English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

9 answers

Exactly .....you are one of the smart ones

2007-01-18 22:13:17 · answer #1 · answered by Brown guy 2 · 2 1

Diseases aren't "meant" as anything. They are not deliberate.
It would be a lot more sensible if we controlled our own population through economic incentives as is needed. Disease is unpredictable and won't necessarily make the right choices.
Simple example: Europe needs a younger population at the moment. If Aids were to spread heavily here, the young population would diminish.
Also, not all diseases kill. Many just disable a person in some way. Nobody benefits from this.

2007-01-18 22:31:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You raise an interesting question here. If you believe that disease exists only as population control, then it should not be controlled, rather used as a natural method to control the Earth's rapidly growing population. On the other hand, if you look at the big picture, perhaps unhampered disease would exterminate the human race. It is only the total picture, disease coupled with Man's ability to combat it, that keeps our population in balance.

But I think the simplest answer to the question is evolution. We fight disease because disease attacks us. Survival is the most basic of all human motivations. When we discover that an ailment is threatening us, our family, friends or community, and we have the power to stop that threat, we will act to ensure our own survival and the survival of our offspring.

2007-01-18 22:04:21 · answer #3 · answered by Max 2 · 0 0

In the first place, I don't know who ever told you that diseases were meant as pupulation control, and therefore should not be cured at all. If this kind of nihilistic theory is followed, we would not need to eat or do anything to improve upon ourselves as human beings. Disease, crime, poverty and all other evils of this world are meant as challenges to our god-given intelligence and not as punishment or otherwise. The more we solve them, the better our survival.

2007-01-18 22:18:24 · answer #4 · answered by Paleologus 3 · 0 0

They were never meant to be "population control". They came about from Adamic sin and are a result of mankind's demand to live without the influence of God's wisdom, power, love, and justice.
Then again, with a screenname like you are using, you probably disagree with my statement anyway.

2007-01-18 22:02:48 · answer #5 · answered by krazykritik 5 · 0 1

Controlling population doesnt mean to let the people die..
It can be controlled by other means too.. and nyways We Aint the Hitler to control the population that way !!
:):)

2007-01-18 22:01:06 · answer #6 · answered by MaUj 2 · 0 0

Part of the Human endeavour, besides disease sucks we like WAR!

2007-01-18 22:17:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Need to keep to it in balance a little bit.

2007-01-18 21:59:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

NO, thats what wars are for and they take the cream of the crop, damn it.

2007-01-18 22:03:23 · answer #9 · answered by brown eyes 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers