Is eugenics really all that bad? (On an individual level)

I see no problem with it at all

6bfcb0a3df246abd0133e179024fd66d_400x400.jpeg
 
Nope, fully support it.

It's the natural progression of things. Do we really need to continue living in a world with diseases and low iq people?

No. The problem is humans can be pretty awful and that's the issue.

Ayahuasca said:
How far does it go though? When all the men are 6ft 6, chiselled jawlines and 140 IQ?
Click to expand...

That is 100% where it would go, it's over for copecels.
 
CREATIVE!11 said:
Do we really need to continue living in a world with diseases
Click to expand...

The problem with that is we don't understand enough to just screen embryos for potential or even certain genetical diseases and decide their life isn't worthy. We would have got rid of some of the greatest minds in history based on our yardstick of what's normal, acceptable or desireable.
 
It's one of those slippery slopes, starts off with the little things nobody would argue against- reduced tendancy for cancer, heart disease etc

then what's the harm in changing eye colour or hair colour? come to think of it what's so bad about increased muscle mass or higher intelligence?

next thing you know you have a new race, who will for obvious reasons believe themselves to be superior to everyone else (and arguably have a point), then they start calling natural born humans untermensch....

ultimately you could argue that in the long term once whatever fighting/segregation/extermination/slow decline of the natural born people is over that the future of humanity as a race entirely composed of genetically adapted creatures might be worth it, or perhaps the resultant lack of genetic diversity would be our ultimate downfall. but regardless it's gonna suck for anyone in this thread unlucky enough to live to see such times.
 
adolf hamster said:
It's one of those slippery slopes, starts off with the little things nobody would argue against- reduced tendancy for cancer, heart disease etc

then what's the harm in changing eye colour or hair colour? come to think of it what's so bad about increased muscle mass or higher intelligence?

next thing you know you have a new race, who will for obvious reasons believe themselves to be superior to everyone else (and arguably have a point), then they start calling natural born humans untermensch....

ultimately you could argue that in the long term once whatever fighting/segregation/extermination/slow decline of the natural born people is over that the future of humanity as a race entirely composed of genetically adapted creatures might be worth it, or perhaps the resultant lack of genetic diversity would be our ultimate downfall. but regardless it's gonna suck for anyone in this thread unlucky enough to live to see such times.
Click to expand...

The most unlucky group are going to be the natural ones born very close to the new age.

You genuinely would be thought of as a sub class.
 
When they do the test for Downs, they can also tell the sex. They don't like telling the sex to parents from certain ethnicities as there is a problem with them wanting to abort if its a healthy female.
 
I have a rare genetic condition that is listed on the rarediseases government site in the US.

The condition is slightly different for everyone. I've had a good quality of life in my youth and 20s. But since hitting 30s and 40s its starting to go down hill.

A couple of times in my life when I've been with a partner the subject of babies have come up. The condition is in the family tree though it only appears in some people, while other people carry the gene. So far there is no predictable connection on the likelihood of me passing it on. But it's always at the back of my mind, and I'm sure it plays in to the fears of any partner I have.

For someone like me to say if there is a way to remove the condition from any kids I have, some people think that is me saying I'm currently living a lesser life. But I think its natural for any parent to want their kids to be better than them.

What I find interesting is a few years ago I was reading a document written by feminists about abortion and disability. Though the feminist cause pushes for choice they still pushed the idea that abortion is justified if there is any chance a child might have a disability. Which I think is the wrong attitude to have. In my view it comes down to the quality of life the person can live. I would attempt to remove my condition from them. That's not invalidating my life experience. But I just want them to have a better life than me.

The problem with giving people more choice is not all people make the choices based on a balanced view of the subject. For example I know in some cultures having a female child is frowned upon, so they would try to change the sex to male or if they could abort the baby. I think when a form of eugenics becomes mainstream, as I think it will, I think its important that the whole decision making progress should be very strict. Maybe restricting the choice to only people who have a genetic disability in the family.
 
BowdonUK said:
I have a rare genetic condition that is listed on the rarediseases government site in the US.

The condition is slightly different for everyone. I've had a good quality of life in my youth and 20s. But since hitting 30s and 40s its starting to go down hill.

A couple of times in my life when I've been with a partner the subject of babies have come up. The condition is in the family tree though it only appears in some people, while other people carry the gene. So far there is no predictable connection on the likelihood of me passing it on. But it's always at the back of my mind, and I'm sure it plays in to the fears of any partner I have.

For someone like me to say if there is a way to remove the condition from any kids I have, some people think that is me saying I'm currently living a lesser life. But I think its natural for any parent to want their kids to be better than them.

What I find interesting is a few years ago I was reading a document written by feminists about abortion and disability. Though the feminist cause pushes for choice they still pushed the idea that abortion is justified if there is any chance a child might have a disability. Which I think is the wrong attitude to have. In my view it comes down to the quality of life the person can live. I would attempt to remove my condition from them. That's not invalidating my life experience. But I just want them to have a better life than me.

The problem with giving people more choice is not all people make the choices based on a balanced view of the subject. For example I know in some cultures having a female child is frowned upon, so they would try to change the sex to male or if they could abort the baby. I think when a form of eugenics becomes mainstream, as I think it will, I think its important that the whole decision making progress should be very strict. Maybe restricting the choice to only people who have a genetic disability in the family.
Click to expand...

My ex has a genetic disorder and in some ways her life experiences are similar to yours ... We discussed having our children and had some appointments to discuss with doctors. NHS offered us the ability to use a procedure to isolate the gene. In the end we did not take it. I do remember her stance was conflicted , as on one hand she felt her identity was being erased but on the other we wanted the children not to go through what she had to. Truth is , she has had a more fulfilling life than me.

Thanks for sharing.
 
Part of me thinks that we need natural selection. If for example, there was a way of screening out motor neurone disease and the Stephen hawking that was born lived with an able body his entire life, would he have travelled across the universe in his mind?
 
Terminal_Boy said:
If Eugenics can remove all traces of Sky Pixie belief in humans, we should embrace it immediately.
Click to expand...
If you think humanity would be any different without religion, you're in for a bit of a shock.

Hint: humans will always find some reason to wage wars, etc.

Also militant/authoritarian atheists can be just as extreme as any religious nutcase out there. Hasn't history already shown this time and again?

Most religious people are quietly minding their own business and the idea that we should forcibly remove religion from the populace says more about you than it says about them.
 
Freakbro said:
The problem with that is we don't understand enough to just screen embryos for potential or even certain genetical diseases and decide their life isn't worthy. We would have got rid of some of the greatest minds in history based on our yardstick of what's normal, acceptable or desireable.
Click to expand...
Actually we do. This is something that happens already, it is called pre-implantation genetic screening.
Typically it is used when parents are aware that they are carriers of genetic diseases. They do ivf and the embryos are screened before being implanted in the mother.
 
Last edited:
bainbridge said:
Part of me thinks that we need natural selection. If for example, there was a way of screening out motor neurone disease and the Stephen hawking that was born lived with an able body his entire life, would he have travelled across the universe in his mind?
Click to expand...

His science wasn't tied to his disability. I am confident that he would have contributed much more if he wasnt held back by his severe disability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom