THE PACK Message Boards

http://www.vhemt.org/

Me and sabre found this when we were talking online tonight we both agree its a very good idea. Not to mention funny as hell. Check it out!

WTF!! man i know a cult when i see one. it sounds like they're serius and most of all unrealistic. because it's geniticly hard wired in us to surivive and pass on our genes to the next generation. If we go instinct it will because we blown the s*** out our selves in a nuclear world war. and what this guy is talking about just plain wacko he really needs to insatutionalized. because i'm thinking that he hit the Marry Jane a little too hard.

but i admit it's pretty funny, viewing it as a joke

Hmmm. Sounds cool. Too bad its never going to work.

I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

I certainly plan on having children. Not too many, but I do intend to have them. And you know what? Maybe we'll be socially responsible.

I think I agree

Renorei wrote:I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

Aye.

They seem to forget that they are quite capable of fixing the enviroment without lying down and dying.

What is it with the anti-human spirits everywere? A lot of people forget that they actually ARE humans themselfs.

F*cking retards.

Renorei wrote:I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

I certainly plan on having children. Not too many, but I do intend to have them. And you know what? Maybe we'll be socially responsible.

You really are hilariously hypocrite.

Morkulv wrote:

Renorei wrote:I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

I certainly plan on having children. Not too many, but I do intend to have them. And you know what? Maybe we'll be socially responsible.

You really are hilariously hypocrite.

WTF? How is anything I said in that post hypocritical?



These people don't seem to realize that humanity doesn't have to cease to exist for the world to get better. We can take steps to reverse the damage we've done. There's some things we'll never correct, such as the extinctions of various animals, but I believe that we can reverse most of the damage we've done.

Not having any children isn't the way to save the world. Sure, it is ONE way that you can reduce humanity's impact on the world, but it's not a way that I'm going to choose.

Someone has been smoking the funny stuff and has WAY too much time on their hands.

Renorei wrote:

Morkulv wrote:

Renorei wrote:I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

I certainly plan on having children. Not too many, but I do intend to have them. And you know what? Maybe we'll be socially responsible.

You really are hilariously hypocrite.

WTF? How is anything I said in that post hypocritical?



These people don't seem to realize that humanity doesn't have to cease to exist for the world to get better. We can take steps to reverse the damage we've done. There's some things we'll never correct, such as the extinctions of various animals, but I believe that we can reverse most of the damage we've done.

Not having any children isn't the way to save the world. Sure, it is ONE way that you can reduce humanity's impact on the world, but it's not a way that I'm going to choose.

Blablablabla... You were just hypocrite.

Morkulv wrote:

Renorei wrote:

Morkulv wrote:

Renorei wrote:I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

I certainly plan on having children. Not too many, but I do intend to have them. And you know what? Maybe we'll be socially responsible.

You really are hilariously hypocrite.

WTF? How is anything I said in that post hypocritical?



These people don't seem to realize that humanity doesn't have to cease to exist for the world to get better. We can take steps to reverse the damage we've done. There's some things we'll never correct, such as the extinctions of various animals, but I believe that we can reverse most of the damage we've done.

Not having any children isn't the way to save the world. Sure, it is ONE way that you can reduce humanity's impact on the world, but it's not a way that I'm going to choose.

Blablablabla... You were just hypocrite.

Explain HOW I was hypocritical...because I don't see it.

Leighlia wrote:Someone has been smoking the funny stuff and has WAY too much time on their hands.

I'm preaty sure they have been smoking something a little stronger then weed and hash.

There was certainly a time when I thought it would be a good idea. And, I do agree that we should temper our populating tendancies a bit and quit glorifying the "go forth and multiply" premise, for the sake of reducing competition amongst ourselves and depletion of resources, until we can get our act together.

And, I do seem to be, like it or not, a participant, since I don't want to have kids.

But, there's a fundamental flaw in this proposal.

There is no way to convince a significant number of people not to reproduce. It goes counter to a biologically induced motivational imperative. Those who do will tend to be educated intellectuals, and thus, it will make intelligence a selective reproductive disadvantage. In short, this plan, for all its good intention, at best will promote evolution of a stupider breed of human.

I myself will volenteer to be apart of it and not breed if its to help the earth

I'm not reading all of that. But judging from the first page I'd say this is a joke. A damn funny one at that.

I'd rather blow the entire planet to kingdom come, but really...that's just me.

What the...!
well, and I still see people that says "the Internet doesn't have all kind of stuff". Pff... if they know...

Ya know, I think if we all adopted children, this could be good. I havent really read much of the link except the top line but I think adopting...I think that's why nature put homosexual individuals on the planet. I'm hetereosexual, but still willing to adopt.

