Quote:
Originally Posted by WarChild
So Libertine, I take it then you live on only the bare essentials of life so that you can send every extra penny you can come by to help starving children in developing nations?
Oh, wait, what's that? You like to have some luxuries in your life? Well then you're not doing everything in your power to help the starving children! Are you selfish or something?
|
Of course I'm selfish. Moreover, I'm a cynical, nihilistic misanthropist.
I didn't post here to guilt you all into donating money to impoverished children, I posted here to utter my bafflement at the self-congratulating circle jerk in this thread.
Dozens of imbeciles flocking together to spend relatively huge amounts of resources on taking care of a dog, while billions of humans and animals in the world are suffering, thousands of which could be helped with those same resources. And then, they actually praise each other for their selflessness and generosity.
The image is of an almost surreal beauty, so wondrously ludicrous, yet at the same time so descriptive of human morality, that I can't help but marvel at the utter madness mankind.
And as if the thought of Loryn sitting behind her computer, tears in her eyes, overwhelmed by emotion as she rescues a dog, possibly still full from the roast beef sandwich she had for lunch (please, let it be so!) wasn't enough, you come in. Professing beliefs that would make Hitler's chest fill with joy, backed up by people who proudly proclaim that they value the life of a single kitten over that of dozens of children.
It's a thing of beauty, most certainly. A twisted sort of beauty, perhaps, but beauty no less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarChild
The fact of the matter is those starving children, if they grow up, will continue a pattern of failure known as tribalism. The only thing they will ever produce is more disease and more starving children. Or, if they're lucky, they'll find Islam and find a nice junjaweed rape gang to call a family of their own.
Sorry, I'm a survival of the fittest type of guy. I don't question why or how or by what strike of luck I happened to land amongst the strong. I simply continue the natural order of things.
If anything, we should take a page from animal medicine and start an euthanasia program amongst humans.
|
Survival of the fittest does not mean what you think it does.
But that aside, you did not land among the strong, you landed among the lucky. Of course, if you decide to take survival of the luckiest as your moral code, who am I to question you?
Although I have no choice but to question just how firm you are in your beliefs. Those African children happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Therefore, according to you, they deserve to die.
Chances are that one day, one of your loved ones - maybe one of your own children? - will be in the wrong place at the wrong time as well. So when your daughter happens to find herself sharing a spot on a sidewalk with 2000 lbs of twisted metal driven there by a drunken idiot, will you chalk it up to survival of the luckiest?
Will you respect the choice of the passers-by, who decide that to take care of her bleeding body would merely continue a pattern of failure known as wasting resources on lost causes unlikely to ever contribute something meaningful to society again?
Know what? I bet you would. You seem like the straight-talking, stand-up kind of guy who stands by his principles no matter what
