+322

In a healthy human body, when one cell becomes infected or mutated, it will signal other cells to destroy it to ensure it doesn't spread. This is because the survival the the human body as a whole is more important than the survival of one cell. Humanity could learn a vital lesson from this, amirite?

84%Yeah You Are16%No Way
Share
28 33
The voters have decided that this post is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

my train of thought was like, 'What a great analogy! Wow, the human body is so-oh wait a minute, what the hell is you implying?'

@I_Predict_A_Riot my train of thought was like, 'What a great analogy! Wow, the human body is so-oh wait a minute, what the hell is...

I know. I can't believe this isn't in the red. It goes to show, it doesn't matter what you say but how you say it.

Anonymous +23Reply
@I_Predict_A_Riot my train of thought was like, 'What a great analogy! Wow, the human body is so-oh wait a minute, what the hell is...

You know... I did get what it was implying... but I voted up anyways because I've always thought that.... is that a bad thing?

Anonymous +1Reply

....Was anybody else thinking about this in terms of a zombie apocalypse?

Alyssas avatar Alyssa Yeah You Are +18Reply

I don't think the post was explicitly saying sick and weak people should be killed off. Just that sometimes you have to sacrifice a little bit so that you can save a lot.

brunetterox915s avatar brunetterox915 Yeah You Are +13Reply

I absolutely cannot believe I am only the third person to NW this. I don't think anyone understood the implications of what you were saying; they just got caught up in the flowery language.

I agree. If you have to kill someone to save 10 others, then it's worth it, for example.

Emperorerrors avatar Emperorerror Yeah You Are +10Reply

I'm not saying you're wrong, but in what scenario would this apply to humanity?

Nicks avatar Nick No Way +8Reply
@Nick I'm not saying you're wrong, but in what scenario would this apply to humanity?

Sacrificing the weak so that the strong can survive. Either people didn't understand that properly, or our generation is fucked up.

Anonymous +2Reply
@Sacrificing the weak so that the strong can survive. Either people didn't understand that properly, or our...

In that case, I disagree. The "weak", whether you mean sick or just not strong, deserve to live just as much as the "strong".

Nicks avatar Nick No Way +19Reply
@Nick In that case, I disagree. The "weak", whether you mean sick or just not strong, deserve to live just as much as the...

I agree, but if I wrote "People with sickness and genetic diseases should be killed to make the human race stronger" it probably would've been voted down.

Anonymous +2Reply
@I agree, but if I wrote "People with sickness and genetic diseases should be killed to make the human race...

So essentially, you completely disagree with your own post and made it just to show that people will believe anything because of the way it's worded?

Nicks avatar Nick No Way +4Reply
@Nick So essentially, you completely disagree with your own post and made it just to show that people will believe...

Well not really. It was just a troll post meant to stir up a little debate. I never thought anyone would seriously agree to it.

Anonymous 0Reply

So we should team up to kill sick people?

Even if this post wasn't suggesting the execution of the human race, it is still ridiculous. A "community first" mentality has, and always will, result in taking away individual freedoms. Anyone who exhibits beliefs contrary to the society they would be seen as a threat, and they would be done away with. It would kill everything democratic nations are built on.

Holy shit what is wrong with you? Amirite is not about euthanasia propaganda. You have issues.

Trishs avatar Trish No Way +3Reply

It seems many missed the part about how the infected cell signals others to destroy it. Imagine a situation in which a person has to do something they wouldn't normally do otherwise for the good of all: if you were bitten by a brainthirsty zombie, your human conscience would (hopefully) wish for the infection to be demolished, even if it required your own death.

Monopolygamys avatar Monopolygamy Yeah You Are +1Reply

Socialism is not the answer. NEPTUNE HAS SPOKEN.

Eugenics would defeat the sanctity of human life and the diversity in human culture that makes us interesting as a species. And anyway, how would you know who are the strong people that should be preserved? Do you go by brute strength? Intelligence? Leadership ability? You'd just end up with no one left because in some regard everyone is a dissident.

'The' is written twice in a row.

Anonymous 0Reply

They used to do that with the mentally retarded. Think about what you're saying.

I read, understood, and completely agree with your post. People seem to forget that that's how we got to be here. If we as a species allow the weakening of our genes, we're allowing the weakening of our species. To keep us strong, we may not need to kill off weaker people, but at least stop them from reproducing

guitarplayer213s avatar guitarplayer213 Yeah You Are -4Reply
@guitarplayer213 I read, understood, and completely agree with your post. People seem to forget that that's how we got to be here...

...Completely healthy people can have mentally retarded babies and the like, you do realize? Without access to lots of money, nobody can determine what their offspring will be like.

@Cuban_B Completely healthy people can have mentally retarded babies and the like, you do realize? Without access to lots...

Yes they can. Kill the retarded baby. I dont see the problem here. If you have some large growth or tumor on your body that contributes nothing to your life, you'd want to get rid of it, correct? That's what I'm trying to say here. If they don't contribute anything helpful, why keep them around?

Inb4 someone tries to bring religion into this.

guitarplayer213s avatar guitarplayer213 Yeah You Are -5Reply
@guitarplayer213 Yes they can. Kill the retarded baby. I dont see the problem here. If you have some large growth or tumor on your...

Helpful by whose definition? Even the mentally retarded can have jobs. What about the habitually unemployed? Should they be offed too? Or anyone who's not a recognized genius? Where does the line stop? Surely you can see the flaw in your logic.

This user has deactivated their account.
@1531173

Okay, here's the flaw with what you're saying. It's complete bullshit. "Anyone that does more damage to society than good should be offed." Yes, because it's the retarded kid with an action figure obsession that's going to grow up, be in a position of power, and declare nuclear war. It's the autistic people that are going create biochemical weapons. Are you fucking kidding me? Who's the real drain on society? I understood perfectly what he was saying, but who decides when the stopper goes on? Take a look at history, why don't you? Do you honestly think this is a novel idea? People have been wiping out "useless" groups of people for ever and it's stopped because it's monstrous. If people are that worried about the population, then they should should stop reproducing so much. They shouldn't just kill people who are "lesser" than them. Because I promise you, the human race is fucked anyway and it's not because of retards.

@guitarplayer213 I read, understood, and completely agree with your post. People seem to forget that that's how we got to be here...

Then we lose our humanity. Is our survival really worth losing what makes us human? Because I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in the kind of world you're proposing.

Anonymous +3Reply
@guitarplayer213 I read, understood, and completely agree with your post. People seem to forget that that's how we got to be here...

that's... horrible. Even if we used to be like that (I personally don't believe that, like, at all) we've since then developed morals and, you know, consciences. I'm pretty sure a few sick or stupid people reproducing doesn't spell out doom for humanity at this point.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.