| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"me" |
| Date: |
15 Jun 2005 01:01:17 PM |
| Object: |
Solving the "over-population" problem |
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population would be to reduce the number of
females. The Toda of India practiced infanticide of female newborns to create a culture
where there were 5 males to each female. Using modern medical techniques it will soon
be possible to plan a similar society. The urgency of the problem, the steady collapse of
the planet's ecosystem due to overpopulation, is such that I propose that immediate
steps be taken to create a society with 12 males to each female. To ensure that
democracy continues to function the voting power of each female should be equivalent
to that of 12 males. Only married people would be allowed to vote.
In such a society a woman would, of course, be given the most detailed instructions on
how to keep men happy (and, of course, herself). Sexual activity would happen three
times a week, thus each male would "get his oats" once a month. The woman would
decide when to get pregnant.
... and so on.
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
.
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 02:44:39 PM |
|
|
"me" <here@now.com> writes:
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population...
Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with the current
population numbers?
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 09:01:13 PM |
|
|
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:878y1bs8uw.fsf@drizzle.com...
"me" <here@now.com> writes:
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population...
Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with the current
population numbers?
There are too many people, or hadn't you noticed?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 09:35:25 PM |
|
|
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> writes:
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:878y1bs8uw.fsf@drizzle.com...
"me" <here@now.com> writes:
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population...
Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with the current
population numbers?
There are too many people, or hadn't you noticed?
No, I hadn't noticed. There are enough calories produced every
year to support over twelve billion people; that some are starving on
this planet is the result of politics, not population.
Elf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 10:29:46 PM |
|
|
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:87mzpryqoi.fsf@drizzle.com...
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> writes:
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:878y1bs8uw.fsf@drizzle.com...
"me" <here@now.com> writes:
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population...
Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with the current
population numbers?
There are too many people, or hadn't you noticed?
No, I hadn't noticed. There are enough calories produced every
year to support over twelve billion people; that some are starving on
this planet is the result of politics, not population.
Is that all people need to live well, calories? I believe people need space,
and natural beauty, and they need for wilderness to exist even if they never
visit it. Now if suburban sprawl is eliminated in favor of dense cities with
lots of parks, and leaving more open, undeveloped land outside of the
cities, things might be alright even with 12 billion people. But that
doesn't seem to be the way it's going. When you can be in space and make out
a gridwork of roads criss-crossing the Amazon Basin, I think you've got too
many people and it's only going to get worse before it gets better.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 10:24:01 PM |
|
|
On 15 Jun 2005 19:35:25 -0700, "Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com>
wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> writes:
"Elf M. Sternberg" <elf@drizzle.com> wrote in message
news:878y1bs8uw.fsf@drizzle.com...
"me" <here@now.com> writes:
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population...
Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with the current
population numbers?
There are too many people, or hadn't you noticed?
No, I hadn't noticed. There are enough calories produced every
year to support over twelve billion people; that some are starving on
this planet is the result of politics, not population.
Elf
soylent green
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 04:50:47 PM |
|
|
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, Elf M. Sternberg dropped trou, farted,
whirled, then shouted:
"me" <here@now.com> writes:
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population...
Why would you want to do that? What's wrong with the current
population numbers?
Elf
Try driving during daylight hours anywhere in Los Angeles. That'll answer
your question. I wouldn't want to stabilize them myself. I'd rather
lower them.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Plonked by Jason Gastrich for all eternity...
______________
As you were, I was. As I am, you will be.
--- Hunter S. Thompson
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 05:24:09 PM |
|
|
"Vic Sagerquist" <address@withheld.com> wrote
Try driving during daylight hours anywhere in Los Angeles.
That'll answer your question. I wouldn't want to stabilize
them myself. I'd rather lower them.
You should work for the Bush administration, with your
leaping for the most radical solutions.
One solution I might ordinarily consider "radical" -- when
not being compared to reducing the number of people --
is a 24 hour economy.
If we weren't squeezing a nation of almost 300
million people into a 9-to-5 day our world would be
a lot less crowded.
And it sounds like a terrible waste of energy -- keeping
all the businesses that are normally closed overnight
open 24 hours -- but the extra energy needed for lighting
& such would be offset by savings elsewhere.
By reducing daytime traffic, for example, we would be
saving millions of gallons of fuel normally burned up
in traffic jams. Other energy savings would be hard to
measure, but rest assured it takes a lot of energy to
produce a new office building. By splitting the economy
into two shifts, you effectively double office space, as
both shifts are quite capable of using the same building.
Think of it: Move to a two "Shift" economy and all
capacities are immediately doubled. You can fit
twice as many people on subways & buses, or make
do with half as many, because demand would be
split. It would no longer be piled into that 9-to-5
window.
There would be other hidden benefits to the economy
as well. It's always "day time" somewhere in the
world, and no matter where in the world it is they'll
know they can do business with the United States.
We don't manage our population in the least. Heck,
our government doesn't even have an energy policy
that it'll admit it, so a plan to cope with (even improve
living standards) with a growing population is
certainly beyond it's ability.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Niels van der Linden" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 09:27:07 PM |
|
|
Interesting take!
This is, ofcourse, already being done, but can indeed be taken to another
level, or even some more.
With roughly 8 hours of sleep, 8 hours of work and 8 hours of leisure, this
might become a very liberal day planning (especially in a global world).
The main thing that's holding it back still is the dogma that you should
actually be in the same room with a person when interacting for whatever
(except for you-know-what).
This generation is already familiar with text-mode virtual communication,
but the coming one will be with audio-visual communication and the one after
that with 3D/surreal communication, and the one after that with brain-plugs,
but that's just a guess.
Niels
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 11:53:59 PM |
|
|
"Niels van der Linden" <n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote
This generation is already familiar with text-mode virtual
communication, but the coming one will be with
audio-visual communication and the one after that with
3D/surreal communication, and the one after that with
brain-plugs, but that's just a guess.
The most obvious & practical short-term solution to over
population is telecommuting. However, it only deals with
population issues surrounding employment -- "rush hour"
and the like. It doesn't deal with leisure time, shopping
and the transportation of materials & consumer goods.
It also is very limited in that it can only address certain
professions. An office worker can telecommute, sure,
but a repair man or chef certainly can't. Neither can any
retail, manufacturing or construction people. Most of our
economy would remain untouched.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Niels van der Linden" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
16 Jun 2005 07:11:39 AM |
|
|
This generation is already familiar with text-mode virtual
communication, but the coming one will be with
audio-visual communication and the one after that with
3D/surreal communication, and the one after that with
brain-plugs, but that's just a guess.
The most obvious & practical short-term solution to over
population is telecommuting. However, it only deals with
population issues surrounding employment -- "rush hour"
and the like. It doesn't deal with leisure time, shopping
and the transportation of materials & consumer goods.
It also is very limited in that it can only address certain
professions.
An office worker can telecommute, sure,
but a repair man or chef certainly can't. Neither can any
retail, manufacturing or construction people. Most of our
economy would remain untouched.
You're lacking imagination. Retail: largely, manufacturing: partly,
construction: partly, economy: largely.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
16 Jun 2005 10:46:48 AM |
|
|
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, JTEM dropped trou, farted, whirled, then
shouted:
"Niels van der Linden" <n.f.l.vanderlinden@student.utwente.nl> wrote
This generation is already familiar with text-mode virtual
communication, but the coming one will be with
audio-visual communication and the one after that with
3D/surreal communication, and the one after that with
brain-plugs, but that's just a guess.
The most obvious & practical short-term solution to over
population is telecommuting. However, it only deals with
population issues surrounding employment -- "rush hour"
and the like. It doesn't deal with leisure time, shopping
and the transportation of materials & consumer goods.
It also is very limited in that it can only address certain
professions. An office worker can telecommute, sure,
but a repair man or chef certainly can't. Neither can any
retail, manufacturing or construction people. Most of our
economy would remain untouched.
It's beginning to happen in the music prep industry. My office prepares
sheet music for movie scoring sessions. I commute to Hollywood every
morning, but we already have people who we can fax a handwritten score to,
their machine converts it to a PDF file and places it on a server where
they copy instrumental parts using Finale. Another copyist across the
state (near the Nevada state line) accesses the server and copies some
parts there. Then they E-mail them to the office where I receive them and
print them out for proofreading, then the final print is done in the
office. Realistically, with proofreaders accessing a server from home, we
could perform the operation with just two guys going to the office to
print, one of which takes the finished music to the session. Everyone
else could just work at home. There is a new electronic music stand on
the market now, which puts the sheet music on a monitor in front of the
players, and I think it can be programmed to turn pages. That would
eliminate the need for an office completely.
