Why is it okay to be a serial breeder, but not a serial killer?

If life is life and nothing more or less, and taking life is a crime, then why isn't creating life a crime?

What makes a serial breeder more acceptable than a serial killer?  Is it because they buy their victim a drink first?  And, if so, then just what kind of society is it that we live in?


You may discuss.

This is an interesting point of view I must say. I mean... I actually think having children should be legally controlled a bit... There's no room on this freakin' planet!

Oh, the bliss of the little bundle of joy and the joyous sounds of the pitter patter of tiny feet.  All the old cliches, but when it comes down to it not everyone who has 'em wants 'em.  So I agree, it would be better if there was some kind of licensing thingy, cause you need one to own a dog. 

Ummmm, now the serial killer thing is pretty bad, haven't got much of a view on this but I hope they can cure that malady one day before they turn into one, genetic engineering, but scientists would have to find the gene that causes them to become one, if there is one.  Cause its up in the air about the whole 'born killer or made killer'.   

Serials breeders do it for their own self interest.  Long before there was social security, there was the security of having children and grandchildren.  If you treated them right, they would take care of you in your old age.  If you didn't, you might not survive to reach old age.

"you gotta have a license to drive a car, a license to own a gun, heck, you gotta have to have license to catch a fish!  But any butt reamin' ->-bleeped-<- can be a father" - Todd Higgins, Parenthood 1989

Propogation of the species is the main driver behind human behavior, at least if you believe Charles Darwin.  In nature's eyes making more humans is good.  Killing your fellow humans, decreasing their number is bad.

Any questions?

You can't adopt a corpse

China has a law.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 11, 2008, 09:18:44 AM
China has a law.

Unfortunately it has its flaws I hear. Cause most want a male for an heir or whatever...

Quote from: lisagurl on May 11, 2008, 09:18:44 AM
China has a law.

Quote from: deviousxen on May 11, 2008, 10:30:25 AMUnfortunately it has its flaws I hear. Cause most want a male for an heir or whatever...

Jeesh, any of you girls read 1984?  Seen the movie, maybe?

Quote from: lisagurl on May 11, 2008, 09:18:44 AM
China has a law.

Yes. And China also puts people in prison for speaking freely.

I'm not so sure I'd support a law restricting who can have children. There were those people who insisted my wife and I didn't deserve to raise our own (only 2, relax) children, based on our ages at the times of their births.

True, not all people who have kids are capable of being good parents. And, there is the issue of overpopulation. But the idea that governments should control who can have kids smacks of totalitarianism. Here in the US, we already have people trying to say who can and who can't be legally married. It's not right.

I'm afraid I'll say that killing is worth than birthing.

   I realized after I posted this that everyone dies anyway whether they are serial killed or not.  So, every single one of those offspring of a serial breeder is going to die anyway. 
   Ergo - every time a breeder creates a little human, they are also guaranteeing that the new person is going to die.
   Ergo again - Serial breeders are serial killers.

   Since many serial killers are incapable of having a good and productive breeding relationship, they are reduced to only killing and not creating people.

   I dare you all to poke holes in this logic.

   By the way, I obviously don't know how to use the word ergo

Quote from: Rebis on May 11, 2008, 02:05:35 PM

   I realized after I posted this that everyone dies anyway whether they are serial killed or not.  So, every single one of those offspring of a serial breeder is going to die anyway. 
   Ergo - every time a breeder creates a little human, they are also guaranteeing that the new person is going to die.
   Ergo again - Serial breeders are serial killers.

   Since many serial killers are incapable of having a good and productive breeding relationship, they are reduced to only killing and not creating people.

   I dare you all to poke holes in this logic.

   By the way, I obviously don't know how to use the word ergo

QuoteJeesh, any of you girls read 1984?  Seen the movie, maybe?

Along with "Soylent Green".

Quote from: lisagurl on May 11, 2008, 03:15:53 PM

QuoteJeesh, any of you girls read 1984?  Seen the movie, maybe?

Along with "Soylent Green".

Trust me... I'm just as afraid of a dystopia as everyone else, but who's to say we're not already living in 1984? Our government is freakin' EVIL.

Human test subjects, Paperclip, coverups, mind control and all that...

Its already happening.

Our government is a serial killer & a mass murderer.

That is beside the point.  This topic concerns life and death and the balance between them.  If killing is wrong, why is birthing right?

Life is delicate and precious.  Shouldn't bringing a life into the world be taken as seriously as ending a life?

Quote from: Rebis on May 11, 2008, 05:00:18 PM
Our government is a serial killer & a mass murderer.

That is beside the point.  This topic concerns life and death and the balance between them.  If killing is wrong, why is birthing right?

Life is delicate and precious.  Shouldn't bringing a life into the world be taken as seriously as ending a life?

There are those of us who take bringing life into the world just as seriously as ending life. The fact is that nothing lives forever: not humans or other animals, not plants, and not anything else. If being a breeder is the same as being a killer because all one's children will eventually die, then all that lives are killers.

Quote from: Rebis on May 11, 2008, 05:00:18 PM
Our government is a serial killer & a mass murderer.

That is beside the point.  This topic concerns life and death and the balance between them.  If killing is wrong, why is birthing right?

Life is delicate and precious.  Shouldn't bringing a life into the world be taken as seriously as ending a life?

Are you a parent?  I can guarantee it's taken even more seriously by the people involved. 

Quote from: lisagurl on May 11, 2008, 09:18:44 AM
China has a law.

Typically, if the Chinese government does something, it's a good indication that the right thing to do is exactly the opposite.

There's a law in the rest of the world too: the law of supply and demand. If you can't afford to raise five kids, you don't have five kids. Many Catholics, for instance, will play Roman Roulette (a.k.a. the Rhythm Method) until baby number two comes along waaaaay earlier than planned, and every sperm starts looking more expensive than sacred.

"Keep you laws off my body!" -- broadly applicable good advice for any legislator, which also answers the startlingly obvious (if you'll pardon my boldness) question in the original post.

Quote from: Rebis on May 11, 2008, 05:00:18 PM
Our government is a serial killer & a mass murderer.

That is beside the point.  This topic concerns life and death and the balance between them.  If killing is wrong, why is birthing right?

I think you have made an assumption here that breeding has to be either good or bad, and that dieing is a bad thing.

To poke some holes in your logic, dieing itself is not a bad thing and it is enevitable. Also you are not always the cause of your offspring dieing and I don't believe you can be responsible for their lives as they are an individual entity (though you can have some responsibility for who they are).

So to summerise, I think it is the cause of death that makes the dieing wrong. When you give birth it is with the assumption that your offspring will die some day, but you are not usually responsible for that death. You create the entity but they destroy themselves.

Well, if it came to zero population growth, we as a species would die out.  It would be mass murder on a grand scale and the dying would not be replaced......End of civilization as we know it.

I don't think there should be a law to prohibit how many children a person has but the growing number of neglected and abused children should be addressed.  Probably the simple answer is education, because we know that serial breeders who don't cherish their children are usually ignorant about birth control and what constitutes being a good parent. 

China took birth control to the extreme and their citizens are rebelling in growing numbers, I cannot see communism surviving there much longer, well not as before.  Capitalism is taking hold there, Hong Kong and Shanghai is testiment to that.