2 ms·
The children afflicted obviously. What gives the unaffected the right to impose their judgment when they will never pay the price? Their skin will not slowly ha
by eugenicsismoral 8y ago
The children afflicted obviously. What gives the unaffected the right to impose their judgment when they will never pay the price? Their skin will not slowly harden to bone over the course of decade, making every movement an agony, until eventually they asphyxiate when their chest can no longer expand. Their limbs will not grow twisted, their heart will not rip and tear, their immune system will not rise up against them.
The votes to criminalize reproductive outcomes must only come from the population experiencing those negative outcomes. Otherwise the 99.999% of people who will never experience that particular horror will always outvote them to save 20 bucks of testing.
We have a rich history stretching thousands of years of the damned returning to warn society to avoid their mistakes, their follies, their hubris. We listen to Tiny Tim about the importance of relationships over wealth, but seem to discard his other message on the importance of polio vaccinations.
Almost 300 years ago society decided that cruel and unusual punishment was unjust, and forswore its use. Yet today the power to summon new human beings into any of millions literal hells on earth is completely unchecked. We have the technology to know
> Probably 90%-98% of the population has one or a few things "wrong" in their genetic makeup
I read this argument as the slippery slop fallacy. Criminalizing bringing children to term with Huntington's disease is very different that murdering all babies at the hospital that have brown eyes. The current technology level makes it cheap enough to society to eliminate the low hanging fruit of the most crippling genetic diseases.
Eugenics is not limited to concentration camps. There are many moral forms of eugenics. For example: a society could recognize that certain genes impose steep costs, and tax those who choose to impose those genes upon new humans. Society then uses the tax revenue to compensate the victims.
- onetimemanytime 8y agoFine, you are King of Kings for a day. Draw the line P.S. Usually a lot of these things solve itself, as by the time you are of marriage age people wither know your family history or the disease has manifested. If you had leukemia as a kid and go for x procedure every year, why would a reasonable person marry you?
- cimmanom 8y agoMost people choose marriage partners based on emotional connection (with some component of physical attraction). Surviving leukemia doesn't preclude being physically attractive. And how the hell would it preclude emotional attachment?