Incorrect. Even if we are machines following a set if programming, we still have a point. That point may be to reproduce genes, but more and more we play host to memes. Ideas that live in our heads. And this forum as a mean to spread those memes is very pointy.

Incorrecter. Without free will there is no point to reproducing genes, hosting memes, or indeed spreading those memes. They are just meaningless things that happened to happen for a period of time, like a rock, drizzle, or France.

Oh, you mean no point for humans to... but the point is they would try to spread despite humans self-importance (and yes, i know some memes that get into our heads can reduce the number of genes we spread.. and free will is a meme which may be useful and thus spread successfully...)

There is nothing important outside of humanity. Things only have a value because we give it to them. The great wonders of nature are only great and wondrous because we observe them to be so.

Meme are the things that tells us we should make things important.

Or to put it another way, the idea that something is important is a meme.

So it's fine for people to procreate when they cannot ensure that they can raise those children in safety with adequate resources, and when it all goes pear shaped, they can ignore those formal ways to migrate to Australia, and we take more refugees per capita than most countries except Canada, get here illegally, and then throw all their demands at us, and I'm a prick because I'm not a compliant doormat willing to open my taxpayers wallet immediately ?

Oh and it was Greek Christians who burnt the library at Alexandria and most probably murdered Hypatia, the woman who first postulated an elliptical orbit for the earth in a heliocentric "solar system" ..way to go guys

I don't agree with the idea that value is either

A. given by religion or a higher power

or

B. things only have value if humans deem them to have value

like... is there no middle ground where there is a higher state of existence, but doesn't follow any form of "religious" dogma? It's like atheists who claim that science is inherently purposeless, only inasmuch that it helps reveal our past, things about ourself, etc.

I love science, I don't believe in god, but saying that there is no purpose is ridiculous, because it is totally unverified, rather it is saying "religion says there's value, but religion has been exposed as a fraud, so there is no value"

it's a false syllogism.

I.E.

if I say that "there is a god that is all knowing" then ask you to prove me wrong, it's impossible because you must prove a null

if I say that "there is life somewhere in the universe other than here" then ask you to prove me wrong, you can give me very rough statistics, but it's much more conceivable because we have observed life, and we can observe microevolution and genes and determine how such things would possibly take place. Not impossible now, but very hard.

if I say that "it is possible for life to have meaning without religion" we are not delving into a purely theoretical realm. You have a philosophical aspect that many modern intellectual can dichotomize into: there is no purpose, VS if there is a purpose, we are not able to currently conceive it.

However there is a physical realm of science that deals with this too. The physical sending of probes out into the Universe, could potentially expand our knowledge, and give us capabilities understand human meaning on a plain higher than any thought currently created.

The problem is that my last claim is debated on both realms: tangible and philosophical, where the tangible argument is "yes we must search more" and the philosophical argument is "there's no other perspective or dimension to this we can currently perceive"

Thus science is necessary to expand philosophy.

@MM are you wealthy enough to live in Australia without government subsidy? Cause whether you are a prick or not for helping others or not, really depends on your ability to help, imo.

And your whole arguements seems to be flawed. These people had the resources (both monetary, and mental) to get their family to safety when a war broke out - probably a war they had no control over... So i'd place them on the 'adequate resources' scale of things. BUT how could they ever make those decisions in advance - without knowing the future or whether your country will end up in a civil war (or invaded by the US, in the case of Afghanistan... I'm kinda assuming we are talking mostly about Syria refugees)

"So it's fine for people to procreate when they cannot ensure that they can raise those children in safety with adequate resources"
In the West, no. There, it's an expectation.
"and when it all goes pear shaped, they can ignore those formal ways to migrate to Australia"
When they're refugees, they don't WANT to be there, they HAVE to leave their homes (or what's left of their homes).

Yes they're refugees, amongst millions globally, I'd like to see Australia's foreign Aid budget increased, per capita we're a donor / helper Nation amongst refugee crisis areas, but we cannot give refuge to all refugees
There's the waiting lists of millions in camps, the poorest... Australia takes a reasonable share, per capita, our total population is small approx 25 million
We also provide decent welfare services to help refugees who come via our Government aid programs integrate into a new country, Nation and it's people.
Why should refugees who are already in "transit" countries start cherry picking where they will go next, not on safety reasons,..push factors but more on economic pull reasons..then often paying. Using money to side step our aid programs and queu jump poorer refugees from far worse situations than those who've made it to say Indonesia a transit country..should they get ahead of ones who have endured the camps and went about applying to get here and complying with our agencies processes ?

I'd rather see us give refuge to refugees from the worst situations in Africa who go through our aid programs than the clientele of people smugglers coming after a spell in a few transit countries

Which is what we do, help the refugees from the worst situations
We're not a perfect philanthropist nation, we're young ...only a federated nation for 116 years I'm reasonably proud of our foreign aid track record.. Not perfect, but better than other nations out there

Syria and Russia obviously don't want to cooperate with the cease fire, their latest efforts around Aleppo deserve universal condemnation.

@MajorMitchell The ceasefire wouldn't have even been necessary if the US and its allies in the Middle East didn't arm and train Syrians and foreign jihadists from all over the world. Set the region on fire, then ask for a ceasefire when it's clear your guys are losing. Wow.

"Syria and Russia obviously don't want to cooperate with the cease fire..." - almost like they have their own interests, which they are pushing for.

Just like the US has it's own interests.

Well that Syrian dictatorship was doing such a good job that his own people rose against his regime
I'm prepared to criticise US foreign policy but it's Putin who is really playing a dirty game in Syria

Worldwide..estimated 60 million refugees and displaced persons
Gee it's going well

I think, maybe mistakenly, that I can make the sort of comments about the way people recklessly have children then demand, repeat demand they have some right to stroll into my country and have us fulfil their expectations.
I bang on about the fire breathing MemSahib, Her Indoors.. Sired by the devil himself.. many years ago we posts child in birth and I nearly lost her, and of course.. No way she could try again.. Yes indeed, thanks God
So what does she do...gives to charities that sponsor children in the poorest parts of the world. It's too much for me to get involved with apart from "signing the cheques" and drinking a bit too much whisky.
Her indoors has her gallery of photos and letters, she knits them silly presents, and I indulge her in this hobby.
So when I see some desperate dad and mum with a litter of kids..Demanding resettlement, I understand, and emphasise a bit, but part of me can't help wanting to ask them..Take responsibility..admit you acted selfishly breeding like rabbits and try asking not demanding

Oops a typo.. We lost..not we posts

It's easy to sneer at and criticise the USA
I've started reading a history of the USAAF's Eighth Air Force during WW2...these armchair critics might want to consider the possibility that the armed forces of the USA have done, and continue to do good work for the global community

"hen demand, repeat demand they have some right to stroll into my country and have us fulfil their expectations."

Maybe you should look at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and see what Rights were Universally Declared under it. (i'll give you a hint, its in article 14)

Just think about why that is a thing at all. Look at the history of it. And decide which rights you think humans actually deserve.

And about 95%+ of the refugees who try to get to Australia do so from a "transit" country, often several transit countries after leaving their own country which they first fled...they change from being genuine refugees to "economic" refugees.
I support my nations very generous refugee resettlement programs.. Australia and Canada lead the world in refugee resettlement (per capita )
I personally help refugees and the fire breathing MemSahib, Her Indoors has her own "sponsor / support" children in poor families overseas activities.

Perhaps when your nation Orathaic lifts it's own performance past that of Australia in refugee resettlement you might have a basis to make some criticism

Australia's send back the boats policy is dreadful though.

Refugees are overwhelmingly a positive boon to the local economy. The problems with resettlement manifest in the ability of refugees to integrate into the community, and the ability of the local community to accept outsiders. It is a cultural and political problem not an economic problem.

I agree with the comment that Australia's border protection policies are not perfect,,"turn back the boats" is an emotive description that suits political agendas.
However the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd alternative policies were a disaster.

So if you can suggest a workable, effective alternative then be my guest.

Strong border protection policies do influence in a positive way public support for a generous refugee intake, and public support for both emigration and refugee resettlement is essential.... and strong border protection policies cut the ground from under our own dangerously lunatic right wing Politicians such as Pauline Hanson and their campaigns of fear mongering ( too some degree..her recent resurgence is definitely a worry )

Goobledygook, you miss the "economic" point
Refugees who try to come to Australia outside of our resettlement programs, overwhelmingly come via transit countries.
Having got to a transit country, they have escaped the oppression etc that made them flee their own country... They then cherry pick a country, Australia which is prosperous because they want to share in that wealth.. Their reasons for wanting to come here are more self interested economic reasons, and not reasons to do with political persecution... Get it ?

Your point about the benefits of refugees, and it applies to emigrants to the host nation is valid Gobbledygook... That's why Australia gives a new home to substantial numbers of migrants, and per capita takes more refugees than any other nation apart from Canada. So if you want to do some good I suggest you encourage the citizens of Nations other than Canada and Australia to lobby their governments to lift their game and match our performance