Poll: Do you support Eugenics? (Poll)
- Thread starter Sneaky-Pie
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No. In effect, it was used as an excuse for Nazi support in the USA pre-WW2. Along with the first IQ tests which were soon adopted by the Eugenics movement at the time, it led to the blocking of around 6 million jewish and eastern european immigrants fleeing from Germany and the surrounding areas, and inforced the argument that white = better than black. Yes, arguing from histoical negativity is not the best, I do know this.
Whilst I can see it being used as a good thing, it's chance for miss-use is currently far too high. Like Communism, it has the potential for a great practice, but is unachievable at this current point.
Whilst I can see it being used as a good thing, it's chance for miss-use is currently far too high. Like Communism, it has the potential for a great practice, but is unachievable at this current point.
I honestly don't know what to think of Eugenics other than the fact that it used to exist naturally for the human race but we've effectively wiped it out due to all the advancements in medicine. Anyone following me here? Natural selection? Yeah... That kinda doesn't exist for us anymore...
well realistically we've already done about as much as we can to stop natural selection, so there needs to be SOMETHING to replace it. However, like many have said, far too corruptible. Comparable to communism, great in theory, terrible in practice. Idiocracy, anyone?
Objectively my arse, funny how the "horrible human being" that "doesn't fit into society" is the one that wants Eugenics. You're no more objective here than I am.xitel said:
How is cutting down diversity in the gene pool a good thing? How is Eugenics, a.k.a selective breeding, superior to advancing medicine and cybernetic/artificial replacements and gene therapy?
Then there's the logistics of the whole thing and somehow convincing the populous that taking away their freedom to have kids is for the best on the off-chance that generations down the line there might be some slight improvement. Yet the neighbours, they can still have kids. Because they have better genes. Sure lets discriminate against a part of the population, not based on their actions and deeds, but on something they have absolutely no control over. Still think everyone's going to get on just fine? Sounds like a powder keg to me.
As someone on the first page said, the temptation is immense. Breeding out things like evolutionary mistakes though, maybe.
Also, am I the only one who instantly thought uGenix from Timesplitters 3?
Also, am I the only one who instantly thought uGenix from Timesplitters 3?
Im basicly against this idea. its sound in theory after all who wouldnt want a child with all the best genentic qualities, the problem is its a massive attack on your rights. heres an example of how it could get blown out of proportion say in theory this is legalised that would mean only people with no inherent defencts of any kind could have kids. if you wear glasses your eyes are not as good as somone who doesnt need them, your right to procreate is revoked.
there is a history of mental illness in your family, your right to have kids is revoked. this list goes on and on.
So basicly bad idea, population control is taken care of automaticly anyway, it might not be nice to say this but earthquakes or any other natual disasters, violent crime, suicide even old age kills people thats less population instantly and it all adds up, the last thing a socicity needs is a ligitimate reason to stop procreation
there is a history of mental illness in your family, your right to have kids is revoked. this list goes on and on.
So basicly bad idea, population control is taken care of automaticly anyway, it might not be nice to say this but earthquakes or any other natual disasters, violent crime, suicide even old age kills people thats less population instantly and it all adds up, the last thing a socicity needs is a ligitimate reason to stop procreation
I don't see how it's possible you can't force women to have kids just to pass on desirable traits and you can't class "beauty" as a desirable trait as it's massively subjective.
There is no acceptable way to say you have to have x amount of kids that you may not actually want or you can't have any at all.
Breed us like cattle in baby farms and have the state look after the children as long as you can get away with no one actually having to carry said super babies. No wait just sterilize everyone then have the government keep DNA and gene records of everyone and use them to selectively create babies from these when we need more, kinda Brave New World like.
But remember we can't all be massive shiny adonis super men, even in a perfect society until we invent robots someone still needs to empty the bins and clean the loos.
There is no acceptable way to say you have to have x amount of kids that you may not actually want or you can't have any at all.
Breed us like cattle in baby farms and have the state look after the children as long as you can get away with no one actually having to carry said super babies. No wait just sterilize everyone then have the government keep DNA and gene records of everyone and use them to selectively create babies from these when we need more, kinda Brave New World like.
But remember we can't all be massive shiny adonis super men, even in a perfect society until we invent robots someone still needs to empty the bins and clean the loos.
Eugenics? I first thought of...
Thanks for the description.
For the most part, I'm against it. You can't tell people how many kids to have just because the entire human population tells you to. That's kinda edgy, getting into one's freedom rights and stuff.
On the other hand, some people should be advised against having kids. For example, where I come from, you'd see poop people begging for money and they would have like 5 children around. Come on, you barely have food for yourself and you're still having kids? No, these people are not rape victims, they're just poor and horny. What sucks is that these kids then roam the streets.
In that case, I would tell them that it's not fair to have another kid if they can't provide a roof over their heads or a meal everyday. I wouldn't force them to stop having kids but...well, I don't know.
About enhancing people's genetics: I'm not sure how these Eugenics work (I simply didn't know of the term) but I am against unborn children being genetically enhanced for whatever reason; the only exception being that everyone knows the kid will be born with some sort of disease or disability. But if it's just because someone wants their kid to have blue eyes or to be taller or smarter, then no. There's a certain beauty that comes from naturally born children: they have pros and cons. Variety's good! It's who you are. If we get into this, next thing you know, we're gonna have a world full of Barbies and Kens.
However, if an adult makes the choice to get something altered, then I suppose that's fine as long as it is for a powerful reason, again, like a sickness or something like that.
Hope I understood that correctly.
Thanks for the description.
