Foundlings and the Orphan Trains: video by CONSPIRACY-R-US

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
797
Reactions
2,155
From the Canadian end

Louisa Birt was the sister of Annie Macpherson, both of whom worked with destitute children. Mrs. Birt became the head of the Liverpool Sheltering Home in 1873, the same year in which she started sending children to Canada.

From 1873 to 1876, approximately 550 Birt children were placed in homes in Nova Scotia by Colonel James Wimburn Laurie.

Annie Macpherson no longer needed her receiving and distribution home in Knowlton, Quebec, so Mrs. Birt began using the Knowlton Home in 1877.

Mrs. Birt also brought children over from the Christ Church Homes, Claughton, Birkenhead, and various British Unions and industrial schools.
 

Recognition

Active member
Messages
92
Reactions
243
Yikes. "c.1300, from Late Latin orphanus "parentless child" (source of Old French orfeno, Italian orfano), from Greek orphanos "orphaned, without parents, fatherless," literally "deprived," from orphos "bereft," from PIE *orbho- "bereft of father," also "deprived of free status," from root *orbh- "to change allegiance, to pass ..."

Even creepier: "Informal. to deprive of commercial sponsorship, an employer, etc."

Then thisinteresting page quote:

A PUPIL OF ETYMOLOGY

"The first definition of pupil came from the French word pupille, which meant "orphan", since many orphans became students, supposedly? This is from its Latin etymon pupillus, with the same meaning. This is a diminutive of the earlier word pupus, or"boy". Pupil meaning "the part of the eye", however, derives from the French homonym of the previous word pupille, which in this case meant "little doll"

Looked everything up myself and then found this reddit thread finding the same things:
Lastly, this page from this book: Inheriting Walter Benjamin

Disgusting how these poor kids were treated😢

In terms of the 'little doll' etymology, reminds me of that show humans, where they often call the clones "dollies". Cloning is not this amazing playing god type situation. It's just farming. If these orphans were clones, they were farmed, but no less deserving of love, freedom, and autonomy than we ourselves are. It would be really interesting if these poor beings were mistreated because they were "parentless children"aka cloned, and people thought this made it ok. Really puts into question that stupid joke about red head children having no souls. Of course they had souls, but if some of them were cloned, maybe that classic rationale of "i can mistreat this creature, because since it was farmed, it had no soul" made the abuse not stick in the craw of the abusers, quite so much.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,209
Reactions
16,777
That would explain why in the so-called “ancient” Rome “free” population had no issues watching slaves slaughtering each other on various arenas. If those were clones, for them it would be very similar to a battle of robots for us. There would be no feelings involved. This is entertainment after all.
 

WarningGuy

Well-known member
Messages
144
Reactions
368
This thread is getting scary.
Ok lets say these orphans are some sort of clone and this has been happening since the so called roman times or beyond and they are soulless what would that make us ? What if my great grandmother who was one of the Irish orphans sent to Australia in the 1800s a clone also. Would that make me soulless as well ?
 

irishbalt

Active member
Messages
71
Reactions
169
This thread is getting scary.
Ok lets say these orphans are some sort of clone and this has been happening since the so called roman times or beyond and they are soulless what would that make us ? What if my great grandmother who was one of the Irish orphans sent to Australia in the 1800s a clone also. Would that make me soulless as well ?
I'm really sorry but I have to step in here. If you look at the genetic markers In England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales you find distinct differentiations. Compare that with China, Taiwan, North and South Korea; however, I'm very skeptical regarding "biorobots", clones etc . . . Perhaps there was more than one "peopling" of this realm and we vibrate at different frequency, making each tribe a bit alien to a tribe accross the ocean. So all with souls, though one tribe believes theirs is superior to every other.
 

Recognition

Active member
Messages
92
Reactions
243
This thread is getting scary.
Ok lets say these orphans are some sort of clone and this has been happening since the so called roman times or beyond and they are soulless what would that make us ? What if my great grandmother who was one of the Irish orphans sent to Australia in the 1800s a clone also. Would that make me soulless as well ?
Not at all, my point is that the propaganda about potential clones would exist, then (as potentially in our future) to excuse gross abuses against people who were "created" to serve.

The ethical implications of cloning in current discussions are gently twisted these days, and i'm betting they were back then, too. Look up ethical quandaries about cloning nowadies and one of the bullet points will be something like 'gasp! But will they have souls?!'

Here's the thing though. If clones don't have souls, then we don't either. "Dolly the sheep was cloned using a process known as somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) which takes a somatic cell, such as a skin cell, and transfers its DNA to an egg cell with its nucleus removed. In the process, the DNA can be transferred by injection or through a process using electric currents."
(Where are the human clones? 20 years since Dolly was unveiled we look at the future of cloning)

Here's the thing, they don't know how to make the egg cell. By their logic any multiples born through ivf would also not have souls. Cloning is being dressed up to look like this magical process, but really it's just mass farming. The supposed dialogue about the 'ethics' of cloning usually leaves this part out.

That is the scary thing to me-what ideology are they trying to shape for us? Perhaps trying to bring back a roman times lack of concern for our fellow man.

So yes, @WarningGuy of course your ancestors/ the irish orphans had souls! It's a god**n lie that was (and from the looks of it, is now) being promoted to excuse farming and inhumane actions of the most extreme kind.
Post automatically merged:

That would explain why in the so-called “ancient” Rome “free” population had no issues watching slaves slaughtering each other on various arenas. If those were clones, for them it would be very similar to a battle of robots for us. There would be no feelings involved. This is entertainment after all.
Entymology of free: "The sense evolution from "to love" to "free" is perhaps from the terms "beloved" or "friend" being applied to the free members of one's clan (as opposed to slaves; compare Latin liberi, meaning both "free persons" and "children of a family".

This connects even more with this thread imo
 
Last edited:

Banta

Active member
Messages
44
Reactions
158
I again think we need to widen our definition of clones and the like. I think it is easier for species to get impregnated with non-species sources than is conventionally believed and this tendency could probably be cultivated with specific preparations.

I just think that there is a tendency to view these things through the lens of our current technology structure and that could be obscuring part of the puzzle. It's probably more like breeding dogs than test tube babies... Animal human hybrids are some of the first things I think of, but what if "artificial sperm" was more or less combined together with natural ingredients? Or even more practically, it was just a grab bag of various donors, so paternity would be impossible to tell?

Still trying to figure how what a half-orphan could be in that context. Offspring of a True Orphan I suppose.
 

Sawdy

Member
Messages
16
Reactions
55
I think we over complicate things at times. A half-orphan could be as simple as having a mother and not a father or vice versa. Women generally seemed to be at home raising children, so would be unable to work to provide for the family in the manner that is needed. Young children would then be sent to work to provide for themselves, if not also the family.

My husband's grandpa had lost his Mom at an early age. His sisters were sent to live with relatives in the US. He stayed in Canada with his Dad and brother to farm.

Although not orphaned, my husband's grandma was sent to work away from home and was responsible for sending home money to take care of her younger siblings and their farm. Her mother was quite unhappy when she got engaged and married as an "old maid" as it cut off their revenue stream.

Times were tough and it is better to see someone able to survive rather than starve to death. My husband's grandpa was on the very of starvation his entire childhood as they struggled to make ends meet.
 
Top