Let's face it. In the Beginning, the Big Fella in the Sky made a catastrophic error of judgement by underestimating the universal attraction of sexual intercourse.
Consequently we are faced with an impending shortage of critical essential supplies (food, water, alcohol, breathable air) due to overpopulation.
But I'm slowly coming to the realisation that longevity is a punishment for not making the most out of one's allotted three score years and ten.
I mean, check our your average 75 year old.
After a lifetime of overconsumption and self indulgence, his / her contribution to society (baby-sitting grandchildren, grotesque and ultimately futile disproportionate consumption of globally scarce therapeutics, relentless compulsion to bore the shit out of friends, relatives and complete strangers by recounting in mind-numbing detail their latest interaction with health professionals), is barely balanced by the knowledge that, whatever heroics the medical profession is exercising on their behalf, we're all, sooner or later, gonna die. Even them.
If we were following the implied conditions of our tenancy, we would be compelled to adjust our behaviour to maximise the use of our alloted time, and would simply wear out, grinding to a halt in our mid-60's.
In my opinion, there should be a harsher penalty for those who deliberately set out to flout the rules by eating healthy foods, abjuring alcohol and compulsively exercising.
If I was the BFITS, having put in a lot of time and calculation into allotted life spans (bearing in mind the complications of overcrowding and resultant limitation of essential supplies (food, water, alcohol), I'd be really pissed that anybody should surreptitiously attempt to avoid the assigned limited-time-on-court by bending the rules, not acceding to the hooter when it signals "Game Over" for everybody else.
I mean if everbody decides that the rules don't apply to them and declines to vacate the field and move along when "TIME!" is called, the whole shebang will deteriorate into an overcrowded shambles, even putting aside issues of supply and demand for basic finite essential supplies (air, water, beer, single-malt whisky) due, basically, to the underestimated attraction of sexual intercourse)
And when you think about it, an allowance of 65 years (with annual review by an expert panel of 40 year olds who would take into account all these important issues), would be a pretty good system, with a constant supply of fresh blood on the panel to bring in new ideas.
As my Italian grandmother would say to those who want more, "Dont'a be greedy!"
And anyway, as Brian May pointed out, "who wants to live forever?"
Comments
Post a Comment