|
No really. Why wouldn't we try to remove traits like cystic fibrosis, that fatal disease that affects jewish people mostly, downs syndrome, congenital blindness, etc. Is it just stigma from the holocaust or other genocides?
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 02:25 |
|
|
For one, you wouldnt be alive. Wait...
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
gettin some deja vu here
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
Methanar posted:stigma from the holocaust or other genocides
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Who's choosing the undesirables? What's their criteria?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
Methanar posted:Is it just stigma from the holocaust Afterwards the programs ended. So yes that's why it stopped. Also the fact it's loving evil helped to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
stigma from everyone who advocated for it seriously being a whacked out fascist who immediately went 'and then we can get rid of all the non whites!' but yeah otherwise I don't see the problem with it as a concept; it's just selective breeding but for people. we do it to animals there's nothing inherently evil about that. really the issue is who decides what gets bred out, because it's easy to start with obvious poo poo like genetic disease but it's also easy to get some aforementioned whacked out fascist trying to make sure poors/blacks/undesirables don't breed Bowlcutbarricade posted:Up in till the holocaust the united states was practicing forced sterilization and the euthanasia of mentally ill people. forced sterilization might be evil but idk who says you have the right to have a bunch of kids if you have a 90% chance of giving them a disease? just adopt, there's too many kids needing help as it is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
do eugenics and the name eugene have a common root? sorry if i'm getting off track here but it seemed like a good place to ask also nothing is wrong with it and obviously its good to prevent bad stuff
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
we're such monstrous shitheads that we can't even realize full communism why would we entrust anyone with deciding who and what gets culled in a eugenics program
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
burritolingus posted:Who's choosing the undesirables? What's their criteria? >90% chance of being affected by a seriously debilitating condition at birth such as being born paralyzed, blind, serious mental illness, genetic disease, hereditary disease or with any condition known to be fatal. Choosers would be a board of top medical officials from around the world with combined centuries of medical experience. Alternatively a computer which runs a very stringent set of simulations or something to calculate the odds of a baby being unsuitable. This calculation would be unbiased and decide entirely on statistical data and dna tests or something. Methanar fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Mar 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
God loves everyone equally OP. Everyone deserves a chance to live. Unless you're gay
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
burritolingus posted:Who's choosing the undesirables? What's their criteria? This really is the biggest problem but at the same time I don't think it's insurmountable. If you have transplant committees able to ethically decide who gets organs and who dies, I'm sure you could do some sort of non-biased doctor approved thing going. But yeah it's really easy to be like 'oh well you just need to get a check up and whatever' and then suddenly a bunch of poor people aren't allowed to have kids.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
it didn't kill you, that's one problem out of many
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
Nobody nowadays is willing to come out in favor of Eugenics because people will think they're like a nazi. And people who supported Eugenics back in the day didn't know poo poo about genetics, so they were just talking about trying to breed out stuff like being poor or being shifty looking or lesbeanism or being Irish. So there's no real good pro-eugenics voices out there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
what about small things like if you're made fully aware of the overwhelming odds that you will give your offspring some hosed up poo poo based on the genes of both parents, then you're allowed to have a kid but don't expect the state/insurance to cover that poo poo at all. bump up the tax breaks for adopting parents.boom boom boom posted:Nobody nowadays is willing to come out in favor of Eugenics because people will think they're like a nazi. And people who supported Eugenics back in the day didn't know poo poo about genetics, so they were just talking about trying to breed out stuff like being poor or being shifty looking or lesbeanism or being Irish. So there's no real good pro-eugenics voices out there. Yeah. Honestly it's probably a moot point because by the time public opinion is at all receptive of eugenics again, we'll probably have figured out how to modify genes in vitro so as to eliminate genetic disease through that route and making eugenics superfluous anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:39
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:This really is the biggest problem but at the same time I don't think it's insurmountable. If you have transplant committees able to ethically decide who gets organs and who dies, I'm sure you could do some sort of non-biased doctor approved thing going. "We're really trying to weed out
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
Eugenics is pointless for the same reason Microsoft doesn't upgrade Windows XP anymore. Genetic evolution is an outdated paradigm. "Hmmm, yes. Lets build the perfect ape rather than an artificial intelligence unburdened by the gene trash of a billion years of loving about." Ork of Fiction fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Mar 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Finding cures for genetic illnesses and maybe selecting traits for your unborn children with gene something something sounds better than murdering to me
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
If I am elected Eugenicist Primus, I promise to interbreed all races equally to make hot-as-gently caress ladies (and ladyboys???)
