The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Implication
What are human rights again?




How so? :holmes:


Because that wasnt the question o.O
Original post by TarnyGee
I was thinking more like turning them into human lab rats for cancer drugs or any drugs, so they can be useful to society.


you have got a winning idea there lets start a petition more likely to get signature if some good comes out of it

Original post by Implication
State sponsored torture-revenge? Sounds great.


ah someone after my own heart i did write a manuscript for an english class and got given six counseling sessions admittedly torture using droplets of acid in to the eyes and a hand in a deep fat fryer oh and drowning someone in cement at one point too
Original post by TarnyGee
I was thinking more like turning them into human lab rats for cancer drugs or any drugs, so they can be useful to society.


You are a Nazi. Not a Nazi in internet-speak - an actual full-blown Nazi.
Original post by Yes, alright
You are a Nazi. Not a Nazi in internet-speak - an actual full-blown Nazi.


Hey. Don't get personal dude. I don't know why hanging a child molester is better than trying to find a cure for cancer. The thread is called "Most controversial view".
Original post by TarnyGee
I don't know why hanging a child molester is better than trying to find a cure for cancer.


I don't endorse hanging either

Original post by TarnyGee
The thread is called "Most controversial view".


Right. It doesn't require that anyone like your answer
Original post by Yes, alright
I don't endorse hanging either



Right. It doesn't require that anyone like your answer


That's fair. The thing is hanging happens all around the world, as well as stoning. I'm just trying to compromise. My ideal is we have a punishment so hard that no one ever commits a crime and that everyone can be and feel safe. And just keeping someone in a room for a long time does not cut it. We need a real deterrent from crime
Original post by TarnyGee
Everyone should mind their own business. Gay people should get married and heterosexual people shouldn't get a view, because it's not your problem.
Women should get an abortion if she wants to, because some random woman in Brazil getting an abortion will not affect you. Carry on living your life.
We shouldn't pay taxes, there will always be homeless and starving people in the world, and in my country. Why should I give 20% of my salary to some racist chav when I can use it to buy a car.
Prime Ministers (and MPs) should get minimun wage, so that we can actually get people who love their country and know what it is like to be one of us.
Ban single sex schools, ban grammar schools. (No reason for this one).
Stop making school so serious, let kids start proper school at eight, we live til 80/90/100 anyways, let little kids be little kids. We could realistically teach 14 years of school in 10years. Year 1,4,5,8,9 was a waste of time, we didn't learn anything.


Because schools, hospitals, roads, the armed forces, and many other stuff run themselves right? As for racist chav, all people on benefits are racists, or if they are have come on hard times...OK.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
It's a Jewish conspiracy :eek3:


?


Well mental illness is a fallacy. Who the **** cares about norms anyhow? I drop litter on occasion, and break speed limits, and punched people/got into fights as a teen. I guess the NHS should come and lock me up because i don't follow "norms" or other retard bull****...haha.. :cool: Human behaviour is complex, and not put down to what some doctors or scientists reckon is "normal".

Mental illness is socially defined, and just what people long ago thought based on their own biases. I don't give a **** what people from ancient Rome thought or medieval England about sickness....i don't live in either culture.
Original post by maxisuper
Only the smartest, healthiest, strongest, nicest (best qualities etc.) should be allowed to have children, for the next century or so. The earth can't cope with current population, better in the long run for humanity


would agree though nice is subjective.

I don't think everybody has an automatic right to have a child anyhow.
Original post by wsxcde
have been, but people are so much more intelligent today right, even though our brains are the same as they were in the 1970s. So I dont see that you've got any legs to stand on for your opinion that it's not in people's nature to pathologise meer difference tbh.

If you think some people are naturally superior to others and would like to stop me posting in threads like this maybe meet me irl
sand we can have a friendly sparring match over it, let nature decide who is strongest, after all natural selection got us this far. I'd be happy to meet you.


no, i just think you're not as smart as you think you are.....

and people do pathologise difference..so what? i'm saying difference is not enough to make something a medical condition. again, if you're smart you'd know that basic fact. just you say you have plenty of issues, but then they show, that's all.
Any UK citizen who travels overseas should get mandatory foreign culture training before they get a passport.

sorry, but people like this - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/dubai/3207483/British-couple-jailed-for-sex-on-Dubai-beach.html - should have no right to travel overseas.
That having children is pointless and damaging. Obviously it's personal choice but we live in such a child-centred society that it's looked at as unnatural to be child-free.
That we have no right to cast judgement on other human beings, no matter what, and that prison should be an absolute last resort and used only for public protection and rehabilitation, not punishment. No action should be criminal unless it causes direct harm to another person, and crimes that can be repaired purely via financial means should only be dealt with via financial means.
Original post by Saoirse:3
That we have no right to cast judgement on other human beings, no matter what, and that prison should be an absolute last resort and used only for public protection and rehabilitation, not punishment. No action should be criminal unless it causes direct harm to another person, and crimes that can be repaired purely via financial means should only be dealt with via financial means.


Really? No matter what? So in no situation ever is judgement okay? :confused:
Original post by Saoirse:3
That we have no right to cast judgement on other human beings, no matter what, and that prison should be an absolute last resort and used only for public protection and rehabilitation, not punishment. No action should be criminal unless it causes direct harm to another person, and crimes that can be repaired purely via financial means should only be dealt with via financial means.


prison in itself is a punishment......
Unemployment benefits should be cut off. Completely. Except for those unfit to work (disabled, mentally ill etc)
Original post by TIS200
Unemployment benefits should be cut off. Completely. Except for those unfit to work (disabled, mentally ill etc)


And how exactly are people trying to find work supposed to do in the mean time? Starve? Become homeless? You know food and rent costs money right?
Original post by TIS200
Unemployment benefits should be cut off. Completely. Except for those unfit to work (disabled, mentally ill etc)


So (to clarify, not necessarily saying you'll disagree):

If you worked hard to get good grades in school. Worked full time to self fund a course afterwards. Six months after completing it get a job in the desired field, work hard at the job, which contributes to society for five years. Unfortunately, there are cuts to the sector and you are made redundant. You survive by being frugal, using savings you've accumulated. You apply to many jobs of all types, at least one a day, seek professional advice to improve your application and interview technique and sell things, do as many of jobs as you can, sign up to various temp agencies. But after six months you reach a point where you can't sustain yourself any more - you don't have enough for rent and bills.

You're saying in that stage you would think it right that you should become homeless and receive no support?

Xxx

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by SophieSmall
And how exactly are people trying to find work supposed to do in the mean time? Starve? Become homeless? You know food and rent costs money right?


Original post by kpwxx
So (to clarify, not necessarily saying you'll disagree):

If you worked hard to get good grades in school. Worked full time to self fund a course afterwards. Six months after completing it get a job in the desired field, work hard at the job, which contributes to society for five years. Unfortunately, there are cuts to the sector and you are made redundant. You survive by being frugal, using savings you've accumulated. You apply to many jobs of all types, at least one a day, seek professional advice to improve your application and interview technique and sell things, do as many of jobs as you can, sign up to various temp agencies. But after six months you reach a point where you can't sustain yourself any more - you don't have enough for rent and bills.

You're saying in that stage you would think it right that you should become homeless and receive no support?

Xxx

Posted from TSR Mobile


what about
1) family member support
2) charity support
3) friend support
?
government taxation is legitimised theft (not even as a matter of opinion - it's a fact; try and distinguish government from a popular yet feared band of thieves), and clearly, theft is bad, so the ultimate aim of a government, if it is to exist (which I believe is necessary for some very minor and fundamental tasks of a political society), must keep taxation at its absolute minimum, e.g. to have some kind of legal/judicial system, bureaucracy of government legislative execution, police and military services and a parliament. why do I have to pay for people who have nothing to do with me on an economic level? literally - is there any kind of responsibility logically derived from my actions relating to their situation? if someone fails, is it someone else's burden or problem to pay the tab? I don't accept that reasoning, and I certainly don't accept this as the role of a national government that is meant to simply make sure we have liberty and equality *under the law*, not in terms of outcomes.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by zippity.doodah
what about
1) family member support
2) charity support
3) friend support
?
government taxation is legitimised theft, and clearly, theft is bad, so the ultimate aim of a government, if it is to exist (which I believe is necessary for some very minor and fundamental tasks of a political society), must keep taxation at its absolute minimum. why do I have to pay for people who have nothing to do with me on an economic level? literally - is there any kind of responsibility logically derived from my actions relating to their situation? if someone fails, is it someone else's burden or problem to pay the tab? I don't accept that reasoning, and I certainly don't accept this as the role of a national government that is meant to simply make sure we have liberty and equality *under the law*, not in terms of outcomes.


1) not everyone has a family or a family that could financially support them.
2) since charities rely on donations there will never be a guarantee that the charities can cater to everybody who needs help because there will never be a guarantee that people donate.
3) Not everyone has friends, or friends who could or would be willing to support them.


To be honest I don't really care whether you think it's theft, what I care about is that the government makes sure that nobody in this country is left to starve or fall homeless. To me that is a lot more important than whether or not you have more disposable income to spend on luxuries. Your words quite clearly come from a selfish place.
(edited 9 years ago)

Latest