On 27 Jul 2008, at 04:58, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 09:47 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
Nonsense only requires one answer.
As does knee-jerk prejudice.
Like the knee-jerk 'religion is not sick twisted poisonous pernicious
evil filth' prejudice I encounter on this
At 06:33 AM Sunday 7/27/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
On 27 Jul 2008, at 04:58, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 09:47 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
Nonsense only requires one answer.
As does knee-jerk prejudice.
Like the knee-jerk 'religion is not sick twisted
On 26 Jul 2008, at 03:25, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
There's one particular domestic religious movement here in this
country that is presently doing exactly that. It's probably not the
first one most people might think. Google quiverfull for more info,
the first half dozen hits will tell you a
i would hope that genetic modification is in the
forecast (as long as we
keep a pool of wild humans).
jon
You don't find the thought of virtually immortal
genetically enhanced humans
keeping a pool of wild humans is somewhat
inhumane?
Regards,
Wayne.
there are many reasons for
William wrote:
Is there no limit to the depraved wickedness of the religionists?
What's wicked about bringing children into the world that you have the
resources to support and nurture?
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Jul 26, 2008, at 6:56 AM, William T Goodall wrote:
On 26 Jul 2008, at 03:25, Bruce Bostwick wrote:
There's one particular domestic religious movement here in this
country that is presently doing exactly that. It's probably not the
first one most people might think. Google quiverfull for
On Jul 26, 2008, at 10:49 AM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
William wrote:
Is there no limit to the depraved wickedness of the religionists?
What's wicked about bringing children into the world that you have
the
resources to support and nurture?
Doug
If that were their motivation, I'd
On 26 Jul 2008, at 16:49, Doug Pensinger wrote:
William wrote:
Is there no limit to the depraved wickedness of the religionists?
What's wicked about bringing children into the world that you have
the
resources to support and nurture?
The quiverfull beliefs are vile and perverted.
Bruce
If that were their motivation, I'd agree. But at 8-10 or more per
family, and with the fundamentalist neopentecostal homeschooling those
kids receive, they'll be able to elect their own theocrats to office
at virtually every level of our government in about 30-40 more years
or so.
Actually, that is standard Roman Catholic teaching as well. Except that a lot
of American Catholics don't do it.
http://idiotgrrl.livejournal.com/
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: memes, or genes...
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:55:02 -0500
On Jul 26, 2008
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Doug Pensinger wrote:
What we really need is for responsible, intelligent, enlightened people
to stop making excuses for _not_ having children.
Would you consider some excuses to be reasonable?
And, if responsible, enlightened people are having children, at what point
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Bruce Bostwick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
There's one particular domestic religious movement here in this
country that is presently doing exactly that. It's probably not the
first one most people might think. Google quiverfull for more info,
the first half
On 26 Jul 2008, at 17:24, Pat Mathews wrote:
Actually, that is standard Roman Catholic teaching as well. Except
that a lot of American Catholics don't do it.
The Catholics allow natural family planning. The quiverfulls forbid any.
Lemmings Maru
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:45 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
From: Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what parts of the population are doing their best to outbreed
everyone
else, and why? it seems to me that less developed countries are the
culprits, partly because children are a source of labor...
i
Julia wrote:
Would you consider some excuses to be reasonable?
Of course. The one I think is lame, though, is that they are somehow saving
the planet by deciding not to have children.
And, if responsible, enlightened people are having children, at what point
do they get to decide how
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 4:23 AM
Subject: Re: memes, or genes...
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:45 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote:
From: Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Julia wrote:
Would you consider some excuses to be reasonable?
Of course. The one I think is lame, though, is that they are somehow saving
the planet by deciding not to have children.
And, if responsible, enlightened people are having
At 11:21 AM Saturday 7/26/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
On 26 Jul 2008, at 16:49, Doug Pensinger wrote:
William wrote:
Is there no limit to the depraved wickedness of the religionists?
