Reply #21: Crazy--I almost agree with them. [View All]

[Jed Dilligan]

Personally, having no kids, I swing between the vhemt model and maybe having one or two children (to stay below the replacement rate of ~2.2). At other times, I think of the fundies out-reproducing me and think I should go out and impregnate as many women as I can. And then I realize that ideas aren't genetic; just ask my grossly overweight racist fundie uncle.

In the end, this movement is saying what all socially liberal movements say, which is, let's do something other than violently exterminate each other. Unfortunately, there will always be more people to get behind violent extermination. Of course, they don't want their own tribes to go extinct, even though they work hard at it. We could call the majority of humanity the IHEMT, the Inadvertent Human Extinction Movement.

I don't like the death penalty, by the way. Mainly because, as it's currently applied, it doesn't deter crime. We execute irrational people, most of whom probably welcome death--the threat of death doesn't prevent others from repeating the same crime. If anything, it's an incentive, especially the part where you get to make the state look like a big hypocrite (killing for killing) and the media attention.

I could agree with a death penalty for the worst RATIONAL crimes, which also tend to leave no doubt as to guilt. In murder it's almost always questionable, but when a politician or corporate officer is corrupt, there's usually no doubt when the guilt emerges. Just something to think about.