Eugenics

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

He was, but he may have been a bit misguided. Also, he basically ran Athens as a monarch, despite the fact that it was ostensibly a democracy.

I thought you loved Monarchies ...and in that case, misguided would be beside the point

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I've nothing against the fellow, I am merely showing that a single politician CAN, indeed, "break the system" as you so eloquently put it.

Also, lest Earni get on our tails (scandalous! )...

Eugenics Is Bad.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

I've nothing against the fellow, I am merely showing that a single politician CAN, indeed, "break the system" as you so eloquently put it.

Also, lest Earni get on our tails (scandalous! )...

Eugenics Is Bad.

Ditto.

Here's another link to redeem myself....(and your sorry butt too...)

http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9408/public.html

EDIT: btw, I caught that nasty joke of yours Gwai...

[Gwaimir Windgem]

A nasty joke of my Gwai? Hector you're just getting dirtier and dirtier...

I notice you edited to say you caught it, though. Slow on the uptake?

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

A nasty joke of my Gwai? Hector you're just getting dirtier and dirtier...

I notice you edited to say you caught it, though. Slow on the uptake?

What's this? You can't understand the concept of typos? You're a spelling nazi?

I caught it at first read, but I wasn't going to comment on it, just to spare you...but you ticked me off


http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/...eilaender.html

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I do indeed understand the concept of spelling errors. I just thought that one too High-larious to pass up.

By the way, I absolutely LOVE your correction to your post!

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

By the way, I absolutely LOVE your correction to your post!

I figured it was the only thing your eyes would percieve



http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/...ews/smith.html

(btw, these are actually great links. Do read.)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

What'd you say? My old eyes can't perceive your small print.

[Huorn]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

The problem is that it can never be eithical. I imagine that Eugenicists are thinking "Well, let's not do it like Hitler, let's wait until nobody is looking."
That's impossible.

As one writer puts it (and the article link can be found in the abortion thread):

"Things were going nicely for the eugenicists until Hitler gave eugenics a bad name by being so good at it."

Eugenics is never good. Its advocates argue that it is designed to weed out bad genes. The problem with this argument is while weeding out the bad genes, you are also weeding out good genes when you kill these individuals or prevent their birth. You are narrowing the gene pool and setting the stage for more genetic problems in the future.

Eugenics is based on the theory of Evolution. Like other theories it cannot be proven or disproven. It is a process that needs long periods of time to take place. We have seen micro evolution in the different shades of colour on the human skin and in the different breeds of dogs. Eugenics attempts to circumvent this process and by doing so it actually reduces the gene pool.

There is also as Hector mentions the ethical quagmire of Eugenics. It has been the tool of the monstrous regime of Fascist Germany. It could again be used by another monster in the future if one hasn't already done so.

[hectorberlioz]

Indeed Entwife Oak, good post.


I think we worry too much about the future's future too much...at least, evolutionists do ...and I mean, it's a bit understadable that they do: they think of life as a sudoku puzzle that they've figured out.

[Nurvingiel]

Awesome posts Entwife Oak.

Originally Posted by Entwife_Oak

Eugenics is based on the theory of Evolution. Like other theories it cannot be proven or disproven. It is a process that needs long periods of time to take place. We have seen micro evolution in the different shades of colour on the human skin and in the different breeds of dogs. Eugenics attempts to circumvent this process and by doing so it actually reduces the gene pool.

Yes, this is a problem seen in a number of purebred dog breeds, for example. Labs almost always have hip problems at a younger age, pugs have problems with their noses, etc. Some of this is caused by inbreeding too, but I think it is mostly due to a much narrower selection of genes.

Originally Posted by Entwife_Oak

There is also as Hector mentions the ethical quagmire of Eugenics. It has been the tool of the monstrous regime of Fascist Germany. It could again be used by another monster in the future if one hasn't already done so.

Another problem is that, how do we know what bad genes are? Some, like propensity to certain diseases, are clearly bad. But most genes that one might perceive as bad are actually neutral or even helpful. Then by weeding these genes out, you're actually harming the human race.

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

I think we worry too much about the future's future too much...at least, evolutionists do ...and I mean, it's a bit understadable that they do: they think of life as a sudoku puzzle that they've figured out.

I love Sudoku.

Subscribing to the Theory of Evolution doesn't mean you're going to be more worried about the future than someone who doesn't. Evolution is not about that at all.

Similairly, we don't think we have life all figured out any more than the next guy. We have a theory about how life arrived at this point, but we make no assumptions about the future other than the process of evolution will continue to occur.

[Spock]

hmm, let's see; if we use genetics to affect populations, then applying Cryogenetics to the current problem would be defered Eugenics

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Spock

hmm, let's see; if we use genetics to affect populations, then applying Cryogenetics to the current problem would be defered Eugenics

What exactly is the current problem to which you refer spock?

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Subscribing to the Theory of Evolution doesn't mean you're going to be more worried about the future than someone who doesn't. Evolution is not about that at all.

Similairly, we don't think we have life all figured out any more than the next guy. We have a theory about how life arrived at this point, but we make no assumptions about the future other than the process of evolution will continue to occur.

I'm not so sure, Nurv...I mean of course, we could sit here all day with a fist-sized rock and a wad of hair and sit splitting it...
But of all the people who try to determine the earth's future the most, the scientists with backgrounds in culture or weather...

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

...pugs have problems with their noses...

It's called ugliness, dear.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

I'm not so sure, Nurv...I mean of course, we could sit here all day with a fist-sized rock and a wad of hair and sit splitting it...
But of all the people who try to determine the earth's future the most, the scientists with backgrounds in culture or weather...

That was not splitting hairs. I mean, what the heck.

Why aren't you sure? By your statement you've demonstrated that you don't really understand the theory of Evolution at all.
(edited to add because you're mixing up a scientific theory with people's personal beliefs

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

It's called ugliness, dear.

Ahaha! I think they sometimes have problems breathing as well, because their noses are so short/ugly. Anyway.

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

That was not splitting hairs. I mean, what the heck.

Why aren't you sure? By your statement you've demonstrated that you don't really understand the theory of Evolution at all.
(edited to add because you're mixing up a scientific theory with people's personal beliefs

I'm not trying to understand Evolution, I was saying that scientists are capable of trying to predict the Earth's future in certain ways, some overblown.

[Falagar]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Yes, you're right. But Socialism DOES, and HAS led countries to mere dictatorship. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela: those Venezuelans will never have another free election in their lifetime. He is now the undisputed ruler. I'm not against good rulers if there are any, but from a gov-electing country to a dictated country?

While Chavez may certainly be a dictator-in-the-making, I think it's a bit early to really declare him one. Though he's certainly doing his best to keep himself in power and has made a lot of...controversial () friends, he's still relying on popular support and elections. Time will tell.

[The last sane person]

Eugenics has yet to be destroyed, it has merely taken refuge by hiding under 'genetic research'

*shudder* Wrong...

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Falagar

While Chavez may certainly be a dictator-in-the-making, I think it's a bit early to really declare him one. Though he's certainly doing his best to keep himself in power and has made a lot of...controversial () friends, he's still relying on popular support and elections. Time will tell.

I'm not going to let time tell me that: I think it's pretty darn obvious what he is. He's a hyper-Communist.