Eugenics

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Because "Good" traits and "Bad" traits are subjective and the line hasn't been drawn in a clear manner.

That makes more sense, I didn't really understand what you were trying to say until now.

Nobody has really drawn a line at all, why don't you just say where yours is - what the "limited use" you agree with includes.


I don't think I'd have a problem if testing for likely traits of a child, beyond just genetic disease, became common. The parents still get the choice of having a child or not. Even if most people choose not to have a test, or choose to ignore the results, the few that do would be very slightly changing the next generation. Maybe that difference would be negligible, but over a long enough time period perhaps it could have an effect. I'll admit I don't know if this would actually have an effect so feel free to point out if this is bullshit. People aren't being very specific here so I'm not going to just outright agree with most posts.

Originally Posted by SweetJane

If you and your partner get checked out for the downsynrome gene (for example), and both of you are carriers, you can decide for yourself weather or not you REALLY have to have a little ego-sprout all your own.

I was going to say this contradicts the first sentence of your post, but I missed the brackets. I agree with this, but with all information that can given, not just disease. Probably more useful for people wanting to use sperm donors.

[Starke von Oben]

Why do so many of us humans have no problem breeding other animals to improve the line or avoid genetic defects but refuse to do so to ourselves? I have seen too much suffering by those with genetic defects that could have been prevented.

The worse thing we are doing to our future is to help those with serious, debilitating defects to reproduce and pass on that suffering to yet another generation. Are we insane?? Do we really need more children with cystic fibrosis, type 1 diabetes, cranio-facial defects, mental retardation, heart defects or worse?

It's very humane of us to help these people lead as full a life as possible but it's foolish to let them reproduce their defect into the next generation.

What parent doesn't want a healthy, intelligent NORMAL child? Why do those who KNOW they carry a serious genetic defect want to take the chance of giving birth to a child carrying that defect? Don't they love children? Do they want to see it suffer and perhaps die a early death? Does misery REALLY love company?

I think it's our duty to work toward having children who are healthy, intelligent and without genetic defects. To continue to reproduce serious genetic defects that could be prevented is stupid, foolish, shortsighted and cruel.

Surely we can do better.

[vindicatedxjin]

As lovely as it would be to have a world of nothing but completely healthy humans, who have high IQ's and perfect looks. It's probably not going to happen. Obviously there are "genetic defects". But what about the defects caused by the medications we take? The air we breath? The food we eat? Injections?

In order to get to a point where there would only be completely healthy people on this earth. We would not only have to keep those who are "genetically defected" from having children, but keep everyone from eating specific foods, allow them to only inhale perfect air, and pretty much change our world as a whole. I like the concept of perfectionism as far as health and looks go but isn't it almost impossible to achieve, and is it truly our right? Because regardless of the fact that you have two perfectly healthy parents, with high IQ's, and good looks, your child could still come out ugly, stupid, and sickly. The same scenario could be done the other way around. Also for example...my brother has type 1 diabetes...he was diagnosed when he was 10....Type 1 diabetes doesn't run on either side of the family....he was the first ever to get it. That goes to show that it doesn't matter what parents you have....you can still be sickly. So then that goes to say, that in order to have nothing but perfect humans, we would have to take the chance of only breeding those that have the perfect traits, and if certain children come out sick, ugly, or stupid...we would have to kill them off.

Von Oben said "surely we can do better". And this is true....but I think one must realize that there are just some things that you have to go about in a humane manner. In this case I feel as if its selfish and unselfish at the same time to even consider trying to change the norm.

Selfish in the fact that we want what's perfect. Perfect health, perfect looks, we don't want to feel pain, we don't want to see a child with down syndrome and feel sympathy for him...we don't want to deal with the pain of never being able to look like what's on TV....We don't want to age, we don't want to die.

Unselfish, because we don't want our own children to suffer...we don't want them to feel socially inadequate...we want them to be accepted, looked up on, beautiful, the most intelligent creatures that we could never be...we don't want them to worry like we do everyday of our pitiful lives. But in the end doesn't it always seem like the things we want we want mostly for ourselves? We want our children to have those perfect lives... WE don't want them to deal with the horrors of reality.

I think us humans have a misinterpretation of our reality here on earth. It seems we are incapable of seeing how the flaws of our lives are not merely imperfections but.... fillers..........allowing us to enjoy the beautiful and good things that much more. I'm not trying to be an optimist or push aside the fact that we have so much turmoil going on that should indeed be fixed but. We should really take baby steps to try and fix the problem... rather than kill off the subject that the problem attacked.


Bla bla bla bla bla....

Much love ^_^

[FatGoth]

The problem with trying to breed a more perfect human race is A it have the official Hitler stain. Anyone who even considers that this might be a good idea will compared to him. B love work in mysterious ways, it is not that likely that even if you have one person of so called good breading stock, that he or she will be attracted to another one of equal good stock and then you are down to either forced pairings or test tubes. And C, if we are to see every human being as being of equal worth, how can the world then dictate that only the most healthy, the most beautiful and most perfect is allowed to breed?

Now one can argue that if one have a serious illness in ones family that the next generation might inherit then one should not breed. I personally do not see the point if it is a huge change your child will be born seriously ill, then why not adopt instead. However almost all human beings have the instinct to reproduce. For many that is the goal in life, find a partner, get a job, pay for a house and have children. Who is going to tell pepole that they are not good enough to breed? Is the law going to force pepole with imperfect genes to not have children? And if so where are the line going to be drawn? At serious illness? Not to serious illness? Superficial imperfections?

In my personal opinion I would not recommend pepole with a family history of serious illness to have children, adopt, use donated egg cells or sperm, there are many ways for them to raise a child and not give their flawed genes to their offspring. However without such a thing being made law, most will not make such a choice, and I do not think it should be law. As for perfection. The human race is not perfect. And me personally think we would loose something if all the ugly pepole, all the not so perfect pepole was to be bred out of the population. To breed out serious illness, yes, I can agree with that, to breed out imperfection, no.