On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:09:27 -0700 (PDT), Nic
hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>On 11 Sep, 23:15, Topaz
hotmail.com> wrote:
>I read thru a lot of that, and it doesnt sound much more than
>a pep talk by most goverments for some kind of pro life
>campaign.....however, it was the destruction caused by
>the eugenisists
The Jews control your media.
Far from being "evil," eugenics is actually the most beneficial and
humane discipline ever devised by the mind of man. In fact, eugenics
is the only viable long-term solution to all our social problems. As
I said on this program in 1993, eugenics is the only way to a better
world. Science has shown us that genetic structure is by far the
greatest determinant of intelligence, character, and behavior.
Unfortunately, those with the best genetic inheritance tend to have
the fewest children-and those with the lowest intelligence,
lowest potential, and worst character tend to have the most
children. This leads to a genetic deterioration of the race that
gets worse with each passing generation. No amount of education, no
laws, and no increase in the power of the police or of the state can
counter this degeneration.
Eugenics is simply the idea that we should humanely use our social
policies to encourage as much as possible the birth of children with
good genetic qualities and to discourage as much as possible the
birth of children with poor genetic qualities. Some of this could be
done with the more advanced techniques of modern reproductive
science, such as allowing surrogate mothers to carry genius-level
children in large numbers or encouraging the voluntary use of egg
banks and sperm banks to propagate the best children that our race
can possibly produce.
But most eugenics would be simple and basic and just good common
Sense. there could be endless variations on the theme of tax
deductions, tax credits, and interest-free loans extended to
families of good genetic inheritance to encourage them to give the
priceless gift of their children-most of whom will grow up into
highly-evolved creative problem-solvers-to our society. How can
that be "evil"?
It's not evil. It's really the ultimate good. After a few
generations of eugenics-after a few generations of ten times the
number of problem-solvers and culture-creators being born, and a
tenth of the number of problem-makers and culture destroyers being
born, we would have a very different world indeed. An infinitely
better world.
> and elitist government that I know will always
>be on our minds and unforgiven, as is the duty call of most soldiers
>(count the millions of would be grandpa's and great great grandfathers
>and mothers across Europe today if they hadn't been shot at maimed or
>eradicated from the gene pools of allied forces across our worlds)
>
>Anti-abortion solves the right to evolve naturally, as nature in time
>unfolds
No, evolving naturally is survival of the fittest. With welfare etc.
this isn't happening. But survival of the fittest is cruel and
unpleasant. That is why we should have eugenics instead. We would
evolve in the great way. And no one suffers. People with defects can
adopt children if they want. They know their problems made them
suffer. They should not want to bring more suffering into the world.
>normally quite well without deliberate and preconsidered destruction
>of life potential, anyone who willingly and or any other way prevents
>the freedom and rights of any other individual to maintain a quality
>of life, self respect and freedom to concieve children naturally
>is and always will be, to my way of thinking, acting on the fantasy
>of under another controlling dictatorate, or how would it be ?
>some kind of Nazi opertive!. I'm thinking anyone who PURPOSEFULLY
>DAMAGES or DENIES a normal and natural relationship blossom
>into family and friends, or has denied the fact that people will fall
>in love
>on any other day (with or without inhibition for the basic humble need
>to love and let love) or obstructs in any way normal family reasonably
>evolve and reproducton unfold, is quite obviously
>not quite right in the own human evolutional reasoning.
>
>The idea of abortion for pleasure, ie for aesthetics is a basic
>and fundamental understated reference to eugenics practices.
>for instance, fashion once dictated that where in some parts of
>the world beautiful people should have long slender sculls,
>other places had differing ideals, would either have miscarried or
>caused an abortion becuase they thought that those born with
>a rounder, more squat proportioned face would be less than life
>will or could ever tolerate? The cult of eugenics and abortion, of
>nazi warfare, or of some other discrimination about lesser rungs
>on a genetic heirarchical ladder is contrary to my thinking and
Your way of thinking is caused by the Jews controlling your media.
>belief about how humans evolved, and I think forced marriage
>would be also (although it is my belief under observation that
>happier families are generally ones where parents and relatives
>all have one or several things in common!)
>
>I really do think its becoming very important to consider how
>precious life has become, and what genetic research is doing,
>selective genes ar'nt the only ones that are precious, all of us
>are precious.
>
>It is not a womans right, it is her inclination to concieve when
>she feels it is a good time to do so, why do we to interfer with that?
Women should not be allowed to kill their children. People with
serioius genetic defects should be sterilized in the first place.
>while some women concieve more easily than others and have more
>and more opportunity open to them, If she is at risk of being raped,
>or who has an occupation accepting his pleasures for money she
>may take a contraceptive to prevent miscarriage and conception,
>also as she may be so poor she is beyond the pity of her family and
>community to support her with another infant child.
Another thing, outlawing abortion only works with some kind of
socialism. It doesn't go with capitalism.
> Of course in
>the sophisticated welfare and Western Christian communities women
>can have children and be certain that they will be supported by almost
>everybody, can't they! after all this is what our greatgrandparents
>fought
>for and won for isnt that so? and this is why the Western way of life
>has
>become celebrated with lesbians to worship !
>
>I think that most men are gentle and kind enough in mi experiences
>and will not take advantages without her request or consent for it,
>and we are not at war so women are not exactly ambushed and raped
>by an unfamilliar foreigner or weirdo's who would leave her a maimed
>lifeless corpse or destitute with babies. Men do say no! quite
>positively
>when asked, which is why I ask early!, and I will say no as well
>tho...
>
>Free use of contraceptives and abortion on demand has lowered the
>respect of individuals for their own personal safety, their self
>respect, their
>natural inhibition, their human natural inclination to concieve in a
>very
>special and private way, their respect for other people, and other
>peoples
>emotional affiliations. Its also lowers the respect for the child if
>the woman
>concieves the act is more precious to that gift of life, being reduced
>in
>equality for the few tawdries, lies, or what-have-you's he offers for
>his
>courage.
>
>but again...this somehow isnt proof to our goverment that everyone
>in their country is good enough to have live births and is a risk to
>everyone in the neighbourhood, their dogs cats and their property
>if they so much as date without conceited and gross interference
>and invasion of personal lives and privacy, and a prolonged,improper
>and exacerbated enquiry into their reasons for desiring to extend ones
>family and circle of mates. and the people who would do such a thing
>are in all intent and purpose the filth that should have been cleared
>up
>after the Great wars in Europe.