For the most part, I'm against it. You can't tell people how many kids to have just because the entire human population tells you to. That's kinda edgy, getting into one's freedom rights and stuff.
On the other hand, some people should be advised against having kids. For example, where I come from, you'd see poop people begging for money and they would have like 5 children around. Come on, you barely have food for yourself and you're still having kids? No, these people are not rape victims, they're just poor and horny. What sucks is that these kids then roam the streets.
In that case, I would tell them that it's not fair to have another kid if they can't provide a roof over their heads or a meal everyday. I wouldn't force them to stop having kids but...well, I don't know.
About enhancing people's genetics: I'm not sure how these Eugenics work (I simply didn't know of the term) but I am against unborn children being genetically enhanced for whatever reason; the only exception being that everyone knows the kid will be born with some sort of disease or disability. But if it's just because someone wants their kid to have blue eyes or to be taller or smarter, then no. There's a certain beauty that comes from naturally born children: they have pros and cons. Variety's good! It's who you are. If we get into this, next thing you know, we're gonna have a world full of Barbies and Kens.
However, if an adult makes the choice to get something altered, then I suppose that's fine as long as it is for a powerful reason, again, like a sickness or something like that.
Hope I understood that correctly.
I like the idea in theory... Not if it was to be used on the entire human race but if it were, par-say, used in a small isolate community (lets say... first people to settle Mars!). If those few people breed weakness then the generations that follow will be in trouble...
I'm not saying "Lets breed out brown eyes!" or anything like that, but breeding out certain genetic diseases would be a good thing wouldn't it?
I'm not saying "Lets breed out brown eyes!" or anything like that, but breeding out certain genetic diseases would be a good thing wouldn't it?
I agree wholeheartedly good sir.EverythingIncredible said:
Also, breeding IMO is not a human right. If it is not necessary for living without discomfort then I don't believe we have an innate right to it.
There are a lot of people that are allowed to breed even though they have a high chance of a deformed or highly disabled child, no child deserves that. I just don't think that should be allowed, it wouldn't happen naturally because people with those kind of issues would most likely die off but thanks to our technological advancements life is easy enough to survive for anyone. Controlling the gene pool would bring in an ethical way to replicating survival of the fittest.
Obviously vying for some super human clone army where everyone is the same is ridiculous and immoral to remove our identity but there are many things that could do with being bred out of the gene pool.
Even if Eugenics was a good idea, (which it's not), you guys have to remember that Scientists never hold political power. Political power comes from those willing to sacrifice anything and everything good to obtain it. There would be political struggles by politicians, not scientists, to control what happens with the DNA pool.
except that everything you just said was patently false. Hitler rejected Darwinism, and thought that evolution leading to new species was quite literally impossible. His beliefs had nothing to do with science because they weren't rooted in reproducible analysis and hypothesis.TheIronRuler said:
If in the process we are able to get rid of some of the harsher imperfections that no one really deserves or that aren't just part of life (for example, cancer is a part of life, and in a way helps us not overpopulate or overextend human existence) sure. I would love to see it implemented in the more unlucky places on earth.
There's a difference, however, between that and just wanting to get rid of every disease we could contract, because that's just wrong and sick. Immortality/invulnerability in my opinion is something we should never desire.
There's a difference, however, between that and just wanting to get rid of every disease we could contract, because that's just wrong and sick. Immortality/invulnerability in my opinion is something we should never desire.
@ UnusualStranger
What the f"@k gives you or anybody the right to decide what is a debilitaing illness that is irresponible to pass on to their kids, the only person who has that right is the parents, if people know that they have a debilitating illness and will pass it on to there child many people will think twice about having a child, it's there personal moral decision, that you should respect a moral human being
And about the overpopulation and such this is fucking horseshit, You my friend have so little faith in humanity that you belive that people are having large quantity of children because they desire this, humans are moral it is what makes us not all do immorale acts and punish the people who do, they have large families because many would not have lived 5 or 10 years ago and due to changing circumstances do now, it's as much a part of their moral* (*you read: stupid) decisions as it is about there desire to Destroy the World
You see people think that humanity has Transcended the Laws of Natural Selection which thay have not, we are as subject to these Laws as Any species, we will not destroy this planet by over population, as it will repond to it just as it would be impossible to destoy all life in almost any way
Now i understand your concerns about the apparent path that mankind is on but i ask you to belive that your not the only person with morals, you do not need to decide peoples path because they can do that themselves.
What the f"@k gives you or anybody the right to decide what is a debilitaing illness that is irresponible to pass on to their kids, the only person who has that right is the parents, if people know that they have a debilitating illness and will pass it on to there child many people will think twice about having a child, it's there personal moral decision, that you should respect a moral human being
And about the overpopulation and such this is fucking horseshit, You my friend have so little faith in humanity that you belive that people are having large quantity of children because they desire this, humans are moral it is what makes us not all do immorale acts and punish the people who do, they have large families because many would not have lived 5 or 10 years ago and due to changing circumstances do now, it's as much a part of their moral* (*you read: stupid) decisions as it is about there desire to Destroy the World
You see people think that humanity has Transcended the Laws of Natural Selection which thay have not, we are as subject to these Laws as Any species, we will not destroy this planet by over population, as it will repond to it just as it would be impossible to destoy all life in almost any way
Now i understand your concerns about the apparent path that mankind is on but i ask you to belive that your not the only person with morals, you do not need to decide peoples path because they can do that themselves.
I'm all for making superior people, but I wouldn't want to live in a world similar to Sparta. What I mean is this: "This baby is weak. Let's leave him/her on a mountain to die."