The Spartan Way

MattCameronKicksButt wrote:

I guess it depends on your idea of weak I suppose. Those people you described may not be physically weak but obviously menatally weak. I'm not sure about a culling of those people though, anymore than people who are severly physically disabled.

Still though... *gulp* I understand what the thread starter's saying a bit. If (heaven forbid)! my child was terminally ill and couldn't communicate how he felt, it would be up to me and my partner as adults closest to him, to try and decide what's best for him. I really think if someone can't take responsibilty for themselves, then someone else should. The alternative is that, that person leads a life feeling alone with people around them leaving them there to quite possibly suffer. It's a tough one IMO

jamie uk wrote:

Yes, but surely in these extreme cases, regardless of your outlook on it, there is no real strain on a strong economy...and that was the main point made I thought, rather than the humanitarian point you make...which is a different case really.
The people I speak of are over running parts of our country, and I don't suggest they are culled, sheesh. I think the welfare state as an option should be phased out, people should realise that they need to fend for themselves, to turn a buck, do an honest days work...
There's far too many making the choice not to contribute, and it shouldn't be a choice. The welfare state was put in place to help people who needed it, not for scrounging little arseholes to live in free houses and get free milk for their kids, and free bus rides to school, and free uniforms for school and free lunches at school, while they sit on their arse and watch Jeremy Kyle and smoke fags at £5 a packet....scroungers is our problem Kelly, and people who are too leniant with them. They need a kick up the arse and go without for a while.

TrixieCat wrote:

You would have to go in and purge the whole system and start from scratch. In the meantime you would hurt those that really do need it and only use it as a stepping stone to get their life back in order.
I always find myself singing that Everlast song during discussions like this....god forbid you ever have to walk a mile in her shoes, then you really might know what it's like to have to choose.
Not directed at you jamie...just sayin..

jamie uk wrote:

I understand the point, but if you only saw the extent of the abuse of our system here you would understand mine. There is far too easy a route for people to take, I'm not saying starve people or kick them on to the streets. I'm saying instead of money they should get food tokens, make sure they don't spend their allowance on booze and fags and dvd's and cheap jewellery and sportswear. Let them find out that working brings rewards, even if the rewards are basic.

westsidepie wrote:

I agree that overpopulation is a problem. That is why my wife and I decided to only have two children. However, you generalized the Spartan code. The Spartan's only euthanized male babies they believed could not be raised to be soldiers. That is, they believed the babies would not meet the physical code necessary to form a phalanx. Remember, there was one set of parents who spared their child. When Lionitus met him, he was perfectly capable of taking care of himself. However, he wanted to fight with the 300. Lionitus asked him to raise his shield arm. Of course, because of his deformity, he could not raise it to the proper height to form the phalanx. Lionitus did not kill him on sight for his deformity. He offered to let him bring water or offer some other service to the troops. Lionitus was correct to not let him join the battle, because the hole in the phalanx would jeopardize the safety of all the men. Frankly, why single out this type of handicap? I have an I.Q of 150. Why not develop a gene test that would be an indicator of I.Q., and eliminate all fetuses with an I.Q. of 140 or less. I certainly feel from an economic point of people of less intelligence cost me way more than physically handicapped people. Why bother educating people who will never be able learn very well? Also, old people cost the medical system way more when doctors go to enormous lengths to preserve a life for another week. Unfortunately, this is the way the Nazis rationalized genocide, except they used racial inferiority, which is a blanket term for all these types of dividers. I think we are all in this together, and we all sink or rise together. We are all dependent on each other as well. Only modern society give us the illusion that we are islands and self sufficient. You depend on many people to provide you with the things you need to survive. What if one day they all decided that you were no longer worthy of their services? I do think overpopulation is a problem, a serious problem, but it is not one that can really be fixed by quick solutions that ultimately degrade us all. Like I said, after two kids, my wife and I made sure we would not have any more. Also, euthanizing weak babies may be a quick fix, but it does nothing to address the ignorance that leads to overpopulation in the first place, nor does it address the social inequalities that underly how we care for everyone in a society. Just my .02.