
#435543 - 10/19/10 06:16 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Adveser]
John Prophet Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 04/06/09
Posts: 993
Loc: My suburban lair
Originally Posted By: Adveser
What if next month another organization decided gay people, handicapped people, people that steal, crossdressers, whatever were a burden to children that don't exist and offered them something they knew they would rather have NOW instead of a decision they likely haven't even considered, to determine their future.

Two words: Personal Responsibility

If you think that something like that is a bad idea in the long run and you fall for it anyway, you can’t blame “Big Brother” for your crappy decision-making. If people weren’t such irresponsible idiots, then we wouldn't need things like this in the first place.

Also did you just throw “people that steal” in there? That kind of behavior is even more unacceptable and yes it should be controlled, discouraged and punished.


Edited by John Prophet (10/19/10 06:17 PM)
_________________________


Top
#435544 - 10/19/10 06:21 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: John Prophet]
Adveser Offline


Registered: 06/27/04
Posts: 429
Loc: California
I understand clearly that people are responsible for their own actions.

You know, on second thought, I'm starting to see a paradox in this. That is, a responsible chemical abuser probably wouldn't take 200 bucks for their sterilization.

That said, yeah, I'm gonna have to change my mind. If someone needs the money that bad to get high...

Still a lot of holes in their program. I wonder how many people are going down there to get the 200 dollar power bill paid off because they really need the money. And no, being poor is not an excuse to sterilize anyone.

Top
#435545 - 10/19/10 06:23 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Adveser]
Riddles Offline


Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 82
Loc: Maryland
Originally Posted By: Adveser

People can choose to do whatever they want with their lives. Just because someone doesn't live up to the standards I set for myself does not mean I have the right to control them. Apparently this organization thinks Big Brother knows best.


Might is right. And what exactly is a "right"? A right is something you take or is given to you and you have the power to keep. If this seems to be paradoxical to the libertarian philosophies of the majority of the members of this board, I would suggest that the paradox is an illusion. Take some time to try and sort it out. Without a map, you will learn a lot.
_________________________
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
--Mark Twain

"Egoism is the very essence of a noble soul."
--Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
#435557 - 10/19/10 07:40 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Adveser]
Bill_M Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 07/28/01
Posts: 11552
Loc: New England, USA
Originally Posted By: Adveser
Respectfully, that assumes every person who does drugs will continue to do so forever and it also assumes any drug use will affect children that have not been born yet,

I don't really see how you derived that from Reverend von Tronje's post. You can carry out a sentence on a criminal regardless of whether or not he or she will commit the same crime again.
_________________________
Reverend Bill M.

http://www.devilsmischief.com: Carnal Comedy Clips, Netherworld Novelty Numbers,
New hour every week. Download the mp3 now!

http://www.aplaceformystuff.org: Tales of Combat Clutter and other Adventures

(Wenn du Google's Übersetzer verwendest, um diese Worte zu lesen, dann bist du ein Arschloch.)

Top
#435560 - 10/19/10 07:55 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: anna]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214
Originally Posted By: anna
Thank you, Magister, for posting links. That these people should be under temporary birth control is quite reasonable, but sterilising them, even if they agree, is ,at least in my opinion, barbaric. It is for these people a life sentence. If they happen to overcome their addiction they can regret their decision.

It is voluntary, but are drug addicts able to make lifelong decisions? They are sick people and should be given some treatment, therapy, instead of just ostracising them.

Drug problem is too complex, birth control will not solve it.


Doctor Jack Kevorkian or his methods would be a great alternative. devilchili
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#435577 - 10/19/10 10:00 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Adveser]
Hagen von Tronje Offline

CoS Priest

Registered: 06/28/01
Posts: 10122
This is possibly one of the more ignorant things I've read here in a while.

that assumes every person who does drugs will continue to do so forever

No, it doesn't. It assumes that punishment of drug users should be draconian. Do you believe we should go easy on murderers and rapists because we can't assume they will do so forever? Incidentally, in my mind I'm being rather lenient on drug users, since I advocate death for more serious offenses (including drug dealing).

it also assumes any drug use will affect children that have not been born yet, either directly or through genetics

You have got to be shitting me. Are you seriously going to waste even one breath arguing that drug users are fit to be parents? Or that using drugs while pregnant isn't among the most irresponsible things imaginable?

Some people will always be destitute, moreso from their psychological profile than their behaviour

What kind of bullshit is this? Now their psychology is separate from their behavior and is separate from their personal responsibility? Need I remind you of the Satanic golden rule: "Responsibility to the responsible?"

Further, the reasons why someone is worthless is irrelevant. If someone is born with some defect that predisposes them to violence, for example, that's no excuse for not dealing with them as a violent individual.

Other people can choose to stop boozing or whatever their affliction is or decide to do or not to do something.

Everyone has a choice. Also, often as not their pathetic sob story for why they waste their life is a weak one in light of the people who have endured very real hardship and didn't turn to drugs.

As for alcohol, you're conveniently ignoring a few things. For one, Satanism utterly condemns alcoholism in exactly the same terms as we condemn drug use. We also condemn wanton drunkeness and irresponsibility arising from excessive drinking. For another, unlike illegal drugs, alcohol can be consumed without becoming intoxicated. Find one guy who smokes dope or shoots up without any intent whatsoever of getting high - indeed, that defies the very point of drugs.

