The "Voluntary Human Extinction Movement" Poll

[shemp]

As many of you are probably aware, there is an organization called "The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement" that encourages people to refuse to reproduce so as to eventually bring about the extinction of mankind. Personally, I think they are loopy, but I do believe that a large population of humans is a threat to all life on Earth, and that mankind in general needs to have a more aggressive population control program.

I have posted below an image I picked up from their website. I'm interested in where JREFers fall on their scale. I consider myself "Hip deep."

 

[thaiboxerken]

What's the birthrate in the USA now? What about Japan? How about the world?

 

[BPSCG]

I put "Knee Deep," but why is that in italics in the poll results?

 

[Nyarlathotep]

I put "Knee Deep," but why is that in italics in the poll results?

I think one's own picks are put in italics in polls. I noticed that myself recently.

 

[andyandy]

What's the birthrate in the USA now? What about Japan? How about the world?

well....Europe and japan are doing their bit to slow population growth (by not doing it ).........it's all those poor people in Africa and Asia that are to blame.....selfish buggers.....

 

[Rob Lister]

superficial but I agree with the hip deep. I disagreed at shallow so I had to go back up.

 

[AWPrime]

Voluntary Human Extinction won't work, there are always some that can only reproduce.

Forced Human Extinction, might work.

 

[Rob Lister]

Voluntary Human Extinction won't work, there are always some that can only reproduce.

Forced Human Extinction, might work.

Voluntary SELF human extinction...with incentives.

 

[BPSCG]

superficial but I agree with the hip deep. I disagreed at shallow so I had to go back up.

Rob, that didn't make sense. Read the instructions again.

First "deservie," now this. You been drinking and posting again?

 

[Rob Lister]

Rob, that didn't make sense. Read the instructions again.

First "deservie," now this. You been drinking and posting again?

???

Well, I generally don't post unless I'm drinking so the answer to your question is yes. I'm not sure what doesn't make sense though...other than the dypo...erm...type...erm typo

 

[GodMark2]

superficial but I agree with the hip deep. I disagreed at shallow so I had to go back up.

Rob, that didn't make sense. Read the instructions again.

First "deservie," now this. You been drinking and posting again?

I think what he's trying to say is: The statements aren't all about the same thing, and aren't properly put into a single 'straight line' comparison.

For instance, I agree that "Wilderness has a right to exist for it's own sake" but not that "The planet would be better off with fewer people on it"

They (the creators of this 'scale') are trying to simplify a complex issue and thus create inconsistencies.

 

[I less than three logic]

Can we sign others up?

If forced, I think I could come up with a list of people I don’t think should breed.

 

[Rob Lister]

For instance, I agree that "Wilderness has a right to exist for it's own sake" but not that "The planet would be better off with fewer people on it"

AH! An argument between we friends.

I disagree that "Wilderness has a right to exist for it's own sake".

Let's keep it nice though. I don't feel like fighting. Heck, tonight I don't even feel like being logical or even providing evidence. If you accept my terms, we should should debate this issue...using standard polite cross-inquiries rules.

1) I submit that the planet doesn't give a rat's @ss how many people are on it but WE (being people of a continuing nature) may be better off with fewer people on it. The Planet is an inanimate object and cannot enjoy being better or worse off...therefore it doesn't matter.

2) Rights are nonsense unless defined. I define a right as an ability that that I can, by hook, crook or influence enforce to any degree whatsoever. The more I can enforce it, the more of a right it becomes.

If you dis me I'll cry and maybe not respond.

 

[jj]

Well, these people who wish that people were off the earth now, ethically speaking, only have one option, really.

 

[Rob Lister]

Well, these people who wish that people were off the earth now, ethically speaking, only have one option, really.

I disagree. There is more than one option.

1) Off others (ethics is subjective)
2) Off others then yourself (probably more in line with your ethics and mine...strictly but not literally speaking
4) Off yourself (Even more in line)
5) Don't have kids (guilty x3 for me)
6) Lobby government to force 5 (less in line with ethics)
7) Lobby government to encourage 5 (completely in line with my ethics but maybe not yours or others)
8) Reserved for growth.

 

[jj]

I disagree. There is more than one option.

1) Off others (ethics is subjective)
2) Off others then yourself (probably more in line with your ethics and mine...strictly but not literally speaking
4) Off yourself (Even more in line)
5) Don't have kids (guilty x3 for me)
6) Lobby government to force 5 (less in line with ethics)
7) Lobby government to encourage 5 (completely in line with my ethics but maybe not yours or others)
8) Reserved for growth.

Well, for these people I was thinking of option 5 of yours.
Option 4 is questionable for those with some mythical backgrounds. 1,2 don't fly at all. 6 is right out. 7? Well, that's free speech. They get to lobby, I get to guffaw back.

Btw, what's option 3?

 

[Art Vandelay]

9) Forcibly sterilize people
10) Dump contraceptives into the water supply
11) Perform unwanted abortions
12) Burn down fertility clinics

I disagree with "Wilderness has a right to exist for it's own sake" because I don't think that inanimate objects have rights, and I don't like bad grammar.

 

[Unnamed]

Well, for these people I was thinking of option 5 of yours.
Option 4 is questionable for those with some mythical backgrounds. 1,2 don't fly at all. 6 is right out. 7? Well, that's free speech. They get to lobby, I get to guffaw back.

Btw, what's option 3?

Given 1, 2 and 4, it's obviously "Off yourself, then others". There are practical issues with that, but one could use a time bomb...

 

[Huntster]

Anybody out there read "Death of the West" by Pat Buchanan?

 

[David Swidler]

well....Europe and japan are doing their bit to slow population growth (by not doing it ).........it's all those poor people in Africa and Asia that are to blame.....selfish buggers.....

Just the opposite, I would think. I mean, I'm given to understand that buggery does not, in fact, lead to reproduction.....