Shaken Babies

[God-Raped-Me]

I was thinking the other day as I was holding Dante, and I did this with the girls too, "How in hell could anyone even think of shaking their children?!". I went on to thinking these kids must be really really ******** annoying in order for anyone to do something like that. Then my thoughts continued on to an evolutionary track. You see today we have s**t loads of little ******** thinking they are king s**t, and enjoy being as troublesome as possible. Perhaps they were like that even when they were babies as well. In the last 20 years or so, not quite sure, awareness to shaken baby syndrome has risen. Less and less are killed by it every year. So maybe, shaking our children to death was a way to get rid of the ones who would be a drain on us and society.

Now, I want you to sit and think about it seriously for a bit. We do everything with our babies out of instinct. Whether it be bouncing them on our knees or getting them to watch food as we wave it in front of them. So perhaps shaking these children to death was a primitive way of getting rid of the problem before it starts.

I AM IN NO WAY SAYING WE SHOULD DO THIS AGAIN. It was just an interesting thought and I wanted to see what the ATG thought about.

 

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

I think that a lot of the inter-societal problems regarding children, babies, and the new generation, has to do with our separation as a species from the animals we once were.
Overpopulation, the hunger crisis, and now the environment and the economy are, I believe, signs that technology has come between humanity and the natural world.
I think that shaken babies are, honestly, a method of rooting out the weak and controlling the population. It happens less and less because more and more people think they have the capacity to parent when they don't, and so they ********, have children, and raise douche-bombs... I believe.  

[God-Raped-Me]

I don't believe that there is an overpopulation crisis. I believe the problem is people are too stupid and move INTO cities. There's s**t loads of places for people to live still.

Technology is totally getting out of hand! Are we just not able to learn form the movies we make, or even when they say "If this works then great, we'll be able to learn a whole bunch of new things from it, but if it doesn't there is a small possibility of it destroying the world.". To me that's a huge "WOAH mother ******** stop what you're doing!" NOTHING is worth destroying the world over!

Their mothers should have shaken them! xd

 

[sahihen]

I think some people do it because they aren't "parent material" and they don't know what to do when a baby cries. It overwhelms them and they just can't take it so they shake and yell at the baby to stop.
When most people snap they yell and since a baby is so small it's easy to grab and shake.
It's actually not that hard for me to see someone shaking a baby but that's just because I'm in no way shape or form "mother material". I hate kids and I never plan to have one.  

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

Things like these sites and my experiences with total idiots make me thing there is a population crisis... I don't think the planet is meant to hold so many people, and I don't think that everyone who is born is meant to survive...
http://www.cosmosmith.com/human_population_crisis.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-03-18-birth-rates_N.htm
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/bel/bel_01populationcrisis.html
http://consciouschoice.com/2007/02/artsoulbook0702.html
I think that this is what is meant to happen:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2004/sep/26/environment.environment
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406_b_depopulation.htm

And I definitely agree that science should never risk danger. I mean, if you want to conduct and isolated experiment to see if you can get yourself mauled by bears, that's great. But don't be trying to accelerate particles if it may create a blackhole in California.  

[SilentShadowDreamer]

Oh, well. Although parents don't shake their infants to death much anymore, I assure you there are still plenty of ways that adults ensure the population explosion won't include their children. It's sort of a sad permutation of the Darwin Awards - ensuring that weak genes don't get passed on by killing your own children. I'll have to go hunting for old links, but I recall there was a mother who got drunk and put her month-old infant in the microwave, and some guy who put his two-year-old into the dryer to dry her off although I believe she survived.

Personally, I think bratty children need parents who will actually tell them "No" when they're younger - I mean, if you don't tell little Johnny, "Johnny, you don't do that," when he's too young to know better, how is he supposed to learn that it's not okay to do that?

Shaking them to death as infants, to my eyes, is a clearer indicator of the fact that the parent isn't ready to be a parent than the future brattiness of the child - although I also feel that these things are intertwined. I think that an adult who isn't ready to be a parent will have difficulty raising their child, and may end up with a total brat or a terrified wallflower depending on temperament. This is just my opinion, though (I feel the need to stress that), as I don't personally know a lot of parents who had children before they were ready.

As a note, 'ready' doesn't mean financially or age-wise. I mean it in an emotional sense. There are teenagers who make great parents, just like there are thirty-somethings in a perfectly stable life who don't. And, yes, sometimes the kid is just naturally infuriating. Sometimes they can have the best parents in the world and the kid still turns out awful. That is the luck of the draw, and it sort of sucks for all concerned.

But as I said, thasjusme.  

[Riotous_Proletariat]

I have actually seen 'don't shake babies' ads at those bus stop shelters.  

