Amazon.com Widgets
  • Eugenics will lead us to victory

    In a world like this where humanity is continuously facing new obstacles and dangers we need to do everything we can to survive. Eugenics will help us with that! Eugenics will make us stronger and better and more prepared to fight! We do not know what the human body develop to, in 50 years we could be as strong as bears and as fast as antelopes! If people would just open there eyes to what eugenics can help us become! And yes, overpopulating is a problem, but eugenics can help us solve that, my friends! As more developed human arise we can cut out the less useful ones! If I must be one of them, then when that day arises, I will, as a rightful soul, sacrifice myself for humanity

  • Eugenics is natural and approved worldwide.

    Eugenics is natural. We see it in selecting crops for food, and in animal husbandry where certain breeds are selected for specific jobs or abilities.

    The idea that eugenics will destroy variety is incorrect. Dogs came from wolves. Wolves still exist, as do hundreds of different dog breeds. The same can be said for cats and plants. Even now, we select the best possible mate we can. This is natural. Eugenics simply enhances those traits we find desirable. These traits can be altered over successive generations if needed. The only people who are afraid of eugenics, are those who are concerned their genes will not be passed on into posterity.

  • Public medical records and familial genetic disease

    I think its unethical to force people who they can reproduce with forcefully which is why I propose that all people start recording their family genetic traits such as a family history of high blood pressure, diabetes, problems with addiction/alcoholism, dementia, depression but also beneficial traits such as high intelligence, artistry, athleticism, strong immunity or even those who have the gene that make them resistant or completely immune to HIV and other various diseases and have it on record so any person can easily just check it and see if they would like the chances of having a family with the said person.

    This way it progressively advances the entire population bit by bit without any unnecessary force or ethical issues which the only one I can think of is just an issue of privacy

  • Eugenics can be ethical, If used correctly

    Eugenics is the selective breeding of humans, nothing more. Selective breeding has been used for thousands of years and has resulted in domesticated plants and animals, of which no one complains about today. Eugenics would be completely ethical and extremely useful, so long as it was confined to use in the medical field. Such as preventing those that have or carry lethal or potentially lethal. Not only would this aid in creating a hardier population that is healthier, but it would also lower healthcare costs, especially in the longrun. In my personal opinion eugenics should also extend to those that have serious learning or mental disabilities. The reason why this is needed is because due to modern medicine, natural selection within the human population has been stopped, creating an overall weaker population that is more prone to health problems. This is important as it is estimated that 30% of disease in the United States is genetically related.

  • Qej,wejjwejhe df d

    Erjsdrue43eed d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d dd d d d d d d d dd d d d d dd d d d d d d

  • Eugenics will create a better future.

    Let me ask you a question. Would you prefer to be born with a mental illness like Alzheimers, or a superior intellect? Would you want to be frail and unathletic, or strong and naturally gifted? What about for your children? What about for the human race as a whole? The answer is yes, and this can be fulfilled through eugenics. Instead of taking so much out of the lives of people like cripples or the mentally unfit, think of the suffering that would disappear if eugenics greatly decreased the number of these people who were born. Think of the possibilities if the base human IQ was not 100, but 150. Think of the effort saved if the entire population was naturally healthy, and resistant to disease, obesity, and diabetes. And this could all be accomplished ethically and without a single death, simply by discouraging or encouraging the reproduction of certain people. Eugenics is the answer to the evolutional stagnation that civilization faces, and is the path to a stronger world.

  • Eugenics is already practiced in America today... Didn't you know?

    1. Eugenics is practiced in America right now, if you don't like that then do something about it. http://www.jaapl.org/content/33/1/16.full

    2. This is a debate about wether eugenics is ethical, not to what degree we should practice it
    3. Eugenics should be practiced to remove Violent Sexual Predators from society, which already is happening, so why are you arguing against it? If you don't believe in mentally ill persons, who literally can't help themselves, raping random people then you should agree with eugenics. It is either that, kill them, or spends millions of dollars keeping them in their own padded cell forever. Of those three I definitely believe castrating or chemically sterilizing them is the most human option. But whatever, kill 'me if you want, I'm not your mother. (That's facetiousness)

  • For the Advancement of Man

    It's for the people, it's not for me, it's not for you, it's for the man who's gonna spend his entire life with an inherited disease in pain and suffering. For the man who is in jail for his low intelligence. The complete lack of morality for these people only shows the manifestation of our selfishness and the inhumanity of our kind.

  • For the right reasons. There are cycles we need to end.