What's wicked about bringing children into the world that you have
the
resources to support
At 04:05 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, Wayne Eddy wrote:
I get annoyed with people who think that mankind is a blight on the world
and that the world would be a better place if homo sapiens dies out or
civilisation totally collapses.
That makes at least two of us.
. . . ronn! :)
You quoted the beliefs, but you failed to explain why the
beliefs
described in each quote are perverted. I presume you think
the
answer is self-evident, but for those of us dummies with
IQs that
fall slightly under 200 would you mind addressing each
quote
individually with the
At 07:17 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
You quoted the beliefs, but you failed to explain why the
beliefs
described in each quote are perverted. I presume you think
the
answer is self-evident, but for those of us dummies with
IQs that
fall slightly under 200 would you
One way to win an argument is to nit pick your opponent
to death. My
I.Q. is closer to 100 than 200, and I get it, Ronn.
Jon
Oh, I get it, all right. William is a very
intelligent person with
some interesting things to say on many topics, but he has a
knee-jerk
one-note answer when
On Jul 26, 2008, at 7:26 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 07:17 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
You quoted the beliefs, but you failed to explain why the
beliefs
described in each quote are perverted. I presume you think
the
answer is self-evident, but for those of us dummies
Actually I was thinking more along the lines of
evil or reprehensible.
The post didn't say anything about gene banks, it
talked about keeping
wild humans.
I get annoyed with people who think that mankind is a
blight on the world
and that the world would be a better place if homo sapiens
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
if parents don't make that choice we won't become post human. the best
time to fiddle with genes is in the womb, or before, not after. if some
decide not to meddle, and only procreate as wild humans, that is their
choice. i expect they will
On 27 Jul 2008, at 00:31, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 11:21 AM Saturday 7/26/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
On 26 Jul 2008, at 16:49, Doug Pensinger wrote:
William wrote:
Is there no limit to the depraved wickedness of the religionists?
What's wicked about bringing children into the
On 27 Jul 2008, at 01:26, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
At 07:17 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
You quoted the beliefs, but you failed to explain why the
beliefs
described in each quote are perverted. I presume you think
the
answer is self-evident, but for those of us dummies
At 07:48 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
One way to win an argument is to nit pick your opponent
to death. My
I.Q. is closer to 100 than 200, and I get it, Ronn.
Jon
Oh, I get it, all right. William is a very
intelligent person with
some interesting things to say on
At 09:47 PM Saturday 7/26/2008, William T Goodall wrote:
Nonsense only requires one answer.
As does knee-jerk prejudice.
. . . ronn! :)
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
hkhenson wrote:
And there are certain parts
of the population doing their best to outbreed
everyone else just to
skew future demographics. So it's likely to
be a hard crash, and not
a very well controlled one at that.
This would worry me more except I think the age of
genes is
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
what parts of the population are doing their best to outbreed everyone
else, and why? it seems to me that less developed countries are the
culprits, partly because children are a source of labor...
And children
On 26/07/2008, at 5:59 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
what parts of the population are doing their best to outbreed
everyone
else, and why? it seems to me that less developed countries are the
culprits, partly
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Charlie Bell wrote:
On 26/07/2008, at 5:59 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
what parts of the population are doing their best to outbreed
everyone
else, and why? it seems to me that less developed
On 26/07/2008, at 10:19 AM, Julia Thompson wrote:
And children *are* social security for many people of the world.
Or lunch.
How Swiftly you come to that conclusion.
Very good! :)
C.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
- Original Message -
From: Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 5:57 AM
Subject: memes, or genes...
what parts of the population are doing their best to outbreed everyone
else, and why
On Jul 25, 2008, at 2:57 PM, Jon Louis Mann wrote:
hkhenson wrote:
And there are certain parts
of the population doing their best to outbreed
everyone else just to
skew future demographics. So it's likely to
be a hard crash, and not
a very well controlled one at that.
This would worry
36 matches
Mail list logo