[sweet baby lamb]

I think that it is a crisis that should be stopped. No matter how annoying children get it's no reason to kill them. it's just a one-way ticket to jail if u ask me.  

[God-Raped-Me]

Steph, you know what no one realizes about the American population? They keep saying "Oh it's gone up So much!" No s**t! People have been moving into the states like mad! No one accounts for Immigrants! Then those Immigrants have babies. Of course the population is pretty much doubling, s**t loads of people keep moving into your country. I'm also using the states because that's what a few of those links used.

As for Dr. Crazy Hitler man, can we kill him before he does something bad?! IF we should ever be overpopulated the planet is MORE than capable of coming up with a mass killing virus all on her own. It's happened before it can happen again. Releasing an airborne virus is the STUPIDEST thing I have ever heard! And so is killing off 90 ******** percent of the population. Do people NOT realize that we NEED a lot of these people?! Of course not. No one actually THINKS anymore.

I did like reading the one saying that the population ISN'T going to be a big crisis because people actually ARE having less kids. I bet those articles are hard to find.

@Sweethope: Did you just not read anything I said? Just see the ******** title and post? You didn't really reply to what I was talking about....

 

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

Actually, not only do I realize that, I agree with you. People are too quick to call things a crisis. Not to mention that the failure to take into account the immigration and it's ties to the population explosion, plus our habit of buying imports is the basics of what's ******** the American economy so badly.

I used links referring to the US because I'm an American, so I can see how they may not be relevant to you or anyone outside the US, but I really believe that the problem lies deeper. The US has ******** itself already, but I believe that technology has afforded humans the opportunity to do what they're currently doing - breed faster than they die out.

Look at countries like China and India, who have passed laws to regulate how frequently and how much humans reproduce because they're so crowded.

Yeah, Dr. NutBar is a concern (see bears/particle accelerator comment,) but I think he's got a point. There are way too many people alive right now, and the planet will soon have trouble containing us... Like water overflowing from a cup, we are rising too high, too fast. I personally believe that diseases such as cancer and AIDS are the planet's defense against us. I think that the reason we're having such widespread outbreaks and with such difficult-to-cure, diverse diseases is because it's population control. No other animal population has been allowed to expand the way ours has. I think that the environmental crisis is a natural cycle that we've exacerbated, and that humanity is ******** with the planet's natural ecological rhythms.

In fact, now that the economy has begun to decay in the US, I'm just waiting for there to be a huge epidemic amongst those who have lost their homes and whatnot. I'm certain that these various "crises" are the backlash from our inconsideration. Look at every other animal population - look at dinosaurs. As soon as it came to be that the planet was populated with nothing but dinosaurs, a meteor punched the s**t out of earth and made a "nuclear winter" cloud cover that killed all but, like, two or three kinds of dinosaurs.

I realize that I sound like one of those "repent! We are all damned! The end is nigh!" retards, but it's my honest opinion. This is a serious topic to me, and I don't want to be hurtful while discussing it.  

[God-Raped-Me]

I just didn't want people being all like "Well that's only the states". Of course it is because that's what we're talking about, thats all.

The Doc, has a point but the solution isn't making a virus that will wipe out everyone, because airborne viruses are hard to stop! You used a cup of water as an example, and it solves it's own problem. When the cup is too full, it overflows getting rid of the excess water, so will the world. It did it with the Black plague and it can do it again. Maybe it'll be an airborne virus maybe it'll be a STD, I honestly believe it would be an STD because lets face it, people, as a whole, ******** like rabbits!

Another thing no one is thinking about is water. We can build flotation devices on the water, making whatever fertile land usable for food. Or we could use the flotation devices for food. Could you imagine how many more people we would be able to support if we used the water's surface? We would just have to be careful not to use too much of it because of the plant life underneath. They still need sun. We might maybe be able to come up with a way to create UV for underneath these devices though...

I'm just full of ideas.

 

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

Or we could just stop building outward and build cities upward. Then people could stay in centralized locations, leaving plenty of fields to agriculture. Also, there would be an advantage in that cities with smaller perimeters would cause less widespread clouds of smog, and that would help prevent the water crisis from realizing itself. It would also be more sensible in terms of transportation, since everything is right next to each other, people can walk and bike, cutting back on the gas and allowing for expansion to more eco-friendly fuel sources.
biggrin  

[God-Raped-Me]

There's only so far up we can go though. once we hit that we're going to have to go out, or to space depending on technology.

 

[The Dinosaur Next Door]

It's true that the lesser of two evils is still an evil, but if humans were to expand upward first and then, as a last resort, move outward, we will essentially lengthen the time that we have on earth and slow the damage being done to it.  

[God-Raped-Me]

I think it's cool that one day we'll be able to have cities on water! I would even say screw it to he cities and use the devices as growing centers!