It seems I missed one of the world's largest ****-ups in the heap of ****-ups we've had.

There's this thing called infanticide that a few different places in the world are trying to legalize.

If you don't know about it, let me fill you in:

Let's say you live in a place that's to the brim with people, k? Lets say you aren't ready to have a kid, k? Let's just say you don't want a kid with brown eyes, k? Oh ****, you get preggy. Out pops your kid, and then guess what? You ****in kill it, k?

Yeah, that's pretty ****ed up, isn't it? Some real crazy people out there, right? It's a shame, right? No. It's more than a shame: It's a ****ing disillusionment. People in some MODERN COUNTRIES are trying to make this LEGAL. L E G A L.

Normally, I'd say there's no reason to kill a perfectly healthy baby. Even one with a birth defect. You can say "Oh, their life would be far worse than their death." but who the **** are you to say what any quality of life is better than death? I think suicide is one of the stupidest things in the world... but what's stupider? Deciding if suicide is right for someone ELSE.

But I can't say the above, because it's true.... we don't have enough room. If we were a natural normal species, far more of us would be killed off by preditors. It seems this baby killing business is Mother Nature's response to overpopulaton.

Dear World: STOP HUMPING. You wouldn't have to kill a baby if you hadn't followed your sex-drive, now would you?

You know what we should do? Make it TOTALLY legal, then after the woman has the baby, ask the parents: "Do you want to kill the baby?" The ones that say "Yes" get hit on the head with a sledgehammer, and the baby goes to the next family that comes into the hospital that can't seem to have a baby.

JediKirby

Or, at least use condoms.

It's legal in the Netherlands up to 28 days after birth

It's sick, and I'm pretty sure it is legalized in a couple countries.

[edit]Netherlands. That's right.[/edit]

That's civilized.

we are a natural normal species i believe, we may not look like it but we are. Just because we can learn faster then other species doesnt makes us unnormal just unique. we dont get killed off by predators cause were like the top in the food chain! duh :p


and also, we got plenty of room on this earth for more humans, think of russia and and the empty spots in texas!!

i dont believe this is mother natures way of restrictiong are population, if u think that something is wrong with u. no offence but thats my opinion. its called murder

Okay, you go live in the arctic tundra.

but we are the only species with a moral system. we are the only species that consciously chooses to upset the balance

It's not about space. It's about natural resources.

Beloved by Toni Morrison

I don't understand whats so hard to give your kid up for adoption. Don't kill the kid.

but what if the infant is some sort of crazy star wars cripple?

surely that should be legal.

Because the cultures that practice this are looking for a specific kind of child. For example, a family wants a boy to carry out the family line, but the first born is a girl. No one in that culture is going to want to apopt a girl because it's a girl. This happens a lot in India, where female babies are left for dead because it's better to have a male to carrying on the family name, but also because dowries are still very much a part of the culture.

Wow....that is just sick. As if abortion wasn't bad enough. They're murdering children after they enter the world and see light. For any doctor who performs such a cold and heartless task as killing an innocent, defenceless infant, I hope those memories haunt his/her nightmares for the rest of their life.

In most cases, the parents just abandon the baby somewhere.

It'd be better to just kill the parents beforehand. They can't do stupid mating nor take up space or resources, problem solved.

Female infanticide is very high in China due to the One Child law, but I believe it's still illegal and that they have these people that live in the neighborhoods to make sure the parents don't kill their female child (and well, don't have another one and lots of other things too...but one of their jobs is to watch out for infanticide.)

...That's all I had to contribute. I'd rather not get myself worked up.

They should just make china have a two-child law instead. The population would still get smaller, just not as fast.

You're crazy if you think Texas is empty. Ever heard of Houston? Dallas/Fort Worth? Austin? San Antonio? Not to mention the world is not simply comprised of living space. There has to be space to grow food to feed all these damn people.

kirby, I'm not condoning it, but you have no idea what it's like to live in a vastly overpopulated area, and neither do I.

Except that population isn't the root of the problem.

Wrong.

Amazing that people find infanticide appalling yet they still think a mother has the right to abort her child...

THIS THREAD HAS BEEN OFFICIAL DERAILED BY *SAVAGEX*

Correlation, not causation.

Then I find it odd you can make a statement like




To me, that's just common sense. (and space and natural resources are inseparably connected.. they're pretty much the same thing. Decrease population density and you won't be so strapped for resources)

Thank you Captain Obvious.

i see a lot of negative response, but i have yet to see anything but mere moralizing. Not that i condone infanticide, but utalitarianism would and does back this occurence as well as ethical egoism. So that's two ways of justifying it, fully backed up, and wrapped in a package for you're enjoyment. Now some one make an intellegent arguement to suport that it's wrong.

*Ehics 101 at work*

It's not wrong. Nothing is.

Would it not be "better" to allowing genetic selection if these people are so determined to have their blue eyed boy? They at least would go leaving them on street corners. Though if China just want baby boys, how do they expect to have grandchildren...

This is true, and even happens in the modern cities. Although, the potential parents use sonograms to find out the gender of the baby, and then have an abortion. It's actually illegal in New Delhi for a doctor to tell parents the gender of a baby before the birth, because people abort all the girls.

That's precisely why in South Korea they've banned the pre-natal sex test, because so many female foetuses (foeti?) were being aborted. The male-female balance in the younger generations is out of whack over there and in a few years we're probably going to see a lot of Korean women holding a fair amount of power in their country!



That varies across China. In some rural areas families are allowed to have a second child if the first was female. In other areas you can have more children if you can afford to pay off the local official. There are also isolated cases where the officials themselves have taken new-born second children from their families and killed them.



Utilitarianism is all about justifying any action that increases the net happiness of the population. It can therefore also be used to justify slavery, torture, murder and rape as long as the person/people doing it gain more pleasure/benefit out of it than the victim suffers. It's also wholely impractical to use a system that tries to scientifically measure a subjective quality such as happiness.
Infanticide punishes the innocent, and allows the people contributing to the problem to continue to do so. Surely utilitarianism would argue that it is more beneficial to just kill one or both of the parents rather than allow infanticide to possibly be repeated and accepted by the community?

If they want to do population control, it should be started long before that baby is conceived. NOT after, or hell, before its born!

Using the exucse for killing a baby that the population doesn't need more people is ridiculous. It isn't the baby's fault it was born, it's the idiot parents.

[QUOTE=Vincent Valentine]They should just make china have a two-child law instead. The population would still get smaller, just not as fast.[/QUOTE]
No it wouldn't. If there were two children, for every two adults that bred, added to the fact that life spans are growing, the population would remain (assuming enough people just didn't reproduce all together) or would very slowly continue growing.

I think if people didn't think with their pants, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Eh, not for as far as I know. The current leading party, CDA, religious democrats, wouldn't quite agree with it either, you think?

What? That book was about racism and slavery.

That's not true, but very funny.

Doesn't America use more resources than pretty much everyone else combined? We have plenty of resources - some countries (America) just happen to waste more than others.

I don't think using and wasting are the same thing. You can take a square plot of land that's 40 miles by 40 miles and you wouldn't have to worry about finding a new place to dump trash in the U.S. for hundreds of years.

Or we could shoot it all into the sun, with all those nuclear waste barrels.

And the homeless. They get a free ride.