User Controls

It wud be better if the global population was reduced by approximately a billion people...0

  1. #1
    WellHung Black Hole
    folx, we need far less sheeple.
  2. #2
    It would be better if the your weight was reduced by approximately a billion pounds
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  3. #3
    DrugSmuggler African Astronaut
    😆
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  4. #4
    Sudo Black Hole [my hereto riemannian peach]
    Why stop at a billion?
  5. #5
    Rape Monster Naturally Camouflaged
    Originally posted by WellHung folx, we need far less sheeple.

    Start with urself, then we will all join u. be the change u wanna see
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  6. #6
    Meikai Heck This Schlong
    Originally posted by Sudo Why stop at a billion?

    Exactly. Omnicide is the only viable option.

    Originally posted by Meikai Antinatalism is a fine thing. Truly, the act of bringing new life into this world is a heinous thing. A pure act of selfishness and weakness driven by humanity's spineless inability to resist the genetic urge to reproduce. Nobody has a baby for the sake of the baby. To devote oneself philosophically to a path that aims to reduce the amount of suffering in this world by preventing new creatures from entering into it is a noble thing. But this only addresses new life

    What of the old life? Established life? Things that are already here, living?

    I propose a new school of thought: antivitalism. Life is a plague. A corruption of the inherent beauty of the purely mechanical, physical universe. It should not exist. Its existence in this universe is wrong, abhorrent, and this fundamental incompatibility lies at the root of all suffering. Humanity should dedicate itself to the eradication of all life, everywhere, ending finally with itself once our role as The Annihilator is complete. We are, conveniently, already well on the path to this assuming that life only exists in this one place. Anthropogenic factors are at the heart of an ongoing mass extinction event - this should not be "rectified" by the so called "green", life-loving peaceniks. Indeed, this should be lauded as one of our greatest and finest accomplishments. The presence of life in this reality is like so much excrement on God's finest china. I therefore posit that that is the great evil which should be rectified posthaste.

    Thank you. That is all.
  7. #7
    I don't think 1 billion would make a lot of difference...5-6 billion is a more realistic number.
  8. #8
    One billion you're still standing in line for 10 mins less
  9. #9
    Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood One billion you're still standing in line for 10 mins less

    Globally 1 billion is nothing...and most of them would be from the 3rd world places anyway. You'd actually be in line longer on the phone because there would be fewer customer service reps in India.
Jump to Top