Humanity's Spiral

Employment

2008-09-05T00:30:00.001-04:00

Transcript:

Tobacco causes hundreds of thousands of deaths each year. Hundreds of people overdose on alcohol each year.. Deaths caused by overdosing on marijuana 0. It is zero each and every year. In fact there are more deaths caused by overdosing on caffeine then marijuana. If the purpose of laws is to protect the citizens. How is the prohibition of marijuana protecting us? It isn't.

What the prohibition does do is create a black market for the drug. Citizens are forced to purchase marijuana from unlicensed, potentially unsafe sources, while drug dealers practice violence to control the illegal trafficking markets. The law, instead of protecting us is putting us at risk and charging us billions of dollars in taxes for the privilege.

This tax money, collected at all levels of government pays for prison sentences, prison meals, police vehicles, police uniforms and more. But the real monetary cost of the war on marijuana is wages. Wages for police officers, prison guards and politicians. And there you have the real reason marijuana is illegal – job security.

Of course politicians and high ranking police officials are against legalizing marijuana, there are tens of thousands of jobs on the line. This is why government is forever expanding, creating new committees and ministers and representatives – to create more job opportunities for themselves. Legalizing marijuana means cutting back on government and the politicians won't have it.

There is absolutely no logical reason why marijuana should be illegal. Politicians are protecting themselves while putting the common citizens at risk. Laws should be in place to protect the people not the government. The marijuana prohibition shows us exactly where the politicians priorities lie.

Pro-Choices

2008-08-30T00:05:00.002-04:00

Transcript:

Why is it that even Pro-Choice advocates ignore the voice of the man. It should be Pro-Choices

Two people, a man and a woman decided to have intercourse. Two people conceived a child. If we call it a mistake – then two people made the mistake. Any yet one person, ie the woman makes the choice whether or not to abort. What happened to the man's vote?

Some would argue that the woman has to endure pregnancy therefore she has the choice whether or not to go through with it. But what about the 18 years of child support the man has to deal with, with no say at all.

Let's try this from a different angle. Why can't just the man keep the baby? The woman could give birth to the baby – perhaps even be compensated financially for it. The man would get custody of the child and the woman would pay child support. What's wrong with that?

What if,however, it took two votes to allow for the birth of the child. Either person could veto the birth with their vote. The child would only be born if both parents were willing to support it – doesn't that make sense. It doesn't mean the man and woman have to get married or even live together, it just means more children with two loving parents and less deadbeat dads.

The Pro-Choices scenario doesn't prevent single parents. Sperm donors and surrogate mothers would ensure that single people could still have children. What this does prevent is men being forced by lawyers to support a child they didn't want in the first place. Think about it. There's a reason there aren't any deadbeat moms.

Exchange

2008-08-22T00:22:00.002-04:00

Transcript:

Security and Freedom are mutually exclusive. We can have one or the other but we cannot have both.

In June 2008 Verizon stopped offering access to alt.* newsgroups. Out of 100000 newsgroups New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo found 88 that contained child pornography. Thousands of perfectly innocent newsgroups have been eliminated because of 0.088 percent. They might as well deny access to the Internet because the ratio of child pornography websites to other websites is probably about the same.

This is just a recent example of the exchange that has been taking place between citizens of western society and our governing bodies. They increase our security at the cost of our freedom. The no fly lists deny innocent people from traveling freely around the world. Warrant-less searches deny us of our freedom to privacy and due process. The list goes on.

Freedom is not easy to maintain. It is not free. The cost is security. We must risk everything, our well being, our safety, our lives. True freedom is worth every sacrifice.

But for those of you that want impenetrable security, here's how to obtain it. Make an box out of three feet thick steel. Get inside, you will be safe in there. For even more added security bury yourself and your box six feet underground. Give me freedom, I'll take the risks.

Criminals

2008-08-15T22:22:00.008-04:00

Transcript:

Every single one of us is a criminal. Each one of us has driven a car, or ridden a bus, or used electricity generated from coal burning power plants. Directly or indirectly we have all burnt fossil fuels. Thats not a crime? Well it should be.

Although laws have devolved to include enforcing morale behaviour and propagating the political system, the original reason for having laws is to protect the people. And shouldn't protecting the people include protecting us from carbon dioxide poisoning.

The burning of fossil fuels, if nothing else has significantly decreased our air quality to the point where we get smog advisories. Our air quality is so poor that the government advises us to stay indoors. What the hell is that? Is no one else concerned about this? Where is the urgency? Oh, but our trusty politicians will save us with their carbon taxes. Ridiculous.

