Eugene
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-08-2014, 03:15 AM
RE: Eugene
(08-08-2014 11:55 PM)Wicked Clown Wrote:  so what if in the past century the only people who were allowed to reproduce were those with exceptionally good genetics, intellectual abilities, and physical strength. what if all who had clearly bad genes that could be passed on were sterilized?

whould the world we live in be better? wouldn't there be less obesity, feeble mindedness, or physical handicaps?

And more good looking people, who are more physically fit, and more intelligent? Would breeding only the very intelligent and physically fit, and sterilizing everyone else create a better world?
There would be absolutely no objective way to do this. No way to prevent from sterilizing atheists or religious groups, political opponents, racial enemies, intellectuals, or above-average good looking people, because they're too pretty. If someone has the power to grab people and cut their balls and ovaries off, he has the power to do anything.

I think we have to get by to genetic engineering and then engineer the hell out of ourselves. I don't have a problem with that, unless it's misused to make people dumber or something. I'd love to have my vitamin C synthesis switched on or perhaps limbs growing back, if something could be done about the increased risk of cancer. Christian west civilization is squeamish, but the Chinese would say, of course children need to be made better than parents. And it would be a huge improvement over whatever Mao was up to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 05:32 AM
RE: Eugene
(08-08-2014 11:55 PM)Wicked Clown Wrote:  so what if in the past century the only people who were allowed to reproduce were those with exceptionally good genetics, intellectual abilities, and physical strength. what if all who had clearly bad genes that could be passed on were sterilized?

whould the world we live in be better? wouldn't there be less obesity, feeble mindedness, or physical handicaps?

And more good looking people, who are more physically fit, and more intelligent? Would breeding only the very intelligent and physically fit, and sterilizing everyone else create a better world?

My first thought was Stephen Hawking. Would he have been born or not? He carries a gene for physical illness, but has a great mind.
Then there's the fact that a gene can be good or bad depending on the environment. (http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/ev...nes.shtml)
Selective breeding can also lead to unintended consequences. Pure bred animals often have other issues and weaknesses.
And finally, improvements in genetics are often the result of random mutation and you're more likely to get a random mutation with a large and varied gene pool than with a small and selective pool.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 05:47 AM
RE: Eugene
Everyone thinks of the Jewish people when they think of Hitler. He did have the mentally disturbed killed too, as well as the sickly hospital dwellers. They just quietly disappeared overnight. They were a useless burden.

When you look at his art, you see the perfectly shaped, blue eyed, blond population he wanted to create.

His goal was a uniformly beautiful, healthy , intelligent people.

We all know how that turned out.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 10:45 AM
RE: Eugene
(10-08-2014 03:15 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(08-08-2014 11:55 PM)Wicked Clown Wrote:  so what if in the past century the only people who were allowed to reproduce were those with exceptionally good genetics, intellectual abilities, and physical strength. what if all who had clearly bad genes that could be passed on were sterilized?

whould the world we live in be better? wouldn't there be less obesity, feeble mindedness, or physical handicaps?

And more good looking people, who are more physically fit, and more intelligent? Would breeding only the very intelligent and physically fit, and sterilizing everyone else create a better world?
There would be absolutely no objective way to do this. No way to prevent from sterilizing atheists or religious groups, political opponents, racial enemies, intellectuals, or above-average good looking people, because they're too pretty. If someone has the power to grab people and cut their balls and ovaries off, he has the power to do anything.

I think we have to get by to genetic engineering and then engineer the hell out of ourselves. I don't have a problem with that, unless it's misused to make people dumber or something. I'd love to have my vitamin C synthesis switched on or perhaps limbs growing back, if something could be done about the increased risk of cancer. Christian west civilization is squeamish, but the Chinese would say, of course children need to be made better than parents. And it would be a huge improvement over whatever Mao was up to.

Okay, so what if everyone who is dangerously obese, or any one that had a disease or defect that is notorious for being passed on to children, had not bred in the last two centuries.

Would we have a better world?

Wouldn't it ease so much suffering if we steralized everyone with HIV for instance?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 01:12 PM
RE: Eugene
First off it is called eugenics, Eugene is a given name for females. Forcibly sterilizing people is an obvious violation of their rights, and I think it should be apparent that this is wrong.

Liberal eugenics is a very good idea though. And we may soon reach a point where it is possible to genetically improve the unborn, which is an exciting concept.

Paleoliberal • English Nationalist • Zionist • Rightist • Anti-Islam • Neoconservative • Republican • Linguistic Revivalist and Purist

Happily Divorced from the Left!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 01:13 PM
RE: Eugene
(10-08-2014 10:45 AM)Wicked Clown Wrote:  
(10-08-2014 03:15 AM)Luminon Wrote:  There would be absolutely no objective way to do this. No way to prevent from sterilizing atheists or religious groups, political opponents, racial enemies, intellectuals, or above-average good looking people, because they're too pretty. If someone has the power to grab people and cut their balls and ovaries off, he has the power to do anything.

I think we have to get by to genetic engineering and then engineer the hell out of ourselves. I don't have a problem with that, unless it's misused to make people dumber or something. I'd love to have my vitamin C synthesis switched on or perhaps limbs growing back, if something could be done about the increased risk of cancer. Christian west civilization is squeamish, but the Chinese would say, of course children need to be made better than parents. And it would be a huge improvement over whatever Mao was up to.

Okay, so what if everyone who is dangerously obese, or any one that had a disease or defect that is notorious for being passed on to children, had not bred in the last two centuries.

Would we have a better world?

Wouldn't it ease so much suffering if we steralized everyone with HIV for instance?

It would completely eliminate human suffering if all people were humanely killed. That doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Paleoliberal • English Nationalist • Zionist • Rightist • Anti-Islam • Neoconservative • Republican • Linguistic Revivalist and Purist

Happily Divorced from the Left!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2014, 01:19 PM
RE: Eugene
Quote:Wouldn't it ease so much suffering if we steralized everyone with HIV for instance?

Wouldn't it ease so much suffering if we steralized everyone with HIV for instance?

Wouldn't it ease so much suffering if we steralized everyone with HIV for instance?
[Image: imagejpg1_zps55b56863.jpg]

I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Smercury44's post
10-08-2014, 01:21 PM
RE: Eugene
First off...HIV can be stopped from being passed along in childbirth. So moot point.
Secondly there is no one on this planet who has any right to decide what is an undesirable trait to be sterilized. Talk about a slippery slope. I believe this lesson was already learned from sterilizing people with disabilities.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hobbitgirl's post
10-08-2014, 01:21 PM
RE: Eugene
It's ironic that the only one in favor of this would be someone who would be in the first round of either sterilizations or eliminations (depending on which kind of eugenics he is pushing).

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
10-08-2014, 01:27 PM
RE: Eugene
I never said I favored instituting some law or policy. I ask you guys questions to see if you thought it would cause less suffering in the World!

Please answer:
Okay, so if everyone who is dangerously obese, or any one that had a disease or defect that is notorious for being passed on to children, had not bred in the last two centuries.

Would we have a better world?
(less suffering, less disabilities)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: