Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why isn't there a rofl emoticon?
But seriously, it would be hilarious if not for the likelihood that these views are the result of severe child abuse and deep rooted emotional pain.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,699 posts, read 41,733,093 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD
I'm glad to see both Left AND Right leaners are denouncing this awfulness. Family is pretty much the most important thing in life.
BS!
What if you have no plans to have a family? Should those who don't want families just off themselves now since they have nothing "important" to live for?
What if you have no plans to have a family? Should those who don't want families just off themselves now since they have nothing "important" to live for?
Conservatives often say liberals are "anti-family". Well, I'm mostly to the left of most liberals, but I do admit, I am anti-family. Once upon a time, the family unit may have served a purpose (as did picking live out of one another's hair and burning dried dung for fuel) but now, it is simply an outdated institution.
Which brings me to the thesis statement: family, in modern times, is a crutch for the weak. Honestly, what is more pathetic than a grown man who still needs his mommy? Granted, family may be necessary for financial obligations, but one could just as easily enter some other agreement devoid of the emotion baggage that comes with family. People may say "I need the love of my family" Well, that right there is the weakness: only the weak need love outside of self love. The true ubermensch is confident within himself/herself and requires no such support. Sorry, but when I hear people crying about their family I can't help but wonder if they'll start crying about their stuffed animal next.
Children need an adult figure in their lives, but why do adults need people whom they share .001% more DNA in common with than someone in another continent? Why not go forward, headstrong, not weighed down by the parasites who brought you into this world?
And also, family is unnatural. Do birds return to the nest after they leave? Do wolves return to their mothers after they learn to hunt and find their own mates? Predators, the higher animals, all abandon their families after they are no longer useful. It is only the herd animals that stay with them. Who wants to be a grazing sheep, requiring the safety of the herd when one could be a snow leopard, alone on the prowl?
And the financial obligations! Why should I support my aging father? Yes, he supported me, but that was him being a sucker. Children never ask to be born. It is all vanity on the part of the parents. It is an investment that will never see a return. Why should anyone feel anything for the people whom went ahead and created them without asking for life?
I intent to work and retire (maybe) at a very old age. With the money I safe having never had children and never given a dime to the parasites who brought me into this world I will have a more than comfortable existence. That is the path of strength: ignoring all ties of family. No need for mommy's shoulder to cry on at age thirty, no need for daddy to pat you on the head for doing a good job at forty. Only one's self to impress and perhaps those whose accomplishments have made them worthy of esteem.
Please note: I am referring to "traditional" family here, not circles of friends or military bands etc whom are often compared to family. Those are adults lending their strengths to a greater cause by free association, not obligations we are allegedly born into. A circle of strong people growing stronger from alliance with one another is one thing...a grown man crying to his mommy because his girlfriend left him is another.
Sorry but this is incredibly stupid. Humans aren't evolved to be alone and our families are naturally at the center of a healthy social arrangement. Standing alone in a hostile world by choice isn't brave, it's foolhardy and completely unnecessary.
Take a hint from nature: Social animals that stand alone become lunch for other animals.
The question is, what is the point of life? What are you trying to accomplish?
Philosophers have argued about this for centuries. Some argue that the point of life is just to be happy. Others argue that it is to basically "make the world a better place". Usually this involves a sense of objective morality, and usually an attempt to help others. I always see the second as, if you were to have never been born, would the world be better off or worse off?
If you believe that the purpose of life is only to be happy as an individual, then having children doesn't serve a purpose if it doesn't make you happy. And statistics show that people with kids aren't more happy than people without kids. Though statistically, people in relationships tend to be much happier than people who are single.
If you believe the purpose of life is to have a positive impact on the world, and you see yourself as a good person. Then it almost becomes a necessity to have children, or at least to be a mentor/role model to other children. What has more of an impact on the world than teaching the next generation proper values?
The problem with morality is that it's so subjective...is it moral to kill animals and eat their meat? Is it moral to bring children into a world full of hate and pain?
Life as far as I can tell has no purpose, save for that which we decide as individuals it is. People should come to their own conclusions what they need to get out of their brief existences, and not allow outside forces to make them behave in a certain way. That is the one subjective, overriding goal I can see in life, winning the struggle of Individual vs the Herd. Most lose that fight and the herd wins, but those people were too weak to think for themselves and take the easy way out by just doing what everyone else is doing.
Quote:
Your position is, family is weak, so no one should have children. If that were to happen, then humans would basically cease to exist. Or at least, the weakest people would be the only ones who continue to have children. Which means, humanity would hence become "weaker" in your point-of-view. In conclusion, your position would basically destroy the humanity you believe you are "saving".
No, family is for the weak, and most people are weak and hence, most people have children and care about their families. Nietzsche was right: most people are too weak to stand for themselves as being above the Herd's morality. Only a few wolves in the pack can be the alpha, and only a few elephants will leave the Herd and stand alone as lone bulls.
Quote:
The opposite position is, family is a good thing. And everyone has a family. So, the human species continues to exist, just as it has for tens of thousands of years. The people most "family-oriented" will probably continue to have the most children. The families who are most successful will be more competitive, will live longer, and be more "sought after. Thereby breeding out/diluting more of the genes that are socially inferior.
As awful as it may sound, the ones who are most likely to pass on their genes will be sociopaths who are also serial rapists (and NO, that is not me! Just making an argument) A sociopath is instantly at an advantage for he can do whatever he wants with no morals weighing him down. He can rape a different woman a month and at least a few of them will have his children. These children, sired from multiple women, will be more genetically diverse than any single husband-wife couple. Hence, there is more of a chance at least one or two of those children will be born without any genetic disorder from the mother's side (all the eggs are not in one basket) Those children will grow up and may also be sociopaths and hence, the cycle continues.
Quote:
You know, thats fine. I am not going to say you should like any of these things. The problem I have with you isn't that you feel a certain way. Its that you want others to feel the same way as you do. And you come on here saying that other people are weak for not feeling the same way as you do. Without having a coherent argument for why they are supposedly weak for feeling the way they do.
What if you walked into a room of grown men hugging their teddy bears? A few even comforted a grown, 200 lb man who lost his teddy bear and was actually in tears about it. You think "these guys are weak." Are they? Of course. You may not convince them that stuffed animals are not for grown men, but you know it to be the case. I feel like that about family. Children, who we accept as temporarily weak, need mothers and fathers...grown men who need them still? It is childish behavior, like a grown man still clutching his teddy bear.
Quote:
I personally think its a good thing you don't want kids. With your state of mind, having a child would be incredibly irresponsible of you. So while I appreciate your opinion about the world and about the act of procreation. Once you start disparaging others opinions, you start coming off as an intolerant jerk.
Almost everyone does that, it is just a matter of when. Politically, I am basically a cross between a green and a fascist who believes that it would be a good idea for American to break apart into smaller, manageable nations with my own Pacific North West forming a sovereign nation of Cascadia. I do not believe it will happen any time soon and I'm practical about it...yet let me start politely talking about it while being respectful of others, and see how many people say "you're crazy!".
Quote:
Actually, I am a very nostalgic person. I love talking to people about things that happened forever ago. There is something great about being around people who you share a common history with. It seems like every time I'm around my older sister, she reminds me of something that happened when we were young, that I had basically forgot about until she started talking about it.
I for one would rather not be reminded of a mother who beat me while getting drunk, a sister who was cruel, a father who wasn't there and after I lived with my father, a drunk who was incompetent. I have no reason to be reminded of the time I was seven years old and my mother stripped me from the waste down, beat my bare bottom, and then, I kid you not, spent ten minutes commenting on how ugly my penis looked before allowing me to get dressed.
My story is but one of many countless situations that come from family. Now, if this was a totalitarian state that recognized the future of society cannot be left to random couples of people, I would have been raised in a controlled, institutionalized environment where that wouldn't happen (think a boarding school) as would all children, with independent families being banned. Yes, my ideas are outside of the mainstream, but it is unfair for people with ideas like mine to be branded "insane". Thinking outside of the mainstream does not make one insane.
Quote:
Its also nice to be around people who will basically love you forever, regardless of what you do. One of my sisters is a real pain in the butt. But I still think about her all the time, and I still want the best for her.
I, like many others, want nothing to do with my family.
Quote:
As for being "genetically programmed to kill" your siblings. That simply isn't true. Genetically, you are programmed to grow attachments to your family, which cause you to want to help them, not hurt them.
You should read about "Oxytocin", it is the hormone that causes humans to grow attached to other humans. It plays a large role in human "tribal" behavior, and people without it are basically sociopaths.
Yes, and sociopaths are rare genetic mutations that give people an evolutionary advantage.
It seems from reading your posts, that you are most likely a bit of a sociopath, and display other narcissistic tendencies. Which could explain your total disassociation with your own family, and why you cannot understand why others feel the way they do about their families. And why you seem so interested in becoming a monk/hermit.
Its really quite sad.
"Sad" is a relative term. I could think of few things better than leaving society for the serenity of like minded people seeking to detach from the Herd and pursue enlightenment. Was Chris McCandless "sad" and should he instead of worked in a cubicle all day?
70 is old and are you planning on causing yourself to die intentionally if you get close to 71?
70 is only five years after current retirement age and yes, I'll make sure I die before 71. No need for people to survive if they are too old to be useful.
I'm old enough to know bad propaganda when I read it.
Indeed.
What, pray tell, is this bad propaganda of which you speak? That families are good? This idea offends you in some way?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Granted, family may be necessary for financial obligations, but one could just as easily enter some other agreement devoid of the emotion baggage that comes with family. People may say "I need the love of my family" Well, that right there is the weakness: only the weak need love outside of self love. The true ubermensch is confident within himself/herself and requires no such support. Sorry, but when I hear people crying about their family I can't help but wonder if they'll start crying about their stuffed animal next. 