    In the past, eugenics have been used in many countries because of racism, bias, hatred, misinformation and misunderstanding-and all based on fantasy of perfection by unnatural selection. And in some areas, it's still being done in horrible ways.

    We in America are mostly above those things now. But the evil use in the past and fear of them happening again are preventing us from using eugenics even where most of us know it'd be useful and is necessary. Some examples:

    1. Women who "pop" babies they won't care for, so they can get money-sterilize them.

    2. Sterilize repeatedly and severely abusive parents and take their kids. They may have more kids just to give them hell too. With kids they have, the cycle might continue. We've all been abused before and no parents are perfect. But we should draw the line somewhere.

    3. Parents who raise kids to be evil or high-level criminals; or people that do certain types of horrible things and might teach kids to do the same. Cult-members raise cult-memebers. Same with gangs. Drug dealers raise drug dealers and addicts. Don't deny this would be affective as hell in fighting the drug problem, gang problem, etc. And it'd really help the economy.

    4. Irresponsible parents can cause just as much trouble as deliberately abusive ones. Kids won't get from them what they need to grow up or live on their own or fit in with society. And irresponsible parents are like irresponsible children, but not only resenting the world, but also resenting their children. And so, any lazy parent who won't support their child, or lives at their mom's and have a child in their 20's because of drugs/laziness is dangerous.

    5. Long-term drug addicts who have had crackbabies; long-term drug addicts who are permanently damaged and can't parent. I specifically think it should only be for HARDER drugs, not marijuana or lsd; and addicted for a year minimum. It's less humane than the earlier ones, but still makes sense from a pros and cons standpoint and responsibility standpoint. If they can't have kids, they can't have kids.

    The first four on this list seem more fit for people abusing, mis-raising or deliberately harming kids. And it is also a good extra punishment for certain crimes and lifestyles. The fifth is still justified, and would help long-term. The disturbing ways we used sterilization in the past are not coming back. And we gotta do something about these smug assholes who come in court so many times admitting or denying that they got pregnant just to get money; or these parents who raise kids in organized crime. These eugenics are NEEDED. All the problems we have in economics, crime, all these problems and few people are looking to sterilization of the worst parents or worst potential parents despite its benefits and the fact that those who do these terrible things deserve it.

  • For the right reasoons. Let's end the cycles.

    In the past, eugenics have been used in many countries because of racism, bias, hatred, misinformation and misunderstanding-and all based on fantasy of perfection by unnatural selection. And in some areas, it's still being done in horrible ways.

    We in America are mostly above those things now. But the evil use in the past and fear of them happening again are preventing us from using eugenics even where most of us know it'd be useful and is necessary. Some examples:

    1. Women who "pop" babies they won't care for, so they can get money-sterilize them.

    2. Sterilize repeatedly and severely abusive parents and take their kids. They may have more kids just to give them hell too. With kids they have, the cycle might continue. We've all been abused before and no parents are perfect. But we should draw the line somewhere.

    3. Parents who raise kids to be evil or high-level criminals; or people that do certain types of horrible things and might teach kids to do the same. Cult-members raise cult-memebers. Same with gangs. Drug dealers raise drug dealers and addicts. Don't deny this would be affective as hell in fighting the drug problem, gang problem, etc. And it'd really help the economy.

    4. Irresponsible parents can cause just as much trouble as deliberately abusive ones. Kids won't get from them what they need to grow up or live on their own or fit in with society. And irresponsible parents are like irresponsible children, but not only resenting the world, but also resenting their children. And so, any lazy parent who won't support their child, or lives at their mom's and have a child in their 20's because of drugs/laziness is dangerous.

    5. Long-term drug addicts who have had crackbabies; long-term drug addicts who are permanently damaged and can't parent. I specifically think it should only be for HARDER drugs, not marijuana or lsd; and addicted for a year minimum. It's less humane than the earlier ones, but still makes sense from a pros and cons standpoint and responsibility standpoint. If they can't have kids, they can't have kids.

    The first four on this list seem more fit for people abusing, mis-raising or deliberately harming kids. And it is also a good extra punishment for certain crimes and lifestyles. The fifth is still justified, and would help long-term. The disturbing ways we used sterilization in the past are not coming back. And we gotta do something about these smug assholes who come in court so many times admitting or denying that they got pregnant just to get money; or these parents who raise kids in organized crime. These eugenics are NEEDED. All the problems we have in economics, crime, all these problems and few people are looking to sterilization of the worst parents or worst potential parents despite its benefits and the fact that those who do these terrible things deserve it.

  • BAD, STUPID AND USELESS

    • The main point of Eugenics is to get rid of all the undesirable traits one may have and multiply the desirable traits.
    • Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention.
    • The choosing of which trait the new life form should have
    • Eugenics opponents fear that eugenics could be used for similar purposes in other countries, providing a medical means of racial cleansing or oppression.

  • Disparity would rise.

    What of those who cannot afford such procedures. We would be back to putting them at the back of the bus. Plus who decides the characteristics. It is not ones right of ownership to create their child. What if the child wanted something else. After all eugenics does not control emotion and ambition. Thus is will be social catastrophe which will thrust us back into times of disparity and racism.

  • If it is against the person's consent

    Human survival is required to have variety. Eugenics destroys variety. What if that strain or mutation destroys the only needed vaccine for others? Technology and advancements can be traced back to the Black Death. From there sprang the need for technology from the survivors of it. Those who survived needed labor and so they created it. It is the same for our destiny. 99% of humanities problems can be cured with education. To eliminate human life is to eliminate potential cures. To educate their minds with propaganda is far more effective at solving problems in society and beyond.

  • Eugenics is unethical

    Eugenics are immoral and go against the way humans should be. We should develop naturally rather than be genetically modified. These procedures are dangerous and risk desensitizing our population. If we ever accept this as okay, we are in a lot of trouble as a moral society. These practices should be banned and those who practice them should be prosecuted to the full extent.

  • No I don't think eugenics is ethical

    It removes the choice of the people to make their own decisions for good or for bad alike. Yes some people abuse those choices, that right, but......it doesn't mean it should be ok to take it away from everyone else and punish them too. Anything that is said to be for our greater good by government, inevitably gets abused and turned into something that takes away another right from us. The idea of eugenics is no different to me. So no I don't find eugenics ethical at all.

  • Eugenics is a violation of basic human rights and decency

    Part of eugenics that the yes people are not talking about is the leaning on of racism and mental health stigmas. You see, in every country that eugenics has been used the basis of the usage was the "undesirable DNA" Who decides that? As well as, the case Buck vs Bell in which Bell was considered "feeble-minded" unjustly. The supreme court ruled that the state could sterilize her and she was. Flash forward and Bell, a perfectly fine steady headed woman, is trying to have a child with her husband and can not for the life of her achieve this goal. Why? Because not only did the state sterilize her but didn't tell her. And another thing, eugenics is not just about removing the "undesirable DNA". Its also about distributing the "good" DNA. You read that correctly, forced human breeding. Like how we breed cows to get the best DNA or inbreed bulldogs so they stay "purebred". For an example of why we should not do this, look up blue blood or royal blood.


    TL-DR
    No, it is not okay because there is no way to objectively decide who should and should not be sterilized, and it is a violation of the basic rights of the person as a human being.

  • Eugenics is a violation of basic human rights and decency

    Part of eugenics that the yes people are not talking about is the leaning on of racism and mental health stigmas. You see, in every country that eugenics has been used the basis of the usage was the "undesirable DNA" Who decides that? As well as, the case Buck vs Bell in which Bell was considered "feeble-minded" unjustly. The supreme court ruled that the state could sterilize her and she was. Flash forward and Bell, a perfectly fine steady headed woman, is trying to have a child with her husband and can not for the life of her achieve this goal. Why? Because not only did the state sterilize her but didn't tell her. And another thing, eugenics is not just about removing the "undesirable DNA". Its also about distributing the "good" DNA. You read that correctly, forced human breeding. Like how we breed cows to get the best DNA or inbreed bulldogs so they stay "purebred". For an example of why we should not do this, look up blue blood or royal blood.


    TL-DR
    No, it is not okay because there is no way to objectively decide who should and should not be sterilized, and it is a violation of the basic rights of the person as a human being.

  • Its a no from me

    Im simon yay aya aya ya yah ya ayayhayayaya ya ya yaay ay a ay a ay ay ay ay ay a yay a a ay a aa aa ay a aay ay ay ay ay ayay ay a yay ay ay ay a a ay a ya ya ya ya

  • Its a no from me

    Im simon yay aya aya ya yah ya ayayhayayaya ya ya yaay ay a ay a ay ay ay ay ay a yay a a ay a aa aa ay a aay ay ay ay ay ayay ay a yay ay ay ay a a ay a ya ya ya ya

  • Its a no from me

    Im simon yay aya aya ya yah ya ayayhayayaya ya ya yaay ay a ay a ay ay ay ay ay a yay a a ay a aa aa ay a aay ay ay ay ay ayay ay a yay ay ay ay a a ay a ya ya ya ya


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.