Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by GIThruster »

I remember teachers involved in sex crimes with students when i was in Jr. and Sr.High, but it was never the female teachers.

http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/09/2 ... s-a-prize/

My guess is, it's how internet porn has changed life. There are after all going to be consequences of piping stuff into every home that before the net only entered 1/100 homes.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

Diogenes
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by Diogenes »

Belgium set to extend right-to-die law to children

Image


BRUSSELS (AP) — Belgium, one of the very few countries where euthanasia is legal, is expected to take the unprecedented step this week of abolishing age restrictions on who can ask to be put to death — extending the right to children for the first time.


http://news.yahoo.com/belgium-set-exten ... 38477.html
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

choff
Posts: 2438
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by choff »

...and then they give the kiddies more ADHD drugs to control their behavior leading to suicidal behaviors that bring in subversive suicide prevention counselors that use NLP to coach the kids to actually commit suicide and make it illegal for the parents to intervene when the coached kids opt for assisted suicide. Today's feature film for social studies children will be, "Harold and Maude," Saul Alinsky would be proud.
CHoff

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by GIThruster »

Maybe someone else here knows the history better but didn't Germany go this way in the mid thirties, with the progressive notion of culling the unwanted parts of society, which is what prepared the way for the gas chambers not too many years later? I remember reading about some "Lovejoy" society that would pick up the elderly and they would just vanish. As soon as you cave on considering human life sacred, you're stuck on the slippery slope that leads eventually to genocide.

I can't recall anything in the bible that teaches suicide is a "mortal sin" as the catholic church teaches, but the notion that life is sacred certainly permeates all Hebrew bible. It's what has kept most of us safe in the West from the kinds of indiscriminate killing we have seen in Asia.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

paperburn1
Posts: 2461
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by paperburn1 »

October 1939, Hitler himself initiated a decree which empowered physicians to grant a "mercy death" to "patients considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health." The intent of the socalled "euthanasia" program, however, was not to relieve the suffering of the chronically ill. The Nazi regime used the term as a euphemism: its aim was to exterminate the mentally ill and the handicapped, thus "cleansing" the "Aryan" race of persons considered genetically defective and a financial burden to society.
Some scientists and physicians opposed the involuntary aspect of the law while others pointed to possible flaws. But the designation of specific conditions as inherited, and the desire to eliminate such illnesses or handicaps from the population, generally reflected the scientific and medical thinking of the day in Germany and elsewhere.
Strangely enough or not so strangely Nazi Germany was not the first or only country to sterilize people considered "abnormal." Before Hitler, the United States led the world in forced sterilizations. Between 1907 and 1939, more than 30,000 people in twenty-nine states were sterilized, many of them unknowingly or against their will, while they were incarcerated in prisons or institutions for the mentally ill. Nearly half the operations were carried out in California. This was considered a suitable solution to euthanasia.
When growing up we knew a twin brother and sister that survived the war.The sister went to our church.. She told us about the camps and what occurred in them.(yes she was in a camp tattoo and everything) Her brother was a SS officer and he is the one that turned her into the camp because she refused to sign a loyalty oath to the fatherland.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by GIThruster »

Imagine the kind of pressure these two are putting on this poor little boy:

http://www.mrconservative.com/2014/02/3 ... -or-tammy/

What doctor would prescribe hormone therapy to a kid just to forestall puberty and force such a decision on a child? I'm surprised its even legal for a child to make such a decision--I would have thought it required adult status. Hell, eleven year-olds shouldn't even be allowed to get piercings and tattoos, let alone a sex change.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by GIThruster »

paperburn1 wrote:Strangely enough or not so strangely Nazi Germany was not the first or only country to sterilize people considered "abnormal." Before Hitler, the United States led the world in forced sterilizations. Between 1907 and 1939, more than 30,000 people in twenty-nine states were sterilized, many of them unknowingly or against their will, while they were incarcerated in prisons or institutions for the mentally ill. Nearly half the operations were carried out in California. This was considered a suitable solution to euthanasia.
When growing up we knew a twin brother and sister that survived the war.The sister went to our church.. She told us about the camps and what occurred in them.(yes she was in a camp tattoo and everything) Her brother was a SS officer and he is the one that turned her into the camp because she refused to sign a loyalty oath to the fatherland.
People tend to forget, that what was happening in Germany was just one face of Progressivism at that time, and that it was specifically because Progressivism was the formidable force it was up to and during the war that the US stayed out of WWII as long as it did. Had the Japanese never attacked Pearl, it's quite possible we would have sat the whole thing out and who knows how much of the world would be speaking German by now.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

paperburn1
Posts: 2461
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by paperburn1 »

What worry's me the most is the stories she told us and what we should be afraid of, I see everyday in now in our politics and society. Was she a harbinger of our times or just the crazy old woman. Time will tell .
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

choff
Posts: 2438
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by choff »

The other day I was working on some equipment in a school when they had an emergency drill. Two cops came in and locked the children in the classrooms and the staff in the office. I had to wait in the hallway until the all clear was given. The one cop told me it was an unfortunate consequence of the times we live in, I told him if we could ever get the CIA to stop funding terrorists it would no longer be necessary.

If a real terrorist had predeployed an incendiary locking them in would be fatal, but the real point of the drill is conditioning innocent people to be locked in cells by uniformed guards, as well as conditioning the police to do it.
CHoff

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by GIThruster »

Locking people in place so they can't run away sounds like a really stupid idea. If a shooter has a gun and no one else does, your only safe course is to run away. "Sheltering in place" just seems to me a dubious concept.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

williatw
Posts: 1891
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by williatw »

choff wrote:If a real terrorist had predeployed an incendiary locking them in would be fatal, but the real point of the drill is conditioning innocent people to be locked in cells by uniformed guards, as well as conditioning the police to do it.
Bingo...exactly, and in time the same thing will be done in public buildings, maybe even private shopping malls etc. Get us used to being subject wards of the state from cradle to grave, simply doing what we are told without question. "Yes officer, whatever you say officer"..

Skipjack
Posts: 6073
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by Skipjack »

Well, the main problem is, if you have hundreds of people running around aimlessly, whenever they hear shots somewhere in a large building, you have the recipe for:

a) a stampede at the exits where people get trampled to death.
b) people running towards the shooters instead of away. Shots echo in hallways which could mislead you and there could be multiple shooters coming from multiple directions. So unless you are fully aware of the situation, you might get mislead. Once there is a group of people running behind you, you will have a hard time turning around too (they will block your way back).
c) people getting in the crossfire between the shooter and law enforcement, giving the shooters a means to shield behind civilians or escape in the turmoil.

Another reasoning could be that amok shooters will likely ignore locked doors and move on to the many other, unprotected targets.
Now, I am not saying that this shelter in place is necessarily a good idea. If the shooter is visible and approaching your position, you certainly should run away, if possible without being a target. I just want to point out that there may be valid reasons for this sort of tactic.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by GIThruster »

Honestly, the only solution I see to gunmen who are looking to commit maximum murder is to have the teachers armed. I'm not suggesting teachers who are not educated, skilled and comfortable around firearms should carry weapons, but locking the students and teacher inside a classroom only makes sense if someone can return fire on such a murderer.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

Skipjack
Posts: 6073
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by Skipjack »

GIThruster wrote:Honestly, the only solution I see to gunmen who are looking to commit maximum murder is to have the teachers armed. I'm not suggesting teachers who are not educated, skilled and comfortable around firearms should carry weapons, but locking the students and teacher inside a classroom only makes sense if someone can return fire on such a murderer.
Well, I presume the plan is to have law enforcement come in quickly. I don't feel quite comfortable with the idea of armed elementary school teachers. What's next? Sentry guns?

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Post by ladajo »

The point is if you advertise that the school has armed security on station, then it becomes essentially nil odds that shooters will go after that school. This is also true of malls, and other places.
The shooters (because they are inherently cowards and can not stand up for themselves) go after unprotected places. This is a proven and documented point.

Yo udo not need to arm every teacher. You only need to arm some of the staff. Inherently in the mix of folks there are going to be some that are already gun owners and users, and with a little training and periodic refreshers, they are sufficient safe deterence for the nutjobs.

What is wrong with our country that there are folks so bent on denying the right of self protection to all citizens? This was a founding point for our nation, and what made it strong and able to grow. Crime preys on victims. If you reduce or harden potential victims, crime seeks elsewhere to do its business. Crime is only succesful against the undefended and weak. Those who are criminally minded seek to reduce the ability of the target pool to protect itself.

Prevention is worth a pound of cure. I would rather have a completely armed populace than fall into the liberal leftist trap of having the state do it for me. I want to stand up for myself, and let those that would try to do me or others wrong that I will protect myself and those around me.

A point lost on many is that the role of the police is legally equal to the role of the populace. Any citizen can cite another for a legal violation, just like the police. Most places (except some hard over liberal dens) also support citizen's arrest. The police exist legally to process crime doers in support of the justice system. It is not the role of citizens to dispense justice, nor the police. This is the entire point of having a just society. Another point lost on most when the view the police. The think the police dispense justice for the most part (courtesy of liberal Hollywood idiocy for the most part).
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Post Reply