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
We already do eugenics it's called Planned Parenthood.   Wake up, sheeple.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
Jews start complaining and get all litigious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
p sure at this point we're holding out for the meds that fix your genes after conception so we don't have to have this debate
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
it would be cool if they offered free sterilization and testing for people with high genetic risk factors. by choice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
Eugene is a disgusting name for disgusting proles.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
President Kucinich posted:Eugene is a disgusting name for disgusting proles.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
We should do like the romans did and kill all the inferior babies. It would be no worse morally than abortion; if you can't compel a person to support another their her body, why is it right to make her do it with her wallet?
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:levy Is who I was thinking of when I wrote that. Gross as gently caress, probably lives in Eugene Oregon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
Ork of Fiction posted:"Hmmm, yes. Lets build the perfect ape this but for real
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:18
|
|
|
Morkyz posted:We should do like the romans did Ya lets use lead as a sweetener
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
kill yourself, op
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/science/biologists-call-for-halt-to-gene-editing-technique-in-humans.html?smid=tw-share Scientist seeks ban on gene editing. He's writing this now because gene editing techniques have gotten so good that it'd be almost easy to do now, and he wants a ban so that we don't gently caress up and cause a bunch of problems because our ability to change the genome is so much more advanced than our ability to understand what our changes will cause. tl;dr Eugenics is actually really easy now and we should totally do it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:42
|
|
|
We should do it and make the X-Men. EDIT: But not Angel or Nightcrawler gently caress those assholes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:43
|
|
|
Simple genetic stuff like genetic diseases, ya we can selectively breed against. Anything quantitative though, like intelligence, will be based more on pseudoscience than real science just yet. Eugenics is also closely linked with other "race-related sciences" like phrenology, which were important for justifying why rich old white guys should rule the world. Also a lot of their predictions and theories got blown the gently caress up by genetics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
Hypha posted:Simple genetic stuff like genetic diseases, ya we can selectively breed against. Anything quantitative though, like intelligence, will be based more on pseudoscience than real science just yet. Eugenics is also closely linked with other "race-related sciences" like phrenology, which were important for justifying why rich old white guys should rule the world. Also a lot of their predictions and theories got blown the gently caress up by genetics. Yeah, there's a lot of leftover baggage with the term 'eugenics.' I'd totally be down with regular eugenics without the weird racist overtones. Like, I'd be fine with a race of super-intelligent black overlords as long as they ran things smoothly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
st1LL_51ngl3 posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/science/biologists-call-for-halt-to-gene-editing-technique-in-humans.html?smid=tw-share
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
Bowlcutbarricade posted:Up in till the holocaust the united states was practicing forced sterilization of poor blacks and the euthanasia of mentally ill people. actually they continued into the 1970s
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:54
|
|
|
actually 1980s, go us of a
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
quakster posted:if editing genes is anything like hex editing computer files or building legos, im glad code:
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 08:00
|
|
|
Hypha posted:Simple genetic stuff like genetic diseases, ya we can selectively breed against. Anything quantitative though, like intelligence, will be based more on pseudoscience than real science just yet. Eugenics is also closely linked with other "race-related sciences" like phrenology, which were important for justifying why rich old white guys should rule the world. Also a lot of their predictions and theories got blown the gently caress up by genetics. This. The actual range of things we can quantify and select for / against is tiny and we couldn't expect the sort of dumb people who would be writing the rules to stay inside the lines and not gently caress it up by trying to select against religious beliefs or poverty. Look at the crap that goes on with people trying to slip creationism into science textbooks, then imagine these same shitheads trying to write eugenics laws.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 08:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 02:25 |
|
|
Ivor Biggun posted:This. The actual range of things we can quantify and select for / against is tiny and we couldn't expect the sort of dumb people who would be writing the rules to stay inside the lines and not gently caress it up by trying to select against religeous beliefs or poverty. Look at the crap that goes on with people trying to slip creationism into science textbooks, then imagine these same shitheads trying to write eugenics laws. Eh, I say go for it. If they create a race of deformed retards I'll be like a god for the remainder of my years on earth. If they create a race of brilliant supermen then the global quality of life will probably increase... or they'll kill of all the inferior people. Either way I'm pretty ok with whatever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 08:06
|
|