Artificial Selection and Humans

[Jonluw]

Sure, why not.
I dislike the notion that it's a human right to have children.

It's no longer your undisputed right when you're seriously affecting other people.

 

[Aizsaule]

To be fair Aizsaule, morality doesn't really allow for tax breaks either. It is wrong to punish people who have no control over their own condition. Besides, what you are proposing would fast become a bureaucracy of staggering size, far dwarfing any benefits that can be gained from reduced medical care. Everyone in the country would need to be vetted to make this work, and it would need to be repeated every 5 years to keep it viable. By the time you finish you would have to start again, before even, if you were thorough.

I think the only thing that is realistically achievable is giving money to those who get good genes at a sperm bank and preventing people with bad genes from donating, this would leave nobody cheated and still would gradually improve our genetic quality.

You are right that checking everyone's genes in not realistic, however i think it would be fair to tax/fine those who have expansive genetic diseases and CHOOSE to have children regardless.

the only real factor in natural selection is how many children one decides to get, this will cause a constant increase in genetic disease due to random mutation, it seems impractical not to promote healthier genes.

 

[lovestomooch]

To be fair Aizsaule, morality doesn't really allow for tax breaks either. It is wrong to punish people who have no control over their own condition. Besides, what you are proposing would fast become a bureaucracy of staggering size, far dwarfing any benefits that can be gained from reduced medical care. Everyone in the country would need to be vetted to make this work, and it would need to be repeated every 5 years to keep it viable. By the time you finish you would have to start again, before even, if you were thorough.

I think the only thing that is realistically achievable is giving money to those who get good genes at a sperm bank and preventing people with bad genes from donating, this would leave nobody cheated and still would gradually improve our genetic quality.

You are right that checking everyone's genes in not realistic, however i think it would be fair to tax/fine those who have expansive genetic diseases and CHOOSE to have children regardless.

the only real factor in natural selection is how many children one decides to get, this will cause a constant increase in genetic disease due to random mutation, it seems impractical not to promote healthier genes.

Yes, I agree with you on the sperm bank issue. It wouldn't make sense to have donors who would produce poor offspring. And the issue with children does also make sense (but you wouldn't be able to do any more than talk about it with them). Though most parents with moderate to severe underlying conditions who are willing and able to produce, freely recognise that any children they have are likely to have a lower quality of life and so refrain from having a lot of kids.

I still believe however, that in all cases the rights of the individual must come first. Also, our understanding of Human Biology and advancements in Medical treatment are gradually rendering the likelihood of ever having to do this more and more distant so hopefully we won't have to make the choice. Anyway's, good discussion dude.

 

[Jakub324]

Yeah, I do. Within 250 years, crime could be minimal, war could be non-existent and the economy would be in better shape than ever before. What's not to like?