Comments on: John Holdren gets creepier all the time

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:43:36 +0000

Remind me again who the religious fundamentalists that are dangerous to American society are at? And no, it ain’t the Christians. And it ain;t Islam either.

By: Quisp

Quisp — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:33:25 +0000

Book, did you notice Peter Singer's article in the NYT explaining why health care rationing is a good thing (because some folks' lives just aren't worth all that money)?

By: Top Style Blog :) » John Holdren gets creepier all the time

Top Style Blog :) » John Holdren gets creepier all the time — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 06:39:58 +0000

[...] the rest here: John Holdren gets creepier all the time Wednesday, July 15th, 2009 at 22:53 Tags: 1950s, barack-obama-, calling-for, cited-as-his, [...]

By: What I’m Doing: About to Quit the News (!) « Fastidious

What I’m Doing: About to Quit the News (!) « Fastidious — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:53:37 +0000

[...] dollars for college students. The “Fairness” Doctrine might make a return. Those czars are getting weirder by the day. The elites are still pounding Palin for being an uppity woman without the proper degrees. [...]

By: Danny Lemieux

Danny Lemieux — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:07:18 +0000

I think that it is interesting that now the Liberal/Left fascists are in power, they feel comfortable enough to let the mask slip. This is why the loathsome 20th Century fascist ideas like eugenics (Holdren, Ginsburg) and world governance (Gore) are crawling out from under the rocks where they have been hidden all this time. It will be interesting to see what else emerges.

Unfortunately, to recognize evil for what it is, you first have to believe that evil exists.

By: Mike Devx

Mike Devx — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:34:07 +0000

I’m no Statist, but it’s time for me to make an exception.

I hereby call for a World Law to be passed that states that every person who advocates forced constraints on human endeavors be forced themselves to live precisely by what they say.

Every advocate of sterilization should be sterilized. It’s only fair that they lead the way, a shining example for the rest of us to follow.

So, Prince Chawles, consumerism is killing the planet, and we must constrain our use of resources, or we shall all be dead within ten years? Thank you, for leading the way. All advocates of restrictions on human endeavors to fight global warming shall now be held to the following standards, or be thrown into prison. And we’ll start with YOU. And these conditions below are generous!
- No more than 3000 sq feet of living space for you! You certainly don’t need to be walking the halls of those palaces! Such a waste of space that could be put to use for the benefits of all humanity.
- No limousines
- No more than two airline trips per year
- Average no more than $400 of energy use per month in any year
- You may eat no more than one pound of meat per week. You may average no more than 2000 calories per day in any week. No bread pudding for you! “Could we have kippers for breakfast, mummie dear, mummie dear?” “No! Go to your room!”
- Since you’re white, no more than two children for you. We must make room for those of color, who have been oppressed by the evil white race for all of history.

Why shouldn’t they be held to the standards they advocate for? Gov. Mark Sanford advocated constantly for marriage and sex inside marriage only. He was overwhelmed by a storm of criticism when he violated his own standards. I expect exactly the same for these folks. They should be forced to live precisely by the standards they advocate.

If I were a Statist, that is…

By: kali

kali — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:04:29 +0000

Whenever I hear griping about overcrowding, about how there’s too many people for poor, suffering Mother Gaia to tolerate, the temptation is to say “You first . . .”

It’s a doctrine of complete selfishness, of the belief that your share would be bigger if it didn’t have to be passed around so many other people.

By: suek

suek — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:14:25 +0000

You know…I’ve done animal breeding. The idea of human eugenics appeals to me in many ways. As someone said, though – just because you _can_ doesn’t mean you _should_.

Besides, we choose certain characteristics for breeding. We have meat breeds, wool breeds, dairy breeds, racing breeds, stock working breeds, endurance breeds – and look at dogs! The list is endless. The qualities that one can select for are almost endless. You can’t breed for a characteristic that doesn’t already exist – so all of these desirable characteristics exist in the various animals in a natural unselected state.

Now…what characteristics shall we choose for human selection? How do we know that what we choose today will be desirable in the future? If you choose certain characteristics, you also can have the result of selecting _against_ other characteristics – even eliminating them. What if you eliminate some characteristic only to find that it had some necessary component for existence at a future date?

How can those who believe so strongly in Darwin’s Theory of survival of the fittest think that they can replace the natural forces that they themselves find most admirable? The utter gall of it is almost unbelievable.

They really do think they are god-like.