The only problem I have with working at home is the fact that my wife and
kids are there, and they don't understand the concept of "daddy's at work"
when daddy is at home. Heh... sometimes "daddy" doesn't either :-)
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Plonked by Jason Gastrich for all eternity...
______________
As you were, I was. As I am, you will be.
--- Hunter S. Thompson
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
17 Jun 2005 12:12:17 AM |
|
|
"Vic Sagerquist" <address@withheld.com> wrote
The only problem I have with working at home is
the fact that my wife and kids are there, and they
don't understand the concept of "daddy's at work"
when daddy is at home. Heh... sometimes "daddy"
doesn't either :-)
I've heard that numerous times myself.
For one company -- and only one company (and it's a
major company) -- I've heard a different story. I was
told that the telecommuters were the "best" people,
always the first to answer an e-mail or phone call, because
the first time someone complained about them the
company would revoke their privileges.
The people who worked on site, on the other hand, could
never be tracked down...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 09:09:12 PM |
|
|
"me" <here@now.com> wrote in message
news:42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population would be to reduce
the number of
females.
A) How would you do that?
B) If you could do that, why not just reduce the number of males and
females?
C) Why not just have big honking ancient Roman-style wars? Screw this dozen
or so deaths a week, I'm talking 50,000 dead in one afternoon. Of course,
only the men fought back then, but nowadays we could have women participants
too.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 01:55:00 PM |
|
|
"me" <here@now.com> wrote in message
news:42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population would be to reduce
the number of
females. The Toda of India practiced infanticide of female newborns to
create a culture
where there were 5 males to each female. Using modern medical techniques
it will soon
be possible to plan a similar society. The urgency of the problem, the
steady collapse of
the planet's ecosystem due to overpopulation, is such that I propose that
immediate
steps be taken to create a society with 12 males to each female. To ensure
that
democracy continues to function the voting power of each female should be
equivalent
to that of 12 males. Only married people would be allowed to vote.
In such a society a woman would, of course, be given the most detailed
instructions on
how to keep men happy (and, of course, herself). Sexual activity would
happen three
times a week, thus each male would "get his oats" once a month. The woman
would
decide when to get pregnant.
.. and so on.
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Hell, no. Why the heck would I want or need twelve men?!? And just WHO
would be providing these instructions on how to keep these men "happy".
Hmmm, then again...............Do I get to pick them out myself? :)
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
| User: "leo" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 02:52:24 PM |
|
|
I will put another question.
Would the average woman have enough resilience to keep happy... "just
only a man"? I have heard a lot of complains about men frustrated for
the low level of lust of their wives. So if that would be the case, I
mean if that is true, how could the average woman cope with as many as
twelve men?
I think it will be a lot easier if men buy sophisticated "latex
chicks" with the "latest software" to simulate the feminine
psyche. That would mean that... we would have to go after the
synthetic chick... pleading her for a screw... or accept to pass a time
"persuading" the latex doll to go to bed. The chick's program
would not respond to our request for screwing until we have
accomplished a certain level of pleading, crawling and drooling.
I mean, each customer can choose a slow or tight women, or either a
fast or easy one, following his personal preferences. One could also
adjust the program to different degrees of intensity in the moaning and
cries, as well as different modalities of orgasm to suit our own
tastes.
leo
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "LisaKay" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 05:17:30 PM |
|
|
Robibnikoff wrote:
"me" <here@now.com> wrote in message
news:42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population would be to reduce
the number of
females. The Toda of India practiced infanticide of female newborns to
create a culture
where there were 5 males to each female. Using modern medical techniques
it will soon
be possible to plan a similar society. The urgency of the problem, the
steady collapse of
the planet's ecosystem due to overpopulation, is such that I propose that
immediate
steps be taken to create a society with 12 males to each female. To ensure
that
democracy continues to function the voting power of each female should be
equivalent
to that of 12 males. Only married people would be allowed to vote.
In such a society a woman would, of course, be given the most detailed
instructions on
how to keep men happy (and, of course, herself). Sexual activity would
happen three
times a week, thus each male would "get his oats" once a month. The woman
would
decide when to get pregnant.
.. and so on.
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Hell, no. Why the heck would I want or need twelve men?!? And just WHO
would be providing these instructions on how to keep these men "happy".
Hmmm, then again...............Do I get to pick them out myself? :)
Oh well now... if that's the case... maybe I'll change my answer! :-)
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 05:58:03 PM |
|
|
"LisaKay" <LisaKay2054@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1118873850.056698.271040@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Robibnikoff wrote:
"me" <here@now.com> wrote in message
news:42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population would be to
reduce
the number of
females. The Toda of India practiced infanticide of female newborns to
create a culture
where there were 5 males to each female. Using modern medical
techniques
it will soon
be possible to plan a similar society. The urgency of the problem, the
steady collapse of
the planet's ecosystem due to overpopulation, is such that I propose
that
immediate
steps be taken to create a society with 12 males to each female. To
ensure
that
democracy continues to function the voting power of each female should
be
equivalent
to that of 12 males. Only married people would be allowed to vote.
In such a society a woman would, of course, be given the most detailed
instructions on
how to keep men happy (and, of course, herself). Sexual activity would
happen three
times a week, thus each male would "get his oats" once a month. The
woman
would
decide when to get pregnant.
.. and so on.
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Hell, no. Why the heck would I want or need twelve men?!? And just WHO
would be providing these instructions on how to keep these men "happy".
Hmmm, then again...............Do I get to pick them out myself? :)
Oh well now... if that's the case... maybe I'll change my answer! :-)
Food for thought! :)
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 01:53:11 PM |
|
|
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and would
probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent up sexual
urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the violent
confrontations which would likely ensue with all that testosterone.
We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 03:46:52 PM |
|
|
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, quibbler dropped trou, farted, whirled,
then shouted:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and would
probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent up
sexual urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the
violent confrontations which would likely ensue with all that
testosterone. We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
Or even out the population in about 50 generations, back to 50/50 where we
started from.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Plonked by Jason Gastrich for all eternity...
______________
As you were, I was. As I am, you will be.
--- Hunter S. Thompson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jon." |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
16 Jun 2005 01:25:48 PM |
|
|
Vic Sagerquist wrote:
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, quibbler dropped trou, farted, whirled,
then shouted:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and would
probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent up
sexual urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the
violent confrontations which would likely ensue with all that
testosterone. We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
Or even out the population in about 50 generations, back to 50/50 where we
started from.
Surely it wouldn't take that long? I would expect that, no matter how
few women there were, their offspring would be roughly 50/50 m/f. And
so would successive generations. So the population would even itself
out once the 11/12 male generation died out.
Jon.
aa #703
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jon." |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 01:55:23 PM |
|
|
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and would
probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent up sexual
urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the violent
confrontations which would likely ensue with all that testosterone.
We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I seem to remember hearing or seeing a reference somewhere to a study
that showed that societies with a higher proportion of males also had a
higher likelihood of going to war. I wish I could remember where I
heard that...
Jon.
aa #703
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn Arnold" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 03:06:17 PM |
|
|
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and would
probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent up sexual
urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the violent
confrontations which would likely ensue with all that testosterone.
We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I've often wondered if homosexuality is a natural population control
measure.
Glenn Arnold
.
|
|
|
| User: "Clayton...Less Calories, More Filling" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 07:36:44 PM |
|
|
"Glenn Arnold" <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in message
news:42B08A3A.7135424C@att.net...
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and would
probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent up sexual
urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the violent
confrontations which would likely ensue with all that testosterone.
We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I've often wondered if homosexuality is a natural population control
measure.
Perhaps it's a natural way of making the world more faaaaaabulous!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 07:11:17 PM |
|
|
Vic Sagerquist <address@withheld.com>
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, Glenn Arnold dropped trou, farted,
whirled, then shouted:
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
here@now.com says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and
would probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent
up sexual urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the
violent confrontations which would likely ensue with all that
testosterone. We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I've often wondered if homosexuality is a natural population control
measure.
It surely puts an end to the abortion issue.
Not to mention the polyester issue, which in and of
itself is compelling grounds for promoting it.
On the other hand, there IS the little matter of Disco...
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bonnie B." |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 09:39:30 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:11:17 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
Vic Sagerquist <address@withheld.com>
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, Glenn Arnold dropped trou, farted,
whirled, then shouted:
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
here@now.com says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and
would probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent
up sexual urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the
violent confrontations which would likely ensue with all that
testosterone. We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I've often wondered if homosexuality is a natural population control
measure.
It surely puts an end to the abortion issue.
No doubt because the Christofascist RepubliCUNTS will suddenly make
abortion the eighth sacrament to avoid having gay offspring.
Not to mention the polyester issue, which in and of
itself is compelling grounds for promoting it.
On the other hand, there IS the little matter of Disco...
BLASPHEME!!!!!!!!!!
DISCO RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ein Prosit der GemŸtlichkeit --
Bonnie *****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
16 Jun 2005 10:39:15 AM |
|
|
In article <7gp1b19025l87g78dvcg0g5n5bjntaphv5@4ax.com> Bonnie B. <456eerts@emas.org> writes:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:11:17 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
Vic Sagerquist <address@withheld.com>
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, Glenn Arnold dropped trou, farted,
whirled, then shouted:
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
here@now.com says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and
would probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent
up sexual urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the
violent confrontations which would likely ensue with all that
testosterone. We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I've often wondered if homosexuality is a natural population control
measure.
It surely puts an end to the abortion issue.
No doubt because the Christofascist RepubliCUNTS will suddenly make
abortion the eighth sacrament to avoid having gay offspring.
Not to mention the polyester issue, which in and of
itself is compelling grounds for promoting it.
On the other hand, there IS the little matter of Disco...
BLASPHEME!!!!!!!!!!
DISCO RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oops, sorry, sorry... um, like, "The Village People Live!"
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 03:47:38 PM |
|
|
on 15 Jun 2005 in alt.atheism, Glenn Arnold dropped trou, farted,
whirled, then shouted:
quibbler wrote:
In article <42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
here@now.com says...
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
Does it appeal to you that 11 out of 12 people would be men and
would probably be forced to turn to each other to gratify their pent
up sexual urges? Perhaps even more alarmingly, one can imagine the
violent confrontations which would likely ensue with all that
testosterone. We'd almost certainly destroy ourselves in war.
I've often wondered if homosexuality is a natural population control
measure.
It surely puts an end to the abortion issue.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Plonked by Jason Gastrich for all eternity...
______________
As you were, I was. As I am, you will be.
--- Hunter S. Thompson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 02:46:41 PM |
|
|
Some simple solutions to overpopulation ( over procreation )
would be;
1. Quit giving tax breaks to parents for their children. This is encouraging
the production of more children.
We should probably tax families for their children - not provide tax
incentives to have more.
2. Provide free birth control products to families - particularly in the
poor countries of the world.
"me" <here@now.com> wrote in message
news:42b06cfc$0$19820$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
The simplest way to stabilise the planet's population would be to reduce
the number of
females. The Toda of India practiced infanticide of female newborns to
create a culture
where there were 5 males to each female. Using modern medical techniques
it will soon
be possible to plan a similar society. The urgency of the problem, the
steady collapse of
the planet's ecosystem due to overpopulation, is such that I propose that
immediate
steps be taken to create a society with 12 males to each female. To ensure
that
democracy continues to function the voting power of each female should be
equivalent
to that of 12 males. Only married people would be allowed to vote.
In such a society a woman would, of course, be given the most detailed
instructions on
how to keep men happy (and, of course, herself). Sexual activity would
happen three
times a week, thus each male would "get his oats" once a month. The woman
would
decide when to get pregnant.
.. and so on.
So - ladies - does the above idea appeal to you?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "leo" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 02:21:28 PM |
|
|
With such a rate of males to females, it will be almost unavoidable
many of those males become faggots.
This could be also a mean to reduce overpopulation. Plato in his
Dialogues about love, said that pederasty was intituded by autorities
in certain islands to avoid overpopulation. The Spartans, a fierce
warrior society that lived by exploiting the "ilotas", the slaves that
tilled the earth and tended the herds of sheep and goats, were also
living with homosuality practices and they were also pederastes.
These ancient Greek societies had frequent troubles with
overpopulation, but thanks to restrictive heterosexual activities and
wars, they achieved a degree of stability.
Leo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Solving the "over-population" problem |
15 Jun 2005 02:26:36 PM |
|
|
"leo" <leo@leopoldoperdomo.com> wrote in message
news:1118863288.614242.320750@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
With such a rate of males to females, it will be almost unavoidable
many of those males become faggots.
Cool, then they can do the cooking, cleaning and decorating - Oy :P
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
