Tribal Killing of 'Disabled' Babies

2007-07-31 04:12:17

#1

Gillenator: Evils Bammed Sex Machine; +129|6835|Evilsville

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.athe … b9d6bd6f5e

What do you think?
Are we right to interfere, or just let those tribes be who they are. It is part of their culture after all.
Who are we to interfere.

Discuss!

2007-07-31 04:14:55

#2

Adams_BJ: Russian warship, go fuck yourself; +2,055|7063|Little Bentcock

Let them do it, why should we interfere?

2007-07-31 04:15:51

#3

Buckles: Cheeky Keen; +329|6997|Kent, UK

It's their culture. People may not like it but that's how it is, I'm afraid.

They don't come to us telling us to kill all our unwanted babies or the disabled ones etc. People should leave them alone

2007-07-31 04:17:43

#4

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6814|Kyiv, Ukraine

Very interesting ethical dilemma...leaves a few options:

1) Totally interfere, they live on a nations soil and the law should apply equally.
2) Respect their customs, but give them the means to practice them humanely.
3) Leave well enough alone and hope they develop some ethics.
4) Force convert them to modern liberalism, destroying their happy culture in the process.

I'm at a loss to the right answer on this...I'll keep thinking.

2007-07-31 04:18:53

#5

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7157

That is so like Sparta. Survival of the fittest I guess.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2007-07-31 04:18:58

#6

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6731|Éire

The fact of the matter is there's a whole lot of horrible shit going on around the world and we couldn't possibly intervene in every situation. That's life, eventually these tribes may become enlightened and change their ways, maybe not? We have abortion here in the Western world and in theory it's just as horrible, how would we feel if some nation came along and told us to change our ways? We should only deal with situations that effect our own nation/lives. In extreme situations intervention may be called for but on the whole we're better off letting people learn from their own mistakes otherwise nothing is learned.

2007-07-31 04:21:43

#7

[pt] KEIOS: srs bsns; +231|7094|pimelteror.de

educate them!

2007-07-31 04:26:39

#8

Flecco: iPod is broken.; +1,048|7106|NT, like Mick Dundee

Oh no, when 'tribal' people do it it's allowed, but if Germans do it suddenly they are everybody's worst enemy and can be labelled Nazis...

[/sarcasm]

Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.

2007-07-31 04:45:45

#9

Buckles: Cheeky Keen; +329|6997|Kent, UK

Flecco wrote:
Oh no, when 'tribal' people do it it's allowed, but if Germans do it suddenly they are everybody's worst enemy and can be labelled Nazis...

[/sarcasm]

difference being these guys aren't trying Eugenics. They're not trying to breed a perfect race of people to take over the world with. Their reasons for doing this (I guess) are much simpler, such as it might be so they don't have to look after the disabled/lame because if they had to then they wouldn't be able to hunt etc as effectively. And if they had too many of one gender, then breeding becomes difficult.

2007-07-31 04:45:53

#10

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|7022|SE London

Giving natural selection a helping hand.

2007-07-31 05:08:37

#11

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6814|Kyiv, Ukraine

I guess the most common sense option would be to make a set of rules and let the religious folks play:

- They may freely accept babies from tribal members for the purpose of putting them up for adoption, but may not pay or trade anything for the kids. They may not either sell the kids or charge fees for the service on the receiving end.

- If the tribal members insist on killing the kids, they may provide a humane means to do so on a case by case basis. No giving them a box full of syringes with crap and saying "have fun, come back for more".

Let private organizations have at it, set one regulator up from the Brazillian government to spot check them, and its done. Yes, it's a compromise solution, but what else can be done?

2007-07-31 05:12:43

#12

RedTwizzler: I do it for the lulz.; +124|6978|Chicago

Buckles wrote:
Flecco wrote:
Oh no, when 'tribal' people do it it's allowed, but if Germans do it suddenly they are everybody's worst enemy and can be labelled Nazis...

[/sarcasm]
difference being these guys aren't trying Eugenics. They're not trying to breed a perfect race of people to take over the world with. Their reasons for doing this (I guess) are much simpler, such as it might be so they don't have to look after the disabled/lame because if they had to then they wouldn't be able to hunt etc as effectively. And if they had too many of one gender, then breeding becomes difficult.

Nor did they invade Poland.

Maybe I should make a thread about this, but do you think that if Germany hadn't expanded, and had kept the holocaust within their borders, the Allies would have reacted?

EDIT: For the record, I just thought this question up - I'm not trying to be America-bashing or whatever.

Last edited by RedTwizzler (2007-07-31 05:13:39)

2007-07-31 05:15:31

#13

BALTINS: ಠ_ಠ; +37|6927|Latvia

RedTwizzler wrote:
Buckles wrote:
Flecco wrote:
Oh no, when 'tribal' people do it it's allowed, but if Germans do it suddenly they are everybody's worst enemy and can be labelled Nazis...

[/sarcasm]
difference being these guys aren't trying Eugenics. They're not trying to breed a perfect race of people to take over the world with. Their reasons for doing this (I guess) are much simpler, such as it might be so they don't have to look after the disabled/lame because if they had to then they wouldn't be able to hunt etc as effectively. And if they had too many of one gender, then breeding becomes difficult.
Nor did they invade Poland.

BUT they could invade France.. so..

2007-07-31 05:16:38

#14

Buckles: Cheeky Keen; +329|6997|Kent, UK

RedTwizzler wrote:
Buckles wrote:
Flecco wrote:
Oh no, when 'tribal' people do it it's allowed, but if Germans do it suddenly they are everybody's worst enemy and can be labelled Nazis...

[/sarcasm]
difference being these guys aren't trying Eugenics. They're not trying to breed a perfect race of people to take over the world with. Their reasons for doing this (I guess) are much simpler, such as it might be so they don't have to look after the disabled/lame because if they had to then they wouldn't be able to hunt etc as effectively. And if they had too many of one gender, then breeding becomes difficult.
Nor did they invade Poland.

Maybe I should make a thread about this, but do you think that if Germany hadn't expanded, and had kept the holocaust within their borders, the Allies would have reacted?

EDIT: For the record, I just thought this question up - I'm not trying to be America-bashing or whatever.

That's an excellent question. In hindsight, i'd actually say no, the wouldn't have done anything. At least not as quickly as they did.

2007-07-31 05:27:13

#15

herrr_smity: Member; +156|7069|space command ur anus

Bertster7 wrote:
Giving natural selection a helping hand.

word

2007-07-31 05:28:38

#16

Gillenator: Evils Bammed Sex Machine; +129|6835|Evilsville

Buckles wrote:
RedTwizzler wrote:
Buckles wrote:

difference being these guys aren't trying Eugenics. They're not trying to breed a perfect race of people to take over the world with. Their reasons for doing this (I guess) are much simpler, such as it might be so they don't have to look after the disabled/lame because if they had to then they wouldn't be able to hunt etc as effectively. And if they had too many of one gender, then breeding becomes difficult.
Nor did they invade Poland.

Maybe I should make a thread about this, but do you think that if Germany hadn't expanded, and had kept the holocaust within their borders, the Allies would have reacted?

EDIT: For the record, I just thought this question up - I'm not trying to be America-bashing or whatever.
That's an excellent question. In hindsight, i'd actually say no, the wouldn't have done anything. At least not as quickly as they did.

What do you mean, quickly. Allies were slow as shit in reacting upon German agression.

2007-07-31 06:54:14

#17

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7177|Salt Lake City

There is a big difference between this and what the Nazis did to the Jews. They exterminated completely healthy, intelligent people simply because they were Jews. Now, as cruel as this may sound, in nature natural selection will take out the weak/disabled. It happens in the animal kingdom on a daily basis. Now I realize that is like comparing this group of people to animals, but they are living in the same manner their ancestors have for thousands of years, and in most ways have no more of an understanding of what humans have learned than their earliest ancestors.

2007-07-31 06:56:03

#18

Buckles: Cheeky Keen; +329|6997|Kent, UK

Gillenator wrote:
What do you mean, quickly. Allies were slow as shit in reacting upon German agression.

Yeah, and they would have been even slower if germany hadn't moved outside it's own borders. Notice, i used a COMPARATIVE verb in my statement

2007-07-31 07:09:15

#19

David.P: Banned; +649|6715

Theres times when we should respect peoples culture and theres times when we should eliminate it from the face of this earth! Hell yeah interfere!
I dont care what you say the defense of innocent life is the biggest priority the UN should have not who's turn is it next to bring the rackets and shuttlecock, I wonder if this was a western government doing this WWHD?

2007-07-31 07:12:13

#20

GorillaTicTacs: Member; +231|6814|Kyiv, Ukraine

Might I suggest a modest proposal?

2007-07-31 07:26:17

#21

Kommander_Kale: Genetically Modified; +19|6856|Melbourne, Australia

Bertster7 wrote:
Giving natural selection a helping hand.

The Ancient Greeks left malformed kids at the bottom of the nearest mountain. Less healthcare, vast amounts of money spent otherwise that would be on supporting an invalid throughout their entire life. But that's just an extension of the 'how late is too late to have an abortion' debate.

2007-07-31 07:31:28

#22

Villain{NY}: Banned; +44|6785|New York

Is there oil under their land? If not then who cares.

2007-07-31 08:29:14

#23

topal63: . . .; +533|7159

Kommander_Kale wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Giving natural selection a helping hand.
;)
The Ancient Greeks left malformed kids at the bottom of the nearest mountain. Less healthcare, vast amounts of money spent otherwise that would be on supporting an invalid throughout their entire life. But that's just an extension of the 'how late is too late to have an abortion' debate.

Same as Sparta.

Anyways, leave them alone.

The main reasons to leave them alone is:
1.) You don't live on the edge of nature, within their culture.

2.) In a harsher lifestyle, that must hunt & gather and compete in nature, they are practicing an age old custom. And that is: they are not going to invest all the resources of the culture into an organism (a non-person from their perspective, and certainly not a fully formed contributing adult by anyone's standard) that they deem unfit to be part of it.

3.) In the womb, out of the womb a few months later - whatever. It is OK to have abortions in a liberal culture, but not infanticide in more primitive/harsher living in/with nature culture. Hypocrisy.

4.) Civilizing the natives to your relative arbitrary standards is absurd. It as as absurd as the sentimental empathy evoked in people when they see a gray whale baby - brutally killed by a pack of killer whales (orcas).

5.) Reduction of cultural diversity will be the end product. As once you step in, there will be no end. The assistance will start out as the application of our relative moral standard and end with subsistence & annihilation of the culture - as it has in basically every other Western interaction with a Native population.

6.) There are far more important issues to focus on. Fix your own society first.

Last edited by topal63 (2007-07-31 09:26:07)

2007-07-31 08:32:55

#24

Bubbalo: The Lizzard; +541|7002

David.P wrote:
Theres times when we should respect peoples culture and theres times when we should eliminate it from the face of this earth! Hell yeah interfere!
I dont care what you say the defense of innocent life is the biggest priority the UN should have not who's turn is it next to bring the rackets and shuttlecock, I wonder if this was a western government doing this WWHD?

So, you're going to stop them killing their children by killing them all?

Is this another joke? Because if it is, you need to work on your joke-making some more.

2007-07-31 08:34:49

#25

TheDarkRaven: ATG's First Disciple; +263|7065|Birmingham, UK

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
That is so like Sparta. Survival of the fittest I guess.

You been watching 300? That's not strictly true...

EDIT: They were often adopted by people not of Sparta.

Last edited by TheDarkRaven (2007-07-31 08:35:49)

BF2S Forums Tribal Killing of 'Disabled' Babies

Flecco wrote:

Buckles wrote:

Flecco wrote:

RedTwizzler wrote:

Buckles wrote:

Flecco wrote:

RedTwizzler wrote:

Buckles wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Buckles wrote:

RedTwizzler wrote:

Buckles wrote:

Gillenator wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Kommander_Kale wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

David.P wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Board footer