Homosexuals have to adopt to have children, right? Well not always, but most do. And people who can't have children adopt. And volunteers adopt. If we all adopted, imagine how much better life would be

Theres complications of course, as with everything. But yeah. Not to the extent humans fully go extinct, but to the extent there are no homeless kids, and a very slow birthrate. This would lower much pressure on the planet. I do a lot of environmental science units in Biology and a lot of this is extremely important.

Humans will die out soon enough anyway. War. Because of themselves. I'd like to adopt kids, myself.

Choosing to adopt is a very admirable thing. However, for some people such as myself, it's really not a good choice.

Like all urges that humanity has, some are stronger in some people, and virtually nonexistent in others. Take sex for example. Some people have practically no sex drive, or only a very small one. Others even go so far as to consider themselves asexual, not interested in anyone at all. Some, however, have rather high sex drives. Unfortunately, I am a part of the latter group...which conflicts with my choice to be abstinent in a very ironic way. Most people, however, are somewhere in the middle.

IMO, it's the same with the desire to have children. I have a friend who has never, at any point in her life (including early childhood, when nearly all girls seem to want babies), wanted to have kids. She simply doesn't have the desire for children. And, she's often stated that even if she did decide she wanted kids, she'd probably be totally ok with adopting.

Most people are somewhere in between, but at the upper extreme, you have people like me. I REALLY want kids, and I REALLY want them to be my own. Something inside of me compells me to believe that children that I conceive will somehow be 'better' than if they were someone else's. And, while I know this isn't true (heh, most of the time I don't even like myself, so it's illogical that I should feel that way), that ridiculous urge to have my own children still remains. I certainly don't want a large family, but I do very much want one or two children of my own. Also, I don't think it has much to do with my background, because ultimately having children was never something that was emphasized to me growing up. So...this is why, for someone like me, adoption probably wouldn't work.

The desire to have children and to have them be one's own children may or may not be genetically influenced...but I sincerely believe it is. After all, I'm a reasonably intelligent person, and adoption certainly seems like the logical choice. But, my mind continually rejects this option.

IMO, a solution to this problem might come in the near future. Scientists are now able to do gene therapy to alter a person's DNA. Perhaps...the gene which controls the desire to have kids could be identified and altered in newborns. It could become standard procedure, just like a vaccine, except this time it's against the strong desire to have children. Of course, it would be silly to eliminate the desire entirely, but if it were lessened substantially, a great many people might choose to live full and happy lives without having kids. It could lower the birth rate significantly.


Well...maybe...

Honestly, I don't really know. Human overpopulation is a big problem, but I think it has as much to do with human irresponsibility as it does with human numbers. I think an environmentally conscious family of eight could easily cause less of an environmental impact than a family of three, who aren't environmentally conscious.

All just IMO, of course.

I'd love to adopt kids myself, but I always wanted to have my own, so I have to agree with Renorei with that. I also don't see how her comment was hypocritical at all, unless you were pointing out that she made other suggestions which IMHO don't find hypocritical, but to each their ours..Also even if I do have my own, I might still adopt some just because I love kids and I want to have lots of them

Renorei wrote:I for one am ecstatic that it's never going to work. It's too bad that they don't think humanity should continue, but I disagree. Sure, we should probably encourage people to have less kids, but I don't think encouraging extinction is the way to go.

I certainly plan on having children. Not too many, but I do intend to have them. And you know what? Maybe we'll be socially responsible.

agreed. except for the having kids part, i'd hate to be a parent...

oh lord what will they think of next. I am going to start a farm that breads sheep with two heads. just for braging rights.

Again, I agree with the basic premise, except I don't think we should exterminate ourselves completely--just phase down our numbers until we can make our presence not so oppressive or destructive to the rest of the biosphere.

Indeed, I think the Earth would benefit from humanity in the long run. A few thousand years from now, we could be Earth's gametes, spreading life to lifeless worlds, seeding forests and wildlife from Earth onto previously barren worlds. That might help make up to her for a few centuries of pollution and a close brush with mass extinction by the late 21st century.

In the mean time, let's see if we can get archived the genome of the other 2.9 million species of life on Earth, while they're still around.

Actually Excelsia, most of the time if you born and raise a baby yourself, they WILL turn out better in life than if you just adopted one. AN adopted kid could be traumitized cause of something that happened in thier life, or they could feel unloved, or they could be so used to hanging around bad company and living with drugs thats its a part of them.

Woah... I went to the link "Why extinction? Wouldn't lowering our number be substantial?" Or something like that... Turns out that's what the members favor. Whereas the volunteers actually want full blown extinction. I support the members. Think about if people would stop mating for a generation or two STD's could be decreased or even eliminated. Not to mention with less humans poverty wouldn't be so common. In no way shape or form am I a supporter of extinction of ANY kind. Except small pox and AIDS And various other incurable bugs.