I have some pretty strong feelings about eugenics (it's a good and necessary practice), but I find it very, VERY difficult to talk about it with anyone since I'm instantly labeled a Nazi for supporting it. I'm hoping the folks on Think Atheist will be more inclined to intellectual discussion than name-calling and dismissal.

 

The start off, some disclaimers: genocide is wrong; taking human rights away from people of a race/religion/hairstyle you don't like is wrong; concentration camps are wrong; violence in wrong.

 

There. Now to the actual discussion.

 

When I talk about eugenics, I'm talking about the practice of systematically removing debilitating genetic traits and defects from a population by means of regulating the reproduction of its citizens. Do you have Schizophrenia? Did you know that this ailment is genetic and very easy to pass on to you children? Please, do not punish an innocent child with this problem. Are you genetically healthy, intelligent, and talented? Do you have special immunities that make you less likely to get sick? By all means, spread these traits to future generations, either by having children yourself or donating to a sperm or egg bank. Do you want children but should not carry your genetic problems onto them? Adopt. Adoption will always be available no matter what the society (just because someone has good genetic material does NOT mean they would make a good parent). Do you say that adoption is not the same? Then I suppose you care more about satisfying your selfish desires than the well being of a child.

 

Eugenics is, at its base, very simple - think about the future first.

I'm leaving this post now for what I'm hoping will be thoughtful and anti-inflammatory discussion.

Views: 3249

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

How can you be sure that any extraterrestrial confronting us is on a higher moral ground than we are. No less a thinker than Stephen Hawking isn't sure that would be the case. In fact, he strongly recommends AGAINST attempting to do so.

It is a hypothetical scenario meant to illustrate the current trend of self-destruction. It wouldn't happen. We wouldn't 'explain' ourselves to an extra-terrestrial species. They wouldn't come anywhere near us, or they'd kill us all and take our resources for themselves. Since that hasn't happened, we must assume we relatively disparate and operating on developmental timelines that rarely intersect. What was the result of the Drake Equation: 10? There are ten civilizations in the universe. However with one variable changed, (self-destruction) there are possibly 10,000. Still not great odds. But hey, we're one of them!  Our of the billion trillion stars, we have a actual, legitimate chance to take it to the next level. Survival from Phase I to Phase II. 

I support the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. IMO Homo sapiens are entirely a ridiculous species, and if we go extinct, meh.

Your statement is ridiculous because it is contrary to reality. You're erroneously worried Homo sapiens will disappear, but all evidence points to Homo sapiens successfully endlessly increasing in population. And as the Humanists on this page can attest to, "we have the technology and know-how" to create enough artificial food to feed endlessly increasing populations and medicine to prevent most any of us from dying before 3 standard deviations of our "natural" lifespan (any time we go past 50).

There is really no reason to be worried for Homo sapiens, it's the rest of the squashed life on Earth that is worrisome.  Your worry would make sense in a context where there were 10,000 people left on Earth.

"I support the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement"

Then why not put your money where your mouth is and start with yourself..?

That's probably the 4th or 5th time I've seen this same old comeback. What exactly makes you better than him if you say something like that? "You're an ass for saying people should die, so die!" ? Think of something new already.

I didn't call him out for wanting humans to die, I was calling him out for not applying his own logic to himself. Sometimes calling bullshitters out on their bullshit requires stooping to their level to drive the point home.

My sincerest apologies that it appears to have caused you butthurt, I rather believed you'd been pounded to insensitivity by now.

Arcus you've had a gazillion arguments with me, yet you've not even bothered to check out my profile to see I'm a female not a male... but I wouldn't expect anything else from you, you just like to screech at people.

Why would i bother? Does it matter what gender you are?

Arcus, as I'm religion-free, I'm also gender-free. Genderism is a patriarchal imposition of social roles onto the female sex, and I do not go there. I have worked against conservative "gender" roles most of my life. I am a educated H. sapiens, born with a female reproductive system. So if you can't use the correct pronoun, use none.

Yet you brought it up, which seems to indicate even more bullshit from your side. 

Yes, ass response indeed. If you had bothered to look into the VHEMT, you would have realised that it's not a suicide movement, it's a civilisation reduction (end point being achieved or not).

Some are VHEMTers for de-densification and human quality of life reasons. Others, like me, are VHEMTers for ecosystemic balance reasons.

People who tell other people to commit suicide should be banned from any further conversation since you're not able to have a reasonable conversation without being just plain nasty.

I'm Against VHEMT for neurological balance reasons. That's absolutely insane. Limiting population expansion, yes, I can understand that. But deliberately reducing it, That's called murder and genocide. You're crazy.

RSS

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service