Eugenics

[bushdog]

In my opinion we should at least sterilize those with hereditary diseases.

Thoughts?

[Sir Aunty Christ]

1. Don't use the term retards - it's personally insulting. Words like retard and spastic belittle anyone with disabilites.

2. You're dangerously on Nazi territory. Why would you even consider mass steralisation except to "purify the race."?

[fernando]

The concept of race doenst exist...there is no such thing as different races, its a culturally decided thing.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 06:21 PM
The concept of race doenst exist...there is no such thing as different races, its a culturally decided thing.
And what?

I was trying to make a point.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 04:55 PM
In my opinion we should at least sterilize those with hereditary diseases.

Thoughts?
I will reserve judgement right now, because I believe you are being particuarly confrontational there. If this is an oppinion you hold could you possibly justify it with a little background, when you make such a statement what you are getting at is not self-evident.

[fernando]

Well why would we sterilize these people...wouldnt you be able to remove certain genes (such as genes for terminal diseases) in the pre feutal stage?

Shouldnt this topic be in the science section or something?

[Publius]

The concept of race doenst exist...

Of course the 'concept' exists.

If the 'concept' didn't exist, you couldnt' be talking about it now.



there is no such thing as different races, its a culturally decided thing.

Define 'race' for me.

[TheComrade]

Funny - we had a debate about this in Biology today. One of the comments I made was: "It is fascist to eradicate a line of people simply because they are different to what we consider normal" - To that I hold.

In fact my blood boils to think that anyone can even consider the possiblity of killing a life - before it has the chance to be born - simply because they don't act in the way 'normal' people do - its one of these things that brings about a kind of tearful passion mixed with engulfing rage. I get the same feelings when people are racist or homophobic...

[Free Palestine]

A oft ignored fact about Winston Churchill:

-- In 1910, in the capacity of Home Secretary, Churchill put forth a proposal to sterilize roughly 100,000 "mental degenerates" and dispatch several thousand others to state-run labor camps. These actions were to take place in the name of saving the British race from inevitable decline as its inferior members bred.

Source:Ch. 1, n. 29. Sterilization, Churchill biographer Clive Ponting, Sunday Age (Australia), June 21, 1992. Racism-policymakers, DD, 52-3.

[FleasTheLemur]

1) It's just immoral and Nazi-esque.
2) Eugenics is too subjective. Would I be nutered because I have dyslexia, bad eyes and one weirdly shaped ear?
3) According to evolutionary theory, deformities is how a race is supposed to advance. Like, obtaining an extra finger is a dominate gene and it is possibly benificial. You could play a mean piano or have another finger to jab into the capital bastard's eyeballs..

[bushdog]

I reserve the right to call anyone anything i desire.

I am simply saying that society has the duty to prevent or minimize hereditary diseases when the option presents itself. On the subject of fetuses, aborting them is the same idea, and i support it.

Dont label me a nazi because i despise nazis and what the nazi's did was not eugenics, but genocide. anyone who associates eugenics directly with nazis needs a good history lesson.

I personally despise retards, but contrary to my title i am not calling for thier extermination. I was feeling rather confrontational.

[bushdog]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 11:56 PM
1) It's just immoral and Nazi-esque.
2) Eugenics is too subjective. Would I be nutered because I have dyslexia, bad eyes and one weirdly shaped ear?
3) According to evolutionary theory, deformities is how a race is supposed to advance. Like, obtaining an extra finger is a dominate gene and it is possibly benificial. You could play a mean piano or have another finger to jab into the capital bastard's eyeballs..
I am speaking of hereditary diseases. I dont give a damn how many fingers you have or how deformed you ear is.

[which doctor]

What about bipolar disorder. What do you plan on doing with them. They should not be killed and they should be able to live a full and meaningful life.

[bushdog]

I propose:

Anyone with a serious autosomal dominant disease should be sterelized.
OR
Any fetus concieved (by somone with an autosomal dominant disease)should be screened in utero for the disease and if present should be aborted. There is a 50-50 chance that the child will have it.
Is it more humane to abort an unconcious mass of tissue, or allow somone to grow up to have a debilitating disease that burdens society?

Examples of autosomal dominant diseases include Huntington's disease, neurofibromatosis, and polycystic kidney disease.

[JKP]

I certainly would not want to be born into the world retarded; if my dear mother had aborted me for that, I wouldn't mind.

[Publius]

I certainly would not want to be born into the world retarded; if my dear mother had aborted me for that, I wouldn't mind.

Just as if I shot you in the face you 'wouldn't mind'.

'Minding' is about the last thing a dead person does.

:D

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Eugenics is a non-scientific appraoch to a scientific problem. Hereditary diseases will not go away if you kill those exhibiting them - some people are merely carriers.

Not to mention that new diseases will appear, as they are wont to do.

[Columbia]

I have worked with some severely, mentally retarded children (regardless of what political correctness bandwagon you are part of, I use retarded in its literal sense of being EXTREEMLY slower than the rest of society.)

You have at one and the same time some of the sweetest, kindest people on the planet, and also, believe it or not, the same sexual drive, with generally no embarrassment about PDA's (and on levels that would make an exhibitionist blush.)

Here's what I have to say:

For those of you NOT for steralization, I would like you all to put your time where your mouth is by hanging out with these people once a month. It's all well and good to accuse someone of Nazi-like thinking, as long as you never have to wonder whether offspring from such young people is a good thing. Remember, you are allowing two people to procreate who, in many extreem cases, cannot tie their shoes. And these same people cannot have the same ethical discussions with you about whether society should or should not raise their children.

For those of you FOR steralization, there is something Nazi-like to playing God in this arena. It makes me shudder as well.

Currently, a judge, armed with all of the information on the given person, and on an INDIVIDUAL BASIS is in the best, though also saddest, position to make such a choice. I can't think of a better way to deal with it that that.

EITHER CHOICE IS A POOR ONE.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

So what do YOU think is the right choice eh?

[Columbia]

So what do YOU think is the right choice eh?

A judge, armed with all of the information on the given person, and on an INDIVIDUAL BASIS is in the best, though also saddest, position to make such a choice. I can't think of a better way to deal with it that that.

[TheComrade]

For those of you NOT for steralization, I would like you all to put your time where your mouth is by hanging out with these people once a month. It's all well and good to accuse someone of Nazi-like thinking, as long as you never have to wonder whether offspring from such young people is a good thing. Remember, you are allowing two people to procreate who, in many extreem cases, cannot tie their shoes. And these same people cannot have the same ethical discussions with you about whether society should or should not raise their children.

I have spent a few days with severly disabled people - my mum used to work with them alot. But that is besides the point - simply because someone 'cannot tie their shoes' does not mean that they should not live - it's, it's totally TOTALLY inhumane - infact I cannot believe anybody can advocate the execution of a life because they are different.

I have noticed that many of those in favor of sterilisation/execution seem to make the assumption that disabled people don't want to live - that somehow because they are disabled they can't live. The first man that I think of (there are many) is Steven Hawking - he is severly disabled and yet he wishes to live - he fights constantly to live. Steven Hawking is a good example because he wasn't even always like that - he experienced what some might call a 'normal' life before he became paralysed etc. - that must make it worse for him, knowing what it was like before.

If this dispicable act you talk of was put into place - where do you draw the line? 'FleasTheLemur' mentioned he was dyslexic - my younger brother and some of my friends are dyslexic - should they be prevented from reproducing? Dyslexia is, afterall, hereditary.

I would also like to empahsise a previous post which those in favor of this seem to have ignored (because its a solid argument - typical.) It is part of Nature to have diversity - to have disease. Sickle Cell Anemia provides immunity to malaria - if you have only one allele - otherwise you die a very painful death. If you were to 'purify' humans of all variation - you are going against a natural part of life and endangering the whole species.

[Columbia]

1. I was only referring to the sterilization issue, not the execution one. No one should be executed. That's a no brainer.

2. RE: others with various genetic dispositions. That is not part of this discussion. Remeber, the non-mentally retarded are totally capable of analyzing their situation. Let's say it's shown to me that if I have offspring there would be a 70% likelihood that it would be severely handicapped. Now I have to make a VERY TOUGH decision, but the decision is still mine, and I can make a decision based on a number of factors.

But the severely retarded can't do this; they can't decide on the basis of analysis. In such cases, the only person who should order their steralization is a judge.

It's a crumy decision, but someone has to make it. Of course, it doesn't have to be made by anyone, and you can let nature take its course. But that has ramifications as well.

[Atlas Swallowed]

Yeah, royal famillies and hotel heiresses.

[Guerrilla22]

Deeming other as "inferior" is a fascist tendency, also the gene that cause down syndrome is recessive, meaning two people who do not have down syndrome can produce a child that does have the gene and someone with the gene can produce a child without it. That's why eugenics was such a stupid, aside from terrible program.

Mentally handicapped persons weren't the only ones targeted in the US eugenics program, blacks and First Nations persons were also targeted.

[Delirium]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 11:33 PM
Deeming other as "inferior" is a fascist tendency, also the gene that cause down syndrome is recessive, meaning two people who do not have down syndrome can produce a child that does have the gene and someone with the gene can produce a child without it. That's why eugenics was such a stupid, aside from terrible program.


Down Syndrome is not a hereditary disease i am sorry to say, it is a chromosomal abnormality (trisomy 21). also a symptom of down syndrome is sterility