Idiocy, and Why is disabling allowed?

So besides being more practical to allow disabling a violent defector (but not killing them!), why else might it be good, and why should we not kill anyway?

Let's briefly examine the history of mankind. Okay, pretty much everyone who was alive 120 years ago is now dead. Gone. Vanished from the universe, unlikely ever to be repeated. They are just dust. Now, 100 years ago, this seemed pretty inevitable to everyone living at the time. (And it turns out, it was.) If you were alive, you were going to die. If it wasn't from a disease, it would just be from old age eventually.

But then these really, really, really stupid people invented something called war and had the great idea of killing other people! Hey, they're gonna die anyway, right? Why not kill them? Why not get so angry at your cousin being murdered by a Jew that you go out and kill ten random Jews? Why not get so angry at a handful of people you don't know, don't even know anyone who knows them, who got killed by another handful of people you similarly have no personal connections with, and decide to kill all the people associated with that group anyway?

War, vengeance, retaliation, eye-for-eye, it's retarded. You have to have a double-digit IQ to believe in any of that garbage. Humans are mostly killed by disease or old age, why are you going to add to that, and why do you get so upset with the minor increases of death caused by humans anyway that you go out to add to the body count? Why aren't you equally mad about disease that you want to fund all sorts of anti-disease organizations, or why aren't you so anti-death in general that you fund anti-death organizations meant to increase the lives of humanity?

I don't know what's sadder. That our past is full of these retards, or that our present is also full of them. What's different about our present? People are waking up to the fact that death is not a Good Thing, and many of us are trying to improve the human condition beyond anything ever tried before by halting death itself, increasing our actual intelligence, and making large leaps in medicine instead of praying something will fix itself. So what's sad is that people want to kill people when so many of these 7 billion people have a significant chance of living long, long, long past any normal age. Perhaps until the end of the universe if such a thing must happen.

But this is why I support disabling violent people, and detaining them with intent to fix. Why? Because I want as many of us to continue living as possible, and if that means disabling a potential Hitler, so be it. (And I'm still to be convinced that killing a potential Hitler is required, that simply disabling is insufficient.) If possible, fix the aggressor. If it's not possible, keep them around and secured, but please treat them like humans. The prison system is actually better for having 3 square meals, televisions, video games, etc. But now we're starting to treat them like humans again, let's try to see if we can fix any of them, and also see if we can fix any of the problems leading to criminals. (Like poverty.)

Addendum: since it seems some people like to misinterpret really easily, I'll just say I have no problem with mentally challenged or ill people, in fact I know several such people and think very highly of them; I also believe if we put them in charge the government would actually run better. But the sheer level of idiocy required to believe war is ever a good thing puts the person on par with a mentally challenged person only in respect to the thoughts they're capable of forming. Really, though, perhaps a better turn of phrase is that these people are humans who are still trying to apply the rules of the Savannah to modern life, who are just in a large dick waving contest like our ancestors and other related species.

Posted on 2010-05-27 by Jach

Tags: non-violence, stupidity

LaTeX allowed in comments, use $\\...\\$\$ to wrap inline and $$...$$ to wrap blocks.