Carbon taxes will not reduce the amount of carbon dioxide being emitted into our atmosphere. They will not even punish the companies that do it. First of all, no matter how the tax is applied, the consumer ends up paying. It is simply another cost in running the business. Secondly, taxing an action only perpetuates the idea that it is acceptable. Carbon emissions are not acceptable. Not in the least.

Each one of us, by burning fossil fuels is poisoning the other 6 billion human beings. And that's being conservative. That number is significantly higher when we consider the future generations.
And yet we stand by while coal burning power plants continue to be built. Gasoline vehicles continue to roll off the assembly line. This needs to end now and making the burning of fossil fuels illegal is the only way to do it.

Individualism

2008-08-07T22:34:00.001-04:00

Transcipt:

The human body contains trillions of living cells. Each individual cell has its own unique purpose. When a cell becomes weak and useless it dies. It dies for the benefit of the entire body. It is replaced by a new healthy cell; an individual action that benefits the whole. When a cell refuses to die we get Cancer. This cell acts as a disconnected individual; it replicates and spreads causing death for the host and for all other cells in the body.

Human beings, like cancerous cells have become too self absorbed and individual. We wage war, pollute, compete for wealth with ourselves without any consideration of the wellbeing of the human race or our planet. The Earth absorbs collateral damage while we “progress”. The only thing we are progressing towards is total planetary destruction.

Whether or not the planet is actually getting warmer is irrelevant, Global Warming is a symbol, a memorable phrase that’s summarizes all of the damage we have done and continue to do. We are raping mother earth, the very giver of life. God? Screw God. The Earth gives us life we should be worshiping her. Try to imagine life without water, oxygen or even gravity, the Earth gives us all of these.

We are murdering the planet, suffocating it with ignorance, and committing the human race to a slow painful death. Think outside your minute existence. Consider how the actions of your life affect the future of humanity. Only together, as considerate individuals, can we cure our diseased planet and save ourselves.

Emotion

2008-07-31T16:49:00.002-04:00

Transcript:

The human race faces an epidemic: the erosion of emotion. The pressures of society push each and every one of us to suppress our emotions in an effort to become more civilized. Tears are weakness, happiness is taboo. Emotional displays are unexpected and awkward. Public emotions are rare and discouraged. Human feelings deteriorate with each generation.

Emotions were rampant at the beginning of humanity. Early humans feared for their survival. Fear was ever-present. Man or animal could take their lives in an instant. Fear is a powerful emotion, the response to which builds character. The early humans harnessed the fear, until it became anger and they unleashed his inner beast to kill the predator and prolong their own life. In the 21st century we hide from our fascist government hoping someone else will stand and fight.

Humans thrive when deep emotions surface. When a loved one dies; Sadness strikes suddenly, hard but soothing. When a child is born; Happiness and love uproot themselves from the hidden forests of our minds. These are the only moments of our lives when we are human. During these brief moments we understand the human condition. We love unconditionally; we embrace those around us and cherish the relationships. The fog of civility is lifted, but it doesn’t last. The feelings fade back into the abyss. They fade, not because we don’t care, because we forget. New memories take over our thoughts. The mind is separated from the heart by a wall built up from rigid structure and monotonous routine.

We must tear down this wall before we lose the war on emotions, and become completely civilized. Civilization should not be our goal. The civilized world is populated by cold hard mechanical robots, robots made of bone, flesh and blood.

Coefficient

2008-07-24T17:40:00.002-04:00

Transcript:

The survival of the human race is in jeopardy. We must colonize celestial bodies other than the planet earth before there are no humans left. The ability of a single person or group of individuals to end human lives is increasing exponentially. The number of deaths divided by the number of killers is the End of Earth coefficient. The number of human beings one person can kill. At the beginning of humanity the coefficient was close to 1. One person could kill one or a few people, but not many more.

On September 11 2001, 19 terrorists took 4 planes and ended 3000 lives. The resultant End of Earth coefficient of 158 is quite possible the largest ever actualized. World leaders and warlords, who have indirectly killed millions upon millions of people, are exempt from this calculation because they wish to preserve their own kingdom. Even Hitler didn’t want to eradicate humanity. Suicidal small groups and individuals are the real threat to human extinction.

Although the realized end of earth coefficient is only approaching 200 the theoretical coefficient is much higher. A single individual could devote their entire life to building and detonating one or more Atomic weapons and based on the death tolls of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, kill hundreds of thousands of human beings. In 1945 the then Emperor of Japan said, quote: “The enemy now possesses a new and terrible weapon with the power to destroy many innocent lives and do incalculable damage. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. “

There has been over 60 years of technological advancements since those words were spoken. We increase the End of Earth coefficient with each minute that passes. The only way to prevent human extinction is to remove ourselves from this dependency of planet earth, and get off this planet.