You're also attempting to use the temperance movement as some kind of reference point, which is a bit extreme. Ranks right up there with Reefer Madness for irrationality (as hardline as I am, even I recognize that that kind of propaganda is ridiculous). Which mainstream medical reference defines alcoholism so broadly that a casual drinker qualifies as an alcoholic?

Then of course there is the simple fact that alcohol is legal and other drugs are not. Breaking the law, even if you think it's a stupid law, is fucking retarded. In case you haven't noticed, prisons are full of druggies who apparently lacked the critical thinking skills to see that their habit has one unavoidable conclusion. Doesn't sound very smart to me.
_________________________
"The devil I'll bring you," answered Hagen. "I have enough to carry with my shield and breastplate; my helm is bright, the sword is in my hand, therefore I bring you naught."

Top
#435583 - 10/20/10 12:17 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Machismo]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12990
Loc: The Solid State
Originally Posted By: Machismo
Originally Posted By: TrojZyr
Brilliant! I don't think we could implement that kind of program here in the States--


They're based in the USA. Here's their web site: Project Prevention

Great idea, in my opinion.


Aha, I saw the 200 pounds and assumed that project had to be out of the U.K. Danke!

Originally Posted By: Anna
But calling sterilization charity is just going too far. This is the kind of charity that the Nazis practiced.


The Nazis never gave people the option of choosing whether or not they were going to be sterilized, though.

Not to mention, Hitler was also a vegetarian, an artist, and an avid Disneyphile--doesn't mean art, vegetarianism, and animation all have ties to Nazism, or that people who dabble in them are Nazis.

Quote:
Drug addicts can be cured, of course, if they want to.


Emphasis on "if they want to." Some people don't want to--hell, even some people who SAY they want to, don't REALLY want to.

Then, it depends on what you mean by "cure."

Quote:
It is for these people a life sentence. If they happen to overcome their addiction they can regret their decision.


True. But, you could say the same for if they got high and got knocked up, or got drunk, had a one night stand, and contracted HIV. Life's full of interesting choices with interesting consequences.

I figure, someone who'd permanently trade their ability to have children for a few bucks (and who wasn't already considering sterilization as an option) is either a) desperate for cash---which of course begs the question, why? or b) extremely impulsive and short-sighted. Do we want people who fail the marshmallow test to be making and taking care of babies? Survey says no.

(This excludes those who would seek sterilization for its own sake, and who would consider the money a nice bonus--in which case, you can assume that people who don't want, don't like, or don't feel equipped to deal with children are opting out of the breeding race, which also presumably constitutes a "win-win-win" situation for all involved.)

Quote:

Drug problem is too complex, birth control will not solve it.


Solve it? No. Ensure that fewer children have to be born with birth defects, brain damage, and health problems resulting from prenatal expose to drugs, or have to grow up in an environment of abuse or neglect? Absolutely, and that's what really counts.

Originally Posted By: Zaftig
And if you think that you do not judge who is and isn't worthy of your pity you are living with blinders on. Have you not decided that addicts are worthy of your pity? That is a judgement. It's just one we don't agree on, but it is a value attributed to an arbitrary situation nonetheless.


Excellent observation.

Well, and my thought is, there are already many hard-working, well-intentioned people in this world who are suffering and struggling through no fault of their own, and who would (and often do) make the most of any little gift or reprieve that might come their way. I would sooner help or applaud any of those people, than I would someone who's gotten themselves into a pickle and really doesn't care.
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#435591 - 10/20/10 01:16 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Riddles]
Phineas Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 8265
If this seems to be paradoxical to the libertarian philosophies of the majority of the members of this board

How, exactly, did you arrive at the conclusion that the majority of the members of this board espouse libertarian philosophies?
_________________________
"Consensus is the absence of leadership." Margaret Thatcher

"I'm fascinated with how primitive the human mind still is. It can be misdirected so easily." John Gaughan


"Success is uncommon. Therefore, not to be enjoyed by the common man." Cal Stoll

Top
#435606 - 10/20/10 03:57 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
XUL Offline


Registered: 12/12/09
Posts: 238
Loc: Oslo, Norway
Originally Posted By: Maikeru

Darwin's theory of natural selection through intelligent design!


It's an interesting concept - but it doesn't go nearly as far as I would like it to do. I myself have advocated for many years that there ought to be a governmental program for voluntary sterilization; with prizes that were considerable, say for instance (the equivalent to) 10,000 dollars if you're male and 50,000 if you're female. I am quite convinced that this would weed out a considerable lot of "undesireables" from the gene pool within two generations. Not only drug addicts but also all (or most) other feebles who are borne to become losers in the game of life. I think this is a quite compassionate thing to offer, insofar that such a sum of money (with some counselling) would allow them to make certain investments in capital goods that they would otherwise stand no realistic chance of acquiring (property, etc.). Should they later come to their senses, so to speak, there's always the possibility of adopting a child.

