Secretary on 5/11/2006 at 13:54
All this rethorics that Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology uses resemble the one's that were practiced in ancient Sparta. There was a special board that chose healthy children for the needs of society: boys for soldiers, girls for mothers (who gave bearth to future soldiers and mothers). Those who didn't fit the high standards were disposed of. Convinient, modern, clean.
I wonder what will happen next. I see an anti-utopian picture:
'ISO 435435 has been released for unborn children. New parents approve'.
Strange western civilization: оn one hand they raise human life and personal immunity as a shiled, on other hand they try to edit it (for humans convenience and safety of course).
I think it is not about laws, it is about general state policy. If ruling class wants a certain decision they will stimulate public opinion in the right direction, make a suitable legal document, push it through, then apply it several times, and finally we have a working system.
Though some would confront this statements, i recommend to recall Iraqi war and 'torture act', or other examples which show that public protest has a low value now.
Spitter on 5/11/2006 at 14:21
As a person who needs to wear glasses I heartily support this idea.
Schattentänzer on 5/11/2006 at 14:48
In before Stephen Hawking!
Renegen on 5/11/2006 at 15:22
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
I agree that severly disabled people don't neccessarily reproduce. But what about the only moderately disabled? Why would someone want to be born with any disability? I have willingly removed myself from the gene pool , thankfully before I had children, because I am genetically defective. Chances are 1 in 75 of passing on MS. Genes alone do not determine the onset of MS, but why take a chance with another life? Many lesser disabilities leave people able to reproduce, but should they? I say no, but others disagree.
The natural selection argument is controversial because it goes hand in hand with the theory of evolution. That slides over into religious beliefs & not even I am going there-at least not tonight. I don't agree that society is a device of natural selection. The strong protect the weak. And, we try to save every life no matter whose. I would like to think humans are intelligent enough to successfully circumvent natural selection, but even though I have yet to see proof of it, I still hope we can one day.
So you want humans to go beyond natural selection but you are practicing it yourself?
Nothing we can do will reduce the numbers of disabled significantly, natural selection in this case sounds more like discrimination. Think of wolves, only the alpha wolf breeds yet each generation you still have weak wolves, evolution takes hundred of thousands, millions of years. Crips will come from the alpha male just as much as the one without an arm, there's little we can do about it.
Considered a lot of women marry the best provider I think natural selection is present in our society, it's a touchy subject for sure.
Fingernail on 5/11/2006 at 17:54
Like vegetarianism.
Or autobahns.
pavlovscat on 5/11/2006 at 18:10
Good morning. I see everyone's been busy while I was sleeping.
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
Just because it's difficult doesn't mean it should be ruled out for all cases. Are you trying to say you'd rather have died than contracted MS?
I didn't say that euthanasia was always the right option, but it should BE an option. Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I am too ornery & too chicken shit to kill myself, so here I am muddling along the best I can. I would be lying if I said I get no enjoyment from my existance, but I don't enjoy being sick. As I get worse, there are less things I am able to enjoy, so when does the balance shift to more sickness than enjoyment? And, what then? I would rather have never had to progress to that point.
Quote Posted by caringiscreepy
@pavlovscat- you were able to be diagnosed before you reproduced, however in disorders such