The right to breed

[J.W. Frogen]

Don't blame me, I fuck like a rabbit but I balance it with lazy sperm.

[Outlaw Yogi]

It'd be one of your better conspiracy theory, Hopster, but unfortunately the "powers that be" arn't on the population control bandwagon... yet

No theory boxy. Soy beans contain numerous carcinogens and are extremely high in phytic acid which acts as an anti-nutrient because it prevents the uptake of nutrients of other foods. It is also very good at sterylising just about anything that consumes enough of it. Soy flour has been used as an effective poison for possums and rabbits in NZ since 1993. In Qld the fire and erradification program uses corn kernels soaked in soy oil to sterylise fire ants.
Whether or not its wide spread use is conspiracy or not is anyones guess, but it is an extremely cheap poison to grow.
Its phyto-estrogen content feminises males and sterylises females. It's no big secret, the info is very easy to find.
Noticed how warning about soy content or possible soy content are quite common on so many food items these days?
Well there's a very good reason, food manufacturers haven't got time to ferment their soy beans for 2 years, so the toxins remain.
Actually I love how veg nazis get offended when mentioning the toxicity of their sacred bean.
If it was upto me they wouldn't be allowed to eat anything else, so heaps of non functional people would simply get sick and die.

I also love how people claim there are no conspiracies in a world of conspiracy.
Companies conspire to out do their competitors.
Political parties conspire to replace their opponents in government.
Churches conspire to discredit competing churches and/or religions.
EVERYONE conspires in one way or another, and those who claim there are no conspiracies generally have the most to hide.

EDIT ADDITION - I think vegetarians shouldn't be allowed to breed because they're mentally defective child abusers. Fortunately nature agrees with me and lots of vegetarians have fertility problems, and especially so if they're Tofu or soy milk consumers.
When I was in the Greens the Qld Greens forum moderator and his missus were strict vegos, who didn' believe soy products are toxic or sterylise and gave me looks at State Council meetings that'd kill a brown dog. Anyway this couple were infertile, so adopted 2 african kids. Poor little buggers will now have their health destroyed by these veg nazi psychotics.
I also know a woman who developed sugar diabetes as a result of consuming lots of soy sauce.

So I say if you want to be a low labido soft cock or have kids with learning disabilities or deformed penises, or just become effectively sterylised, by all means consume as much unfermented soy products as you can.

[Super Nova]

I like this topic.

FOR:
We need genetic diversity for the long term survival of human kind. If the right to bred was based on any basis that reduced diversity it would probably be a bad thing.

Also we need serfs in the future, who will do all the manual labour.

AGAINST:
Too many people are breeding and they are at the lower end of the inteligence pool with no way to feed or educate their family. The smart people are breeding at a much slower rate so the maths indicate the world on average is getting dumber. This needs to be corrected if we are ever going to tbe the Star Trek society we should evolve to be.

[boxy]

The right to breed wasn't "given" to promote diversity, it simply follows on from the rights people have to self determination. Genetic diversity is a non issue here. Inbreeding is actually one of the few restrictions on who you can legally have a baby with.

Breeding serfs... yes, that, and also breeding more believers. Religions push for their members to breed, because being born into a devout religious family means a higher probability of defaulting to the parents belief system. We can definitely do without more believers... but workers? I don't know. What happened to the dream future, where manual labour was handled via technology? Is it not still coming? We don't really need the people to do work, we need them to tax. Give them unproductive jobs (selling cellphone packages and cheap kitchenware), and tax them.

Wouldn't it be more environmentally friendly to have less middle/lower income people to tax, and tax the bejessus out of the multi-billion dollar corporations?

[Super Nova]

Wouldn't it be more environmentally friendly to have less middle/lower income people to tax, and tax the bejessus out of the multi-billion dollar corporations?

Now that is an idea. It would need to be done on a worldwide basis or they will just move countries leaving the countries they have left with no workers.

It gets counters by the "business is the real wealth creators" argument and that they should not be taxed more than the people. also there has been a ruling in the US that a corporation is the same as a person when it comes to donations... so this is going to make this difficult.

[boxy]

http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_ridley_wh ... e_sex.html

A huge download, but an interesting talk on the benefits of a high/cooperative population level to technology.

We have the option to continue on the high population path, but the technology needs to be used to find cleaner ways of progressing, rather than just the path of least resistance (polluting until it causes a significant problem for everyone). And we seem to be moving that way.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Some might argue this belongs in the water right thread, but I digress.

Human impact on world's rivers 'threatens water security of 5 billion'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... r-security

[Outlaw Yogi]

Only breed smart babies: Ethicist
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/only ... 6005179171

[boxy]

Interesting article, but seems to raise more questions than it answers. It's very judgemental about the "negative" aspects of low IQ (educational drop out rates, illegitimatacy) but only brushes over the negatives associated with high IQ (mental illness).

[Outlaw Yogi]

Thus my lack of comment ... can't say I'd be willing to take a position either way.