• Listen to a special audio message from Bill Roper to the Hive Workshop community (Bill is a former Vice President of Blizzard Entertainment, Producer, Designer, Musician, Voice Actor) 🔗Click here to hear his message!
  • Read Evilhog's interview with Gregory Alper, the original composer of the music for WarCraft: Orcs & Humans 🔗Click here to read the full interview.

Should conspiracy-theorists be allowed to breed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
Of course, there has been conspiracy-theories in the past that actually have been proven - there are a few examples. But the modern era is characterized with unfounded conspiracy and alternative theories (anything from new-age spirituality to "Omg my barometer can measure ghosts!!11") that goes against the very basic human quality of critical thinking.

illuminatiilluminatiilluminatiilluminatiilluminatiilluminatiilluminati


So my question to you, my fellow Hivers, is should they be allowed to breed? Should we pass on some law that enforces their stupidity to go extinct?

I believe their very existence is a threat to human intelligence and survival.
 
Level 11
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
275
Yes of course.
Who can properly judge the belief of others? You might be, yourself, considered as a conspiracy-theorists in some far country.
And your saying every conspiracy-theorists cannot have "normal" children. They are doomed to think like their parents? And what if one parent is "normal", can't he have a relation with the one he loves?
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
That's quite a statement, but i think you would have to exclude religious people aswell if that were the case. There's already alot of people who shouldn't have been allowed to breed in the first place, seeing how much of a mess the world's currently in.

well, I'm prioriating the conspiracists because of the following statement;

Order of stupidity(from most to less):
A specific conspiracist, member of Hive community - makes excellent systems > conspiracists > fundamentalists

Yes of course.
Who can properly judge the belief of others? You might be, yourself, considered as a conspiracy-theorists in some far country.
And your saying every conspiracy-theorists cannot have "normal" children. They are doomed to think like their parents? And what if one parent is "normal", can't he have a relation with the one he loves?
Well I assumed their children must, since they probably will homeschool them, brainwash them and force them to accept the secret government as an inalienable truth. Not could they send their own precious spawnlings to the very schools that the secret government hands out their own flyers!
 
Last edited:
Level 11
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
275
Well I assumed their children must, since they probably will homeschool them, brainwash them and force them to accept the secret government as an inalienable truth. Not could they send their own precious spawnlings to the very schools that the secret government hands out their own flyers!

I don't think you can remove the privilege of someone to taste life just on some assumptions. The problem isn't breeding, the real problem is, as you said: brainwash. Let them breed, but don't let them brainwash these new humans.
 
Level 3
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
20
I don't think you can remove the privilege of someone to taste life just on some assumptions. The problem isn't breeding, the real problem is, as you said: brainwash. Let them breed, but don't let them brainwash these new humans.

I think it's difficult to answer this question. You have to differentiate. Sometimes conspiracy theories can be quite detrimental to society and once they find enough followers it could become a serious threat. So why not get down to the root of the trouble?
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
I don't think you can remove the privilege of someone to taste life just on some assumptions. The problem isn't breeding, the real problem is, as you said: brainwash. Let them breed, but don't let them brainwash these new humans.

Normally I'd never support any violent or oppressing act against one's right of life, but in a given situation where a, let's say, bankrobber occupies a bank. He takes 30 humans as his hostage and threatens to kill him. No one would deny the necessity (if it's the only way out) to kill said bankrobber to save these 30 lives.

The same argument goes for said conspiracists - I consider them as a threat to human survival, as if they were given positions of power the world will go to hell.
They're a threat to our very existence.
 
Level 11
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
275
Whats with the white text? It's rather disruptive for the conversation.
Ok I'll Stop.

Being down to earth and using solid facts? I don't think so. This isn't theoretical.
This is absolutely theoretical look at all the assumptions of ManYouAreEvil :
Well I assumed their children must, since they probably will homeschool them, brainwash them and force them to accept the secret government as an inalienable truth. Not could they send their own precious spawnlings to the very schools that the secret government hands out their own flyers!
No one can bring you solid facts since we're not even sure of what conspiracists really are or think.

I think it's difficult to answer this question. You have to differentiate. Sometimes conspiracy theories can be quite detrimental to society and once they find enough followers it could become a serious threat. So why not get down to the root of the trouble?
And that's my point, the "root" of the problem is someone's life and you cannot consider it as a simple part of an equation you can solve.
For example, a woman is pregnant and has already eight children, including three deaf, two blind and a mentally retarded, should we abort the child?

Normally I'd never support any violent or oppressing act against one's right of life, but in a given situation where a, let's say, bankrobber occupies a bank. He takes 30 humans as his hostage and threatens to kill him. No one would deny the necessity (if it's the only way out) to kill said bankrobber to save these 30 lives.

The same argument goes for said conspiracists - I consider them as a threat to human survival, as if they were given positions of power the world will go to hell.
They're a threat to our very existence.

I agree you should kill that robber, because you know the finality of the event, which is not the case for the child since he's not a conspiracist.
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
I agree you should kill that robber, because you know the finality of the event, which is not the case for the child since he's not a conspiracist.

The child is not a victim of said action, as he will not exist. The only true victim would be the conspiracist x-self.
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
But the very brainwashing that I'm quite sure these people will conduct because they strongly believe in this (the very nature we see in every fundamentalist) - how could they let their children be blind? Not see the truth they're so aware of.

I'm sure their way of bringing up their children makes the chance that any of them will experience free thought very close to nonexistent.

Those who would fall for the brainwashing would have to be an accepted casuality of the system.

Just like the robber had to be, for the sake of others survival.
These sacrifices has to be made. They're vital.
 
Level 11
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
275
But the very brainwashing that I'm quite sure these people will conduct because they strongly believe in this (the very nature we see in every fundamentalist) - how could they let their children be blind? Not see the truth they're so aware of.

I'm sure their way of bringing up their children makes the chance that any of them will experience free thought very close to nonexistent.

I totally agree with you!

Those who would fall for the brainwashing would have to be an accepted casuality of the system.
But now, if you have the "power" to stop these people from breeding, then why would you accept "sacrifices" when you can simply use that same "power" to remove their children and let them live a normal life?
That's all I say. Kill/torture/imprison as many conspiracists as you want, but offer to an innocent child a chance to live his own life whoever are his parents.
 
Last edited:
Level 8
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
466
but offer to an innocent child a chance to live it's own life

RAGE.

---

Guys, conspiracy theorists and fundies provide us with humorous statements and let us feel superior to them. Would you really want to lose this precious resource?
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
But now, if you have the "power" to stop these people from breeding, then why would you accept "sacrifices" when you can simply use that same "power" to remove their children and let them live a normal life?
That's all I say. Kill/torture/imprison as many conspiracists as you want, but offer to an innocent child a chance to live his own life whoever are his parents.

An action taking away someone's children is more of an inhuman act than not allowing them to have one firstly, It's merely an act of compassion from my side.
 
Level 22
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
3,971
I suppose this thread is to ridicule and even to provoke something...

Oh yes conspiracy guys need to become extinct, interesting idea, not sure if the OP realizes the stupidity coming from such idea is as bad as some of the conspiracies themselves. Mostly because

I believe their very existence is a threat to human intelligence and survival.
And I believe you'd better go a little over the edge than blindly follow newspapers and TVs and do research yourself to see the world isn't as broadcasted on the media. Because if 'open for possibilities' means threat to intelligence, I suppose believing everything you hear equals emptying your head from any intelligence left.

I have a better idea - since the world clearly needs cleaning and population control. We will start with making 'conspiracists not breed/breathe' along with:

- religious fanatics, religious people, believers of complete nonsense like demon possession, Earth being a hologram, some Spaceships flying around in our space', some rocks on Mars being Alien bases and Ruins... BUT also:
- close minded ignorant assholes that talk without any kind of knowledge on the subject, consider everything in these stories 'conspiracies' as a synonym of crazy and impossible

And they ALL should become exinct, it's a deal right? I am fine with it, since I do not support any of the radical views - neither that everything is a conspiracy, nor the blindness of brainwashed and ignorant idiots.

So I am FOR these two poles of opinion to be gone, but the event of just the crazy ones gone and the blind ignorance remaining - aint gonna happen :/

-Yours objective viewer always staying in the middle and correctly accepting both possibilities when due

eImtoR
 
Level 3
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
20
I suppose this thread is to ridicule and even to provoke something...

Oh yes conspiracy guys need to become extinct, interesting idea, not sure if the OP realizes the stupidity coming from such idea is as bad as some of the conspiracies themselves. Mostly because


And I believe you'd better go a little over the edge than blindly follow newspapers and TVs and do research yourself to see the world isn't as broadcasted on the media. Because if 'open for possibilities' means threat to intelligence, I suppose believing everything you hear equals emptying your head from any intelligence left.

I have a better idea - since the world clearly needs cleaning and population control. We will start with making 'conspiracists not breed/breathe' along with:

- religious fanatics, religious people, believers of complete nonsense like demon possession, Earth being a hologram, some Spaceships flying around in our space', some rocks on Mars being Alien bases and Ruins... BUT also:
- close minded ignorant assholes that talk without any kind of knowledge on the subject, consider everything in these stories 'conspiracies' as a synonym of crazy and impossible

And they ALL should become exinct, it's a deal right? I am fine with it, since I do not support any of the radical views - neither that everything is a conspiracy, nor the blindness of brainwashed and ignorant idiots.

So I am FOR these two poles of opinion to be gone, but the event of just the crazy ones gone and the blind ignorance remaining - aint gonna happen :/

-Yours objective viewer always staying in the middle and correctly accepting both possibilities when due

eImtoR

You do not seem to take this seriously. The only one I see who is provoking anybody is you. There is no need to call people closed-minded or ignorant just because they have a different point of view on the subject.

But I have to agree with you. Conspiracy theories are really a threat to intelligence and the government should control this to ensure that none of these radical opinions show up.
 
Level 8
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
466
-Yours objective viewer always staying in the middle and correctly accepting both possibilities when due

eImtoR

Oh god, he even signs off with his name. Someone else, please hit this guy irl; I don't feel like touching his face.
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
Level 22
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
3,971
You do not seem to take this seriously. The only one I see who is provoking anybody is you. There is no need to call people closed-minded or ignorant just because they have a different point of view on the subject.

Yes, but maybe I should stamp it on everybody's head - youy arue when you get familiar and know it, you do not argue when you know nothing about it. Also lots of the skepticism has been proven hilarious and so were the statements they make.

ARGUING with knowledge - welcome - arguing without knowing and just throwing rocks in the darkness - will not be tolerated by me.

That of course, does not mean conspiracies are not full of crap, actually the truth is never revealed. As one movie correctly stated

Those who know, do not speak, those who don't know - speak

So I am not saying there aren't showmen doing out a TV show but see... I am dealing with kiddies and if they do not understand what objective means - accepting possibilities absed on a lot of reading done by me - you will be ignored for trolling.

Valid arguments are made when you know, when you don't know, get out.
 
Level 5
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
159
You are not to make such threats, it's against the forum rules. Especially since I could do a lot worse things with your face but, hey mind your language. I do not tolare this also.

I like how you first go "NO PERSONAL ATTACKS!"
then you attack him.

The double standard, the famous inconsistense of tin foil hats.
 
Level 8
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
466
You are not to make such threats, it's against the forum rules. Especially since I could do a lot worse things to your face but, hey mind your language. I do not tolare this also.

I am sorry. However, your avatar unfortunately qualifies you for the nickname "dickface".

ARGUING with knowledge - welcome - arguing without knowing and just throwing rocks in the darkness - will not be tolerated by me.

How old are you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top