Eugenics?

[MeDeFe]

I guess it's the same as with most other processes in nature, if we tinker too much with it, we'll break it completely.

And I don't think I've seen that quality of ownage on these forums since the collective flaming of s.xkittens ex-boyfriend (does anyone remember his username?) when everyone applied their wits to the common cause. Snorri, that was one hell of a comment.
I know you hadn't intended it that way Jenos, but you must admit that it was funny.
Oh, and I love Norse.

[Skittles!]

I guess it's the same as with most other processes in nature, if we tinker too much with it, we'll break it completely.

And I don't think I've seen that quality of ownage on these forums since the collective flaming of s.xkittens ex-boyfriend (does anyone remember his username?) when everyone applied their wits to the common cause. Snorri, that was one hell of a comment.
I know you hadn't intended it that way Jenos, but you must admit that it was funny.
Oh, and I love Norse.

Even I laughed at it, it surely was hilarious.

Murderers, traitors, rapists and the like do deserve capitial punishment. If not that, then find me a large, abandoned island thousands of miles away from any nation's territorial waters and dump them off there. Let the offenders fend for themselves and have nature take her brutal course.

Hawaii? Antarctica? Madagascar?

Or northern Greenland.

[Dancing Mustard]

Snorri, that was one hell of a comment.

True Dat.

I am twinged with sadness though, I saw Jenos' blunder and thought "Dude! Aus joke FTW, I'm going to look like a fucking comedy-hero!!!1"... then I flicked to page 2 and Snorri had stolen all of my glory away.

It makes it doubley bad that he did it with such minimalist flair, and that I'm pretty sure I'd have bungled it by comparison.

Now excuse me, but I'm off to sulk again.

[tzor]

I would like everyones opinions on the validity of eugenics.

Eugenics is wrong on many levels. It's fundamental assumptions are simply flawed. It assumes too many things are genetic when most are a combination of genetic and environmental factors. But the biggest problem is that natural selection doesn't work when random factors are eliminated.

There is a general problem in that the purpose of life is only to create more life. This is annoying since we generally like to do a whole lot more things after we create more life, but it is the reason why there are a number of genetic effects that give people the biological equivalent of the blue screen of death after they have had several children. Knowing these factors people condemned to die still give birth to more children. But isn't that their choice? (Can a pro choice person help me out here?)

Then there is the case of criminals. One can argue about the nature of sex offenders; this isn't eugenics, his DNA is probably no better or worse than anyone elses and I really don't think there is a pedophile gene. If we could find a way to make a person sexually inactive while allowing him to donate to a sperm bank, more power to everyone.

Finally there is the case of being able to raise chidren. But this isn't a eugenics question either. In fact only tradition links the creting/birthing of a child and the raising of a child. If we want to get picky, that's what adoption is for.

[Snorri1234]

Snorri, that was one hell of a comment.

True Dat.

I am twinged with sadness though, I saw Jenos' blunder and thought "Dude! Aus joke FTW, I'm going to look like a fucking comedy-hero!!!1"... then I flicked to page 2 and Snorri had stolen all of my glory away.

It makes it doubley bad that he did it with such minimalist flair, and that I'm pretty sure I'd have bungled it by comparison.

Now excuse me, but I'm off to sulk again.

[Neoteny]

Snorri, that was one hell of a comment.

True Dat.

I am twinged with sadness though, I saw Jenos' blunder and thought "Dude! Aus joke FTW, I'm going to look like a fucking comedy-hero!!!1"... then I flicked to page 2 and Snorri had stolen all of my glory away.

It makes it doubley bad that he did it with such minimalist flair, and that I'm pretty sure I'd have bungled it by comparison.

Now excuse me, but I'm off to sulk again.

[reminisco]

i've seen that before somewhere. best venn diagram ever.

[billyO7]

sheesh, I can't believe people are discussing the merits of eugenics in the 21st century. This misguided and racist philosophy became thoroughly discredited when one of its advocates, Adolf Hitler, tried to implement it to its (warped) logical conclusion.
Any debate on the death penalty, right to life etc has nothing whatsoever to do with a debate on eugenics.
Some people are quick to mouth off in forums without even understanding what the hell they're discussing.
I'm gonna give the original poster the benefit of the doubt that he hasn't fully understood what he's raising in his poll, rather than abeing a sick, nazi fantasist.

Erm, if you actually knew anything about the study of eugenics, you would know it was being pioneered long before the nazi regime....charles darwin's works are a an example of this.

But, you seem to have missed the point here. How sterilising mass-murderers is in parallel to nazi-fantasism is one of those special kind of mysteries that only special, special people like yourself seem to be able to find.

But, yet again, you fucking thalid-kid, either contribute something positive, ie. the reasons as to why you would love to live in a world of randy paedo's (Male Liberal, are you?) and prolific dole-bunny breeding, and then I will be able to have a sensible conversation with you as to how you are incorrect.

die you prick

[Jenos Ridan]

I guess it's the same as with most other processes in nature, if we tinker too much with it, we'll break it completely.

And I don't think I've seen that quality of ownage on these forums since the collective flaming of s.xkittens ex-boyfriend (does anyone remember his username?) when everyone applied their wits to the common cause. Snorri, that was one hell of a comment.
I know you hadn't intended it that way Jenos, but you must admit that it was funny.

Some times it is hard to laugh at myself. Especially since I don't like making nationalistic (or racial or sexual) slurs.

Even I laughed at it, it surely was hilarious.

Murderers, traitors, rapists and the like do deserve capitial punishment. If not that, then find me a large, abandoned island thousands of miles away from any nation's territorial waters and dump them off there. Let the offenders fend for themselves and have nature take her brutal course.

Hawaii? Antarctica? Madagascar?

Or northern Greenland.

I was thinking some horrible place like Severnaya Zemlya, Franz Josef Land or the Kerguelen Islands. The nations which have no death penalty or a limited one can send their life-sentenced convicts to this place and basically maroon them there.

Or another serious note, In the case of eugenic, I'm playing devil's advocate for a minute; Man has manipulated nature to a high degree, dogs are a good example and certain species of plant will simply die without our add. Furthermore, Man has even manipulated himself with medicenes and technology strongly influences not only Man, but also his environment. So, applying Occam's Razor here, eugenics is not any different that what has gone before. The only limitation is social stigma [devil's advocate mode off], and thank God for that.