4 ms·

Eugenics has a somewhat fraught past. Everyone who tried it thought they were doing their victims a favor.

by Kye 5y ago

DoreenMichele 5y ago
^ This. In the United States today, approximately 1 in every 27 Jews is a Tay-Sachs carrier. https://healthresearchfunding.org/17-good-statistics-tay-sachs-disease/ https://healthresearchfunding.org/17-good-statistics-tay-sac...
- Kye 5y ago
  I had no idea. I just used my "wait, no, that's eugenics" heuristic. Now I know! One day it's "we should save these kids from a difficult life," the next it's "we need symbols to tell undesirables apart," the next it's "we have too many people in camps and nowhere to send them." People like me ended up in those camps next to the Jews, so I'm not keen on the noise that starts the landslide.
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    There's an unfortunate truth that proponents of equality are going to have to deal with at some point: we are biologically different, to greater or lesser degrees. That's a fact. And it's only going to be more of a fact the deeper we dig into our genetic code. But it's how we respond to and deal with that that determines whether we commit good or evil.
    - zionic 5y ago
      > that proponents of equality are going to have to deal with We both know that will never happen. They’ll never “deal with” the flaws in their religion, they’ll just ignore it like all the others do.
      - ethbr0 5y ago
        I have more optimism. Dogmas are hard to cast aside, but gradually things progress forward.
- dogma1138 5y ago
  Israel performs pre and post conception screenings for TS and a few other genetic diseases that are common within the Jewish population. Just calling every genetic screening designed to prevent actual suffering eugenics is pretty nonsensical.
  - DoreenMichele 5y ago
    Just calling every genetic screening designed to prevent actual suffering eugenics is pretty nonsensical. It's also putting words in my mouth since I said no such thing.
    - dogma1138 5y ago
      Apologies then just your reply seemed to indicate that you were agreeing with these screenings and the termination that follows them being eugenics. My litmus test for eugenics requires an ideological and social engineering component. Simply telling parents well if you bring a child to the world they’ll die within 2 years and suffer greatly isn’t that. Neither is offering them other tools such as using a sperm or egg donor or adoption.
      - DoreenMichele 5y ago
        The OP to which I declined to reply says: No one should be born with Tay-Sachs, a genetic disease. I agreed with a reply to that suggesting such an extreme and unnuanced statement amounted to eugenics since the only means to actually ensure that no child will ever be born with X genetic disease would require rather extreme measures that go far beyond providing testing and options.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        s1artibartfast 5y ago
        There is a difference between saying something shouldn't happen, and it should be prevented by any means necessary. I really shouldn't smoke. I don't endorse SS officers killing me if I do.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Eugenics has a somewhat fraught past. That's...an understatement. > Everyone who tried it thought they were doing their victims a favor. No, not everyone who did it thought that they were doing their victims a favor. Quite a lot saw their victims as people who ought to be sacrificed for the good of others, and if they thought they were doing them a favor it was only in not murdering them outright as well as preventing them from reproducing. Of course, some eugenics practitioners didn't bother avoiding outright murder, e.g., the Nazis.
- Kye 5y ago
  This is a bit of a tangent off me pointing out someone's suggestion was eugenics. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this comment. We obviously can't read the minds of eugenics pushers, and very few openly admit their True Aims, so there's not any point trying to litigate it here.
seo-speedwagon 5y ago
1. Tay-Sachs is not limited to a single ethnicity. Carriers exist in the population in general. 2. Assuming you’re referring to the fact that being a carrier is more common in Ashkenazi Jews, you’re aware that there are a number of genetic screening programs run by Jewish organizations, right?

Eugenics has a somewhat fraught past. Everyone who tried it thought they were doing their victims a favor.

by Kye 5y ago

Eugenics has a somewhat fraught past. Everyone who tried it thought they were doing their victims a favor.

^ This. In the United States today, approximately 1 in every 27 Jews is a Tay-Sachs carrier. https://healthresearchfunding.org/17-good-statistics-tay-sachs-disease/ https://healthresearchfunding.org/17-good-statistics-tay-sac...

Kye 5y ago
I had no idea. I just used my "wait, no, that's eugenics" heuristic. Now I know! One day it's "we should save these kids from a difficult life," the next it's "we need symbols to tell undesirables apart," the next it's "we have too many people in camps and nowhere to send them." People like me ended up in those camps next to the Jews, so I'm not keen on the noise that starts the landslide.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  There's an unfortunate truth that proponents of equality are going to have to deal with at some point: we are biologically different, to greater or lesser degrees. That's a fact. And it's only going to be more of a fact the deeper we dig into our genetic code. But it's how we respond to and deal with that that determines whether we commit good or evil.
  - zionic 5y ago
    > that proponents of equality are going to have to deal with We both know that will never happen. They’ll never “deal with” the flaws in their religion, they’ll just ignore it like all the others do.
    - ethbr0 5y ago
      I have more optimism. Dogmas are hard to cast aside, but gradually things progress forward.
dogma1138 5y ago
Israel performs pre and post conception screenings for TS and a few other genetic diseases that are common within the Jewish population. Just calling every genetic screening designed to prevent actual suffering eugenics is pretty nonsensical.
- DoreenMichele 5y ago
  Just calling every genetic screening designed to prevent actual suffering eugenics is pretty nonsensical. It's also putting words in my mouth since I said no such thing.
  - dogma1138 5y ago
    Apologies then just your reply seemed to indicate that you were agreeing with these screenings and the termination that follows them being eugenics. My litmus test for eugenics requires an ideological and social engineering component. Simply telling parents well if you bring a child to the world they’ll die within 2 years and suffer greatly isn’t that. Neither is offering them other tools such as using a sperm or egg donor or adoption.
    - DoreenMichele 5y ago
      The OP to which I declined to reply says: No one should be born with Tay-Sachs, a genetic disease. I agreed with a reply to that suggesting such an extreme and unnuanced statement amounted to eugenics since the only means to actually ensure that no child will ever be born with X genetic disease would require rather extreme measures that go far beyond providing testing and options.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - s1artibartfast 5y ago
        There is a difference between saying something shouldn't happen, and it should be prevented by any means necessary. I really shouldn't smoke. I don't endorse SS officers killing me if I do.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Eugenics has a somewhat fraught past. That's...an understatement. > Everyone who tried it thought they were doing their victims a favor. No, not everyone who did it thought that they were doing their victims a favor. Quite a lot saw their victims as people who ought to be sacrificed for the good of others, and if they thought they were doing them a favor it was only in not murdering them outright as well as preventing them from reproducing. Of course, some eugenics practitioners didn't bother avoiding outright murder, e.g., the Nazis.

Kye 5y ago
This is a bit of a tangent off me pointing out someone's suggestion was eugenics. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this comment. We obviously can't read the minds of eugenics pushers, and very few openly admit their True Aims, so there's not any point trying to litigate it here.

seo-speedwagon 5y ago

1. Tay-Sachs is not limited to a single ethnicity. Carriers exist in the population in general. 2. Assuming you’re referring to the fact that being a carrier is more common in Ashkenazi Jews, you’re aware that there are a number of genetic screening programs run by Jewish organizations, right?