The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Bring back eugenics!!!!!!!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/30/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 541 times Debate No: 107315
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




I'll be con
You be pro.
Debate Round No. 1


In my opinion, eugenics is based solely on the concept of winnowing out certain sectors of society that "we" don't like, without any real thought given to the consequences of disallowing these "undesirables" to procreate. Who are these undesirables that I speak of? It depends solely on the conviction of the parties involved who are willing to administer this "culling" of society. Who's to say that anybody is somehow free of ever making on the list of supposed undesirables? It really boils down to getting rid of those people "we" don't like! The concept of "genetic cleansing" holds no real scientific value, yet eugenics itself is based on a scientific understanding of how we could conceivably control humankinds genetic makeup, but is that really a good thing? First off, the idea that we could somehow remove certain ailments from society (ie, cancer, arthritis, downsyndrom) is so problematic, it borders on the realm of impossible. If we removed everyone from society with a certain sickness that's caused by a genetic "misprint", it wouldn't necessarily remove that gene from the human genome all altogether because these kinds of "misprints" could reamerge in later generations, thus spawning the need to remove more factions of society and so on and so on, until we've removed the vast majority of society itself. Dwindling down our genetic diversity will leave us unable to adapt to ever changing circumstances and could make us genetically venerable to extinction. Who's to say that we are able to make a wise decision of what genes are good or not good for us? We would literally need to see into the future to have somewhat of an idea of what genes in our genome we will need to continue to adapt. Eugenics is a denial that genetic adaptation is a good thing, but if we don't contine to adapt, the human genome would become stagnant and we would become more related to each other, and we all know the dangers of making babies with people we're related to. Eugenics is like scientifically denying science!! In the end, all eugenics really is, is the science of getting rid of those we don't like, and since every sector of society is disliked by somebody, we all make that list of undesirables. Since we cannot see into the future, all we can do is rely on ALL the genes in the human genome to have better genetic adaptation, even the ones we might consider "undesirable".


Okay, and?
Debate Round No. 2


My opponent is an obvious example of what happens when people who are related have children. It's sad to see what his parents have done to him, that's why brothers and sisters shouldn't make babies! Eugenics will only prove to worsen this problem over time because it prevents diversity in the human genome, which in turn makes us all more closely related and then we end up with huge portions of the population who are short on chromosomes like my opponent.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 3 years ago
Let's go!
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.