On a side note, I am going to agree with whomever it was who said that "addiction" is not a cureable disease. It may be managed (with some training) but it remains a mental deficiency which will find a way of manifesting itself in any number of ways, not least religion. Drugs (in combination with "street life") is the perhaps most nefarious way of manifest addiction; not the only possible symptom. Alcoholism has been mentioned. We can also mention compulsive gambling, psychic vampirism, and other such types of behaviour that are designed to fill a sort of "emotional black hole" that some people carry with them.

As for Satanists, we do of course understand that indulgence and compulsion are two vastly different things. Anything which causes you to lose your grip and not be able to manage your own life is "evil" in this context. Some may argue that you may be hit by misfortune and this is true. For instance, you may lose one or more loved ones in some horrible accident and because of this have your "mojo" severely fucked up -- causing you to behave in self destructive ways for a while -- but what separates the wheat from the chaff in this issue is that the strong will eventually pick themselves up and get on with it.

Life is, after all, quite cruel and unsentimental like that. It will never be anything but what you yourself make out of it, for better or worse.
_________________________
The Maxistic Paradigm

Top
#435612 - 10/20/10 04:52 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Phineas]
Riddles Offline


Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 82
Loc: Maryland
Originally Posted By: Phineas
If this seems to be paradoxical to the libertarian philosophies of the majority of the members of this board

How, exactly, did you arrive at the conclusion that the majority of the members of this board espouse libertarian philosophies?


I suppose it was a bit presumptuous, but there does seem to be a big emphasis on individualism among Satanists, although individual liberty is certainly another matter. I guess much of it just what I read into it, and maybe I unfairly extrapolated. Also, I have come across this kind of quote at times which gave me this impression.

"Most of us are fairly libertarian people."
--High Priest Peter H. Gilmore

Also, although I don't believe you made this mistake, I want to make it clear to all that I was using "libertarian" with a little "l", not a capital "L".

With all due respect,
Riddles
_________________________
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
--Mark Twain

"Egoism is the very essence of a noble soul."
--Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
#435619 - 10/20/10 05:54 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
John Prophet Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 04/06/09
Posts: 993
Loc: My suburban lair
Something else that I don’t think has been addressed here yet, is that there are many people who not only choose to have these types of surgeries, but have, and will, actually pay to have them done (after a brief search, I’m getting numbers somewhere in the neighborhood of $500 to $1,000 for a male and up to five times as expensive for the equivalent female operation).

It’s important to remember that sterilization is not, by any means, considered a universally negative thing and there are plenty of completely responsible people who choose this for very practical and selfish reasons.

If you look at it this way, it doesn’t necessarily seem like such a bad deal to get paid for doing it. You could argue that these drug addicts are being handed money for agreeing to undergo something that more responsible citizens would have to pay for the privilege of doing (either directly or indirectly; through their insurance).

It’s really not a bad deal at all, if you think about it. If anything, it’s too accommodating.

Some people don’t see the idea of never having to worry about having kids as some horrible life sentence that they’re condemned to, but as a privileged option that medical science has given us.


Edited by John Prophet (10/20/10 08:01 AM)
_________________________


Top
#435629 - 10/20/10 07:37 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Riddles]
Machismo Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 02/05/10
Posts: 1132
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: Riddles
Might is right.


I've never interpreted that statement as meaning, might conveys rights, but rather, might conveys moral authority. The first interpretation would be an accurate description of reality, of course, since rights can only be granted and defended by force. The second interpretation, which is the one I always applied to Redbeard's use of the phrase, seems to me misleading, because it merges in our imaginations two domains, force and information, which in reality are separate, intrinsically and fundamentally distinct. Better to say, might trumps right, which would mean, might renders moral authority moot, an accurate description of reality, since might trumps everything, and renders moot all that opposes it.

As for the question of moral authority, I've wrestled with that on various threads, many of them on forums you don't currently have access to. None of my thought experiments satisfied me for long. Redbeard, of course, would say that moral authority is a chimera, that amorality is the only non-delusional perspective for man. I had sympathy for that position and espoused it for a while, but finally couldn't maintain it, as there is something in me that wants to be moral. So then I tried to categorize morality as a kind of indulgence, for example as principled malice, or alternatively as principled pride, but in the end this didn't work for me, because morality as it functions in my head is usually a No rather than a Yes, a denial, thus an abstinence. Equating abstinence with indulgence would be oxymoronic.

Lately I'm falling back on my formulation, Satan represents the Satanist, and thus am concluding, not only morally but also politically, that whatever serves the Satanist is right, whatever sabotages the Satanist is wrong, and whatever has no impact on the Satanist is moot. Thus moral and political authority derive from Satanic nature. This begs the question of what Satanic nature is, which can be answered by saying that Satanic nature in man is whatever understands, agrees with, and sees itself mirrored in The Satanic Bible - a good answer, and useful in many contexts, but I want something more specific for my purposes here delineated, so I say, for now, in this context, that Satanic nature is whatever in man rejects herd conformity, rejects faith, and rejects self-destructiveness subconscious or conscious, thus opening all doors and clearing all pathways for the forward march of personal sovereignty, scientific reasoning, and maximum well-being.
_________________________


Top
#435640 - 10/20/10 10:12 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Riddles]
Phineas Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 08/16/06
Posts: 8265
One thing to keep in mind, not everyone who posts in this section is a Satanist, even if they claim to be one. wink
_________________________
"Consensus is the absence of leadership." Margaret Thatcher

"I'm fascinated with how primitive the human mind still is. It can be misdirected so easily." John Gaughan


"Success is uncommon. Therefore, not to be enjoyed by the common man." Cal Stoll

Top
#435705 - 10/20/10 07:16 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Hagen von Tronje]
Adveser Offline


Registered: 06/27/04
Posts: 429
Loc: California
I'm not ignorant. I have different opinion.

You are simply putting me in a very difficult position because I would essentially have to admit that I've used every drug known to man to make my point, which is ban-able and somehow incompatible with Satanism despite never once doing anything without joyfully indulging in it or causing any harm to my body doing so.

Top
#435723 - 10/20/10 10:23 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Liberterius Offline


Registered: 01/06/10
Posts: 241
The program seems like an excellent idea in my opinion.

As I've said before, I do believe that people should have a right to use whatever drugs they want so far as they don't harm anyone else (drunk driving, fights, vandalism, lots of stupid shit people do when they're high) so I do disagree with many members of this board in that respect.

However, yeah I think it's safe to say most drug addicts (not people who just drink once in a while, especially socially but would be considered addicts by AA and other prohibitionists) are irresponsible assholes who don't deserve to have kids until they've had very very confirmed and successful treatment, and even then they shouldn't have kids for some time after they're sure (by doctor approval) of being as "cured" as possible.
Why anyone would marry these idiots is beyond me.

And all these people complaining about the sterilizations; they're not forced. "Big Brother" isn't rounding up people from the streets into unmarked vans and cutting their balls off. It's voluntary, you come to them, and they PAY you for it, so you can go buy more drugs and die in the gutter. Not that I care about that so long as a new child doesn't have to inevitably suffer for their bad choices.
It's not manipulation, there's no dishonesty here, if you don't wanna be a drug addict, don't start on stupid shit like that in first place, and if you wanna have kids and some sort of normal career GET HELP.

By the way I'd just like to take this opportunity to clear up some stuff about me...

I apologize for my bigoted and rude behavior regarding politics of drug legalization on this board. I had read High Priest Gilmore's "Church of Satan Policy on Politics Before," and read the rules about no politics on the upstairs boards, but I was just being an idiot. After lurking around on here a while longer, I realize now, political opinion of COS members really does span the political spectrum, and it was foolish (to say the least) of me to project MY personal views onto Satanism.

To make it clear, I myself am not a druggie; my only experience with marijuana was in a legal bar in Amsterdam (I didn't care for it...) and I'm not at all even a heavy drinker. I believe hard drug use to be stupid, even when and where it is legal, but I am not morally opposed to other using drugs as they see fit, so long as they bear the responsibility of any consequences themselves; I don't like the societal pity for druggies as if it isn't their fault.

I hope this has cleared things up as to where I stand, again I apologize to all clergy, moderators, and members in general that I have been rude to and no doubt highly annoyed with my political bigotry. We all have our opinions and can vote and think how/as much as we want; I feel like an idiot for not fully realizing that in the context of the COS earlier.

Top
#435740 - 10/21/10 04:15 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Liberterius]
John Prophet Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 04/06/09
Posts: 993
Loc: My suburban lair
Originally Posted By: Liberterius
I hope this has cleared things up as to where I stand, again I apologize to all clergy, moderators, and members in general that I have been rude to and no doubt highly annoyed with my political bigotry. We all have our opinions and can vote and think how/as much as we want; I feel like an idiot for not fully realizing that in the context of the COS earlier.

Actually, that does clear up a few things; thank you. Although I don’t believe that I’ve ever responded to you about that particular topic, I must admit that some of your posts about it did leave a little bit of a bad taste in my mouth and seemed to contradict some of your other, more intelligent sounding posts about other topics.

I applaud you for your thoughtfulness and willingness to engage in that type of self examination.
_________________________


Top
#435748 - 10/21/10 05:38 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: John Prophet]
Machismo Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 02/05/10
Posts: 1132
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: John Prophet
Some people don’t see the idea of never having to worry about having kids as some horrible life sentence that they’re condemned to, but as a privileged option that medical science has given us.


Took the words right out of my mouth. For a responsible person, having a kid means raising a kid, and raising a kid means Brobdingnagian* allocations of time, energy, and money over a span of more than two decades. It is a burden of Cyclopean* proportions. I paid money to make sure that my two daughters would be the last children I would ever have. Here we have an opportunity for people to get paid, instead of paying, for the privilege I had to pay for. What a great idea! Especially since the world already has more humans than it needs. I applaud this sensible and benevolent manifestation of antinatalism.

* Indulging my fondness for these words that Swift and Lovecraft made cool. cool
_________________________


Top
#435750 - 10/21/10 06:13 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Spelled Moon Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 12/25/08
Posts: 1691
Wonderful.

I see something very positive in this. This smells sweetly, because if it meets with very wide acceptance, by time, I can see how other human "problems" could be solved in similar way, peacefully and with acceptance again.

The investments would return in many ways.

If the medicine wasn't so evolved and functioning, like it is now, many weakest people would be soon dead and wouldn't reproduce, or the offspring wouldn't survive... As it works similarly with animals in nature. So certainly, those people who behave irresponsibly to their lives get something, what they wouldn't get in previous conditions - a medical care for their lives that they even don't value themselves.

If certain people's reasoning leads to a voluntary decision for adopting the weakness, like is a drug addiction, and such act is 'alright, allowed and their right' - lets allow them and offer them possibility for making decision to sell their prolificacy, too.

Oh my, I can see where the principle would be usable in my country. Some of you know who I mean. Showing them few Euros could be a key to everything -literally, seriously- and everyone 'would live happily ever after'.

Or something like that. smile wink

Top
#435757 - 10/21/10 07:43 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Liberterius]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214
Originally Posted By: Liberterius
To make it clear, I myself am not a druggie; my only experience with marijuana was in a legal bar in Amsterdam (I didn't care for it...) and I'm not at all even a heavy drinker. I believe hard drug use to be stupid, even when and where it is legal, but I am not morally opposed to other using drugs as they see fit, so long as they bear the responsibility of any consequences themselves; I don't like the societal pity for druggies as if it isn't their fault.


"Cannabis remains a controlled substance in the Netherlands and both possession and production for personal use are still misdemeanors, punishable by fine. Coffeeshops are also illegal according to the statutes.

However, a policy of non-enforcement has led to a situation where reliance upon non-enforcement has become common, and because of this the courts have ruled against the government when individual cases were prosecuted."

Source

I hear this all the time. "Pot is legal in Amsterdam" To my knowledge marijuana is illegal everywhere.
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#435759 - 10/21/10 08:03 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Lust]
Zsche Offline



Registered: 04/17/09
Posts: 158
Loc: Where the 5.56 casings fall...
Originally Posted By: Tier Instinct
I hear this all the time. "Pot is legal in Amsterdam" To my knowledge marijuana is illegal everywhere.


Apparently - not everywhere:

Source
_________________________
Originally Posted By: Phineas
My suggestion to you, besides obtaining a copy of The Satanic Bible and reading it, is to immerse yourself in the information contained at the Church of Satan website.

Originally Posted By: Hagen von Tronje
You can't guzzle whiskey and pinch pretty ladies' asses when you're dead.

Originally Posted By: Roho_the_Rooster
Love life. Live life. Don't fuck with people unnecessarily. Don"t let other people fuck with you. Simple guidelines that that will help you to make informed, intelligent and Satanic decisions.

Originally Posted By: Callier
Constructive criticism is one thing but people that just point blank tell others what they should be doing with their lives without any kind of permission can eat a bag of hairy balls.

Top
#435772 - 10/21/10 09:55 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Lust]
Adveser Offline


Registered: 06/27/04
Posts: 429
Loc: California
Yes, I think this is correct too. Regardless of how legal something might be on a local basis, the federal statutes still apply here in the USA.

Top
#435782 - 10/21/10 11:21 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Lust]
Roho_the_Rooster Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/10/05
Posts: 6999
Loc: Pre-Apocalypolis
Legal question aside, there also other good reasons not to waste your time...even if it were legal.
_________________________
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces

http://theepicureandilettante.blogspot.com/

"Life is the only race you lose by reaching the end." - M.M.

Top
#435785 - 10/21/10 12:31 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Roho_the_Rooster]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214
I agree. I do what is best for me. The laws of Satanism and observing the example set by, Doktor LaVey, is what is best for me, as an individual. I could care less what someone else does as I decide what is just.



Edited by Tier Instinct (10/21/10 01:28 PM)
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#435821 - 10/21/10 08:15 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Lust]
Liberterius Offline


Registered: 01/06/10
Posts: 241
Ok, well, you don't have to nitpick non-essential parts of my post.

I also said that I consider doing drugs stupid regardless of legality, I just believe that people should have the choice do in general, so long as they bear the consequences.

Other people have the right to want drugs to be illegal; we all have free political thought. My main point was that I'm apologizing for being obtuse about my personal political views on this board. I'm not begging for forgiveness, nor am I trying to inflate my self-importance by acting like I'm a HUGE topic of trouble.
I simply want to improve my reputation on here and apologize for having annoyed members of this board in the past.

I hope my message is understood.

Top
#435830 - 10/21/10 09:07 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Liberterius]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214
I wasn't aware that I was nitpicking. Some mistakes that people make are based on false information.

Some travel to Nevada just to indulge their sexual desires with a legal prostitute. Some go to Nevada based on this information and pick up an illegal prostitute but then end up with regrets. This is an example of stupidity being painful and can be avoided rather easily. Wouldn't you agree?

Your reasons for your actions are your own. I was content with leaving you with them and still am.

I am not familiar with your problems with others here but have had no major issues with you that comes to mind. I wish you well and compliment you for owning your mistakes.
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#435831 - 10/21/10 09:17 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Lust]
Liberterius Offline


Registered: 01/06/10
Posts: 241
I've never been to Nevada but yeah, I believe prostitution is only legal in brothels there and then only in certain counties, not including wherever Vegas is; that's where trouble seems to arise for many people. wink

But yes, I understand your point now, I apologize for my undue defensiveness.

Thank you, I just hope the people I have offended read this then.

Also on the topic of the sterilizations, I wonder if this program could be reasonably widened to more general criminals, like thieves and violent offenders? Voluntary still I'd say, but...hm. I have mixed feelings on forced sterilizations, especially by methods that are difficult to reverse. There are criminals who can become "normal" productive members of society again if given the chance if they have the personal drive, and it would be wrong in my opinion to permanently stop them from having children 10, 20 years down the road. But also a lot of them have kids when they really shouldn't, and then we have all these slums...eh. smirk

Top
#435839 - 10/21/10 10:03 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Citizen Jonesy Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 09/22/02
Posts: 995
Loc: Palm Springs, California, USA
You have obviously not had to deal with hardcore drug addicts on a day to day basis. I have. It is my opinion that police should be allowed to shoot a drug addicted criminal at the scene of whatever crime they have committed. Their downward spiral destroys everything around them. That is why I'm against across the board legalization that you hear hippies cry for.

If we cannot get rid of them (as per my suggestion), maybe we can keep them from destroying an innocent life-like a child who did not ask to be born to addicted human garbage.

Better to not be born at all then be born into a fucked up situation you cannot change or even control.
_________________________
Hail Satan!
Jonesy
I° Member, Church Of Satan
Webmaster
The 8FoldPath Network-Just updated

Top
#435842 - 10/21/10 10:17 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Machismo]
Riddles Offline


Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 82
Loc: Maryland
Originally Posted By: Machismo
Originally Posted By: Riddles
Might is right.


I've never interpreted that statement as meaning, might conveys rights, but rather, might conveys moral authority. The first interpretation would be an accurate description of reality, of course, since rights can only be granted and defended by force. The second interpretation, which is the one I always applied to Redbeard's use of the phrase, seems to me misleading, because it merges in our imaginations two domains, force and information, which in reality are separate, intrinsically and fundamentally distinct. Better to say, might trumps right, which would mean, might renders moral authority moot, an accurate description of reality, since might trumps everything, and renders moot all that opposes it.


I suppose I would agree. It reminds me of debates I've had with people on the whole concept of objective morality (which I don't believe exists). I prefer the term "moral relativist", but if you want to mince words and use reductionist arguments, you could possibly say that I am a moral nihilist, a term I don't care for since people think that moral nihilists don't have any kind of ethical standards. I have ethical standards; I just don't believe that there is any kind of magical arbiter which justifies my standards. Then they play the game where they make me out to be a psychopath by tricking me to admit that "[insert despicable act] isn't objectively wrong." I respond by saying, "does it really matter what I think regarding this? Subjectively, I find [insert despicable act] to be wrong because I don't like it, so I will do my best to fight against it, and if it appears to be despicable enough, the powers at be will agree with me and set legal and social standards to prevent that kind of behavior. And if someone else is really inclined to do [insert despicable act], they're going to do so whether or not any objective moral exists." Any kind of objective "should" never enters into the equation. So, yes, might renders the point moot.

Although maybe I wasn't clear, the gist of what I was saying before is that there's no reason we should refrain from using might because of fear of infringing on someone's "God-given rights". They don't exist. And freedom isn't going to mean much if we define it to be total anarchy. I like the concept of freedom, but if the concept is to have any utility, lines have to be drawn somewhere. Maybe I don't think there is any objective optimum for where the lines are drawn, but we draw them where we like to see them.

Ultimately, I don't think the whole concept of self-interest should lead to the idea that we should live in some fairy tale "live and let live" anarchy. The simple fact is that interests clash. Laws and social contracts help us to maintain some semblance of order, but I'm not too concerned about assuring someone else's interests are met when they clash with my subjective interests/ethics. Under the most liberal interpretations of freedom, am I infringing upon the freedom of a pedophile when I say they should be killed? Sure, and I don't fucking care. Why should I?

Originally Posted By: Machismo

As for the question of moral authority, I've wrestled with that on various threads, many of them on forums you don't currently have access to. None of my thought experiments satisfied me for long. Redbeard, of course, would say that moral authority is a chimera, that amorality is the only non-delusional perspective for man. I had sympathy for that position and espoused it for a while, but finally couldn't maintain it, as there is something in me that wants to be moral. So then I tried to categorize morality as a kind of indulgence, for example as principled malice, or alternatively as principled pride, but in the end this didn't work for me, because morality as it functions in my head is usually a No rather than a Yes, a denial, thus an abstinence. Equating abstinence with indulgence would be oxymoronic.


I think you are getting too caught up in language. I get my best results and clearest thinking when I don't worry about rigorous definitions, and instead just go with my gut. Trying to label all of my actions as either "moral" or "amoral" makes my head spin. The truth value of what you said really depends upon what we mean by "moral" and "amoral", and I'm not interested in that kind of rigor. Pragmatically, abstaining from something can be an indulgence (in some sense at least) if that something is harmful to you (feeling bothered or guilty because of defying your moral compass counts as harmful). An "abstinent indulgence" is only an oxymoron if you have the need to break everything down into simple black and white concepts. The same goes with your discussion of morality. I have a moral compass, and going against that bothers me, so following that moral compass is for me an indulgence, and if one equates selfishness with amorality, it is "amoral". Even people who admit to being PURELY selfish can show kindness and participate in philanthropy without being hypocritical even if it doesn't appear that they get anything in return. They get something in return; they don't get to be bothered by their conscious, they improve their relations with others, and they may get a sense of satisfaction out of being charitable. And it can be an indulgence even if you don't consciously recognize WHY it is an indulgence. That's why I say "go with your gut." It sounds like you got tired of breaking it down, but that doesn't mean you became any less selfish. There's often not a need to consciously break it down like that. Clearly, according to your conscience, "morality" is in your interest. And there's no need to figure out why. Just go with your gut.

I consider myself to be EXTREMELY selfish, if not purely so, and I can be a "nice guy" in many situations. Also, I don't feel the need to break everything down into transactions, or to worry about "does this necessarily benefit me?" For example, I'm very charitable and kind to my wife (well, usually wink ), and I don't evaluate every interaction with her in a selfish way. I just love her. However, I recognize there are most likely selfish roots to my actions (being good to her makes me happy, and seeing her happy does too), but I don't have any compelling need to consciously break everything down like that. But that doesn't mean I'm not being selfish/"amoral".

Short version of the last two paragraphs:

Generally, I find that admitting self-interest is the first step toward achieving rational self-interest, but sometimes self-interest doesn't have to be admitted to reap the rewards. If you think you have innate "morals", go with that and don't worry about why it feels right.

You remind me of me. I overanalyze things when, pragmatically, I don't need to. I've only met a few Satanists in real life, and I hate to generalize, but most that I've met fall into one of two categories: armchair philosophers and people who just want to kick back and share a bottle of Jack. I respect the intellectualism of many Satanists, and I understand "Satan demands study", but ironically, the latter group tends to do a better job at actually implementing Satanism. I'm not lumping you into either category, but a good question to ask ourselves is: why am I worrying so much about if morality is in my interest, or if my interests are "right" or "wrong"? Self-interest is not a choice, so I don't feel that my moral instincts get in the way of that, whether I have a conscious justification or not.



"I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one."
--Mark Twain (on why I need an editor smile )


Edited by Riddles (10/22/10 12:20 AM)
_________________________
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
--Mark Twain

"Egoism is the very essence of a noble soul."
--Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
#435892 - 10/22/10 10:11 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Riddles]
Machismo Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 02/05/10
Posts: 1132
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: Riddles
I suppose I would agree. It reminds me of debates I've had with people on the whole concept of objective morality (which I don't believe exists).


Me either. I came to realize that saying morality is subjective doesn't negate morality but merely clarifies its primary attribute.

Quote:
I have ethical standards; I just don't believe that there is any kind of magical arbiter which justifies my standards.


The arbiter is of course you.

Quote:
Then they play the game where they make me out to be a psychopath by tricking me to admit that "[insert despicable act] isn't objectively wrong."


Yes - they act as if the phrase subjectively wrong is an oxymoron. It isn't. Subjectively right is right. Subjectively wrong is wrong.

Now a person who wants to use morality as an instrument of persuasion directed at other people can never be satisfied with anything less than objective morality, which doesn't exist, and which therefore leaves them with three options, either (1) give up persuasion; or (2) find another instrument; or (3) sink into a morass of unreality.

Quote:
Although maybe I wasn't clear, the gist of what I was saying before is that there's no reason we should refrain from using might because of fear of infringing on someone's "God-given rights". They don't exist.


Only gun-given rights exist. cool

Quote:
And freedom isn't going to mean much if we define it to be total anarchy. I like the concept of freedom, but if the concept is to have any utility, lines have to be drawn somewhere. Maybe I don't think there is any objective optimum for where the lines are drawn, but we draw them where we like to see them.


Guns enable laws which enforce common sense so that a practical freedom can emerge in the real world.

Quote:
Under the most liberal interpretations of freedom, am I infringing upon the freedom of a pedophile when I say they should be killed? Sure, and I don't fucking care. Why should I?


I can't think of a reason.

Quote:
I think you are getting too caught up in language.


WHAT??? But - but - getting caught up in language is my favorite game! zombie

Quote:
I get my best results and clearest thinking when I don't worry about rigorous definitions, and instead just go with my gut.


A good strategy so long as your gut isn't an ass. cool

But see, there's a difference between knowing the right thing to do, and being able to explain why it's right. The latter matters if I'm a policy maker - and there are many roles in society that entail policy-making; for example, parent, business executive, senator, editor, publicist.

Quote:
if one equates selfishness with amorality


I don't, incidentally.

Quote:
Also, I don't feel the need to break everything down into transactions, or to worry about "does this necessarily benefit me?"


The transactional mentality certainly gets tedious quickly.

Quote:
You remind me of me.


No no no. You remind me of me. jack

Quote:
I overanalyze things when, pragmatically, I don't need to. I've only met a few Satanists in real life, and I hate to generalize, but most that I've met fall into one of two categories: armchair philosophers and people who just want to kick back and share a bottle of Jack.


I like both kinds. jack
_________________________


Top
#435897 - 10/22/10 11:14 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Machismo]
Riddles Offline


Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 82
Loc: Maryland
Originally Posted By: Machismo


Quote:
I get my best results and clearest thinking when I don't worry about rigorous definitions, and instead just go with my gut.


A good strategy so long as your gut isn't an ass. cool

But see, there's a difference between knowing the right thing to do, and being able to explain why it's right. The latter matters if I'm a policy maker - and there are many roles in society that entail policy-making; for example, parent, business executive, senator, editor, publicist.



I agree, but I feel that it is an unfortunate fact of life. If only I were a dictator...

Of course, given that we're on a forum, we're expected to explain things. I can't convince anyone using my gut.

Originally Posted By: Machismo

Quote:
if one equates selfishness with amorality


I don't, incidentally.


"Morality" doesn't mean a whole lot to me. I'll happily call myself "amoral" or "evil", but in a somewhat ironic sense. I'm not saying I'm "wrong", just selfish. It's just one definition of "evil", so I don't feel guilty when I employ it so long as the context is clear.

Originally Posted By: Machismo


Quote:
I overanalyze things when, pragmatically, I don't need to. I've only met a few Satanists in real life, and I hate to generalize, but most that I've met fall into one of two categories: armchair philosophers and people who just want to kick back and share a bottle of Jack.


I like both kinds. jack



I do too. You know who I like even better? Armchair philosophers who want to sit back and share a bottle of Jack. I never said the categories had to be mutually exclusive. smile
_________________________
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
--Mark Twain

"Egoism is the very essence of a noble soul."
--Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
#435919 - 10/22/10 02:29 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Riddles]
John Prophet Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 04/06/09
Posts: 993
Loc: My suburban lair
Originally Posted By: Riddles
"Morality" doesn't mean a whole lot to me. I'll happily call myself "amoral" or "evil", but in a somewhat ironic sense. I'm not saying I'm "wrong", just selfish. It's just one definition of "evil", so I don't feel guilty when I employ it so long as the context is clear.

That’s pretty much my approach as well. Aside from making things simpler (though perhaps less accurate), I find it appealing on an aesthetic and emotional level.
_________________________


Top
#435923 - 10/22/10 03:34 PM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: Machismo]
Riddles Offline


Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 82
Loc: Maryland
Originally Posted By: Machismo

Guns enable laws which enforce common sense so that a practical freedom can emerge in the real world.


This is the kind of mentality I had back when I was a political Anarchist. Then I realized that my interests do not necessarily coincide with popular notions of "common sense", and I don't put democratic opinion above my own, so I am willing to support a government which supports notions I believe in even if it defies "common sense". Basically, I am okay with "borrowing"/supporting the power of others when I don't have the direct power. Also, I believed that in the absence of strict laws handed down from the government, private forces would deal with criminals according to "common sense". But many new injustices would emerge. I am definitely a fan of "trial by jury." I trust myself enough to apply common sense in day-to-day interactions/vengeance, so I don't need to give a trial by jury, but I can't say I trust the group/herd mentality of militias.

The government has the guns, but I'm not restricted by the idea that they should enforce "common sense". Democratic opinion is often crap.


Edited by Riddles (10/22/10 04:59 PM)
_________________________
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
--Mark Twain

"Egoism is the very essence of a noble soul."
--Friedrich Nietzsche

Top
#436241 - 10/26/10 12:24 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
Nammu Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 10/18/09
Posts: 402
Loc: Pacific NW
Bravo Project Prevention! Indeed, it is a rare charity that doesn't make me puke in my mouth.

Top
#436251 - 10/26/10 02:13 AM Re: Chlorinating the gene pool [Re: MoongleMoose]
MoongleMoose Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 11/09/09
Posts: 76
Loc: South O' Sydney
This article and ethical debate was originally referred to my by serving police officer's here in Australia. To my expectations, their direct, methodical and un-bias logic forced the 'ethical dilemma' question of this charity to be blown out of the water.

For one, a point that is seldom systematically digested by the critics... the suffering of children. It is far too easy to jump the gun here and form your own bias and views on what we think is "right" or "wrong", UNTIL you are actually physically and emotionally involved with the REAL victims of this most heinous act (act, being the birth of children by druggies). This is something that the founder of Project Prevention had gone through. I can remember a documentary done on her that aired in Australia a couple of years ago, and it involved her talking about her own history with drug addicted babies as an adoptive parent. Barbara Harris experienced first hand, the effect of drug addicted mother's popping out kids, one after the other, usually because they couldn't keep their leg's together or they sold themselves for drugs.

By that notion, I would argue that critics of Project Prevention that refute their work on "Ethical" grounds, come forward to chat to Barbara. I'm sure she'd be more than happy to take them to a stroll through either a hospital or foster home that's caring for babies and children that are suffering the effects of drug withdrawal.

One thing I did find interesting about Project Prevention was the support of several christian priests (take a look at the board of directors page).
I, myself have had dealings with many Catholic and Anglican priests in my time. Some were fucking idiots that I wouldn't bother wasting another second talking to, and others were probably the nicest and most logical individual's I've ever known, and still talk to on a monthly basis. You take them as you meet them.

Sure, have the expectation that they've all gained wisdom and philosophy from the bible, but that's not to say that they can't think for themselves. Remember... individual church's are very subjective in their proceedings based solely on what the priest says the "go is". This is why some people will go to different churches, even if they are of the same branch. It really does come down to personalities on this. And it's by this that I would like to believe why there are priests involved with Project Prevention.

This isn't a religious issue, it's a common-fucking-sense issue. I'm glad to see a smart, select few leaders of Christianity step up and do what's ethically right here.

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >


Forum Stats
12157 Members
73 Forums
43918 Topics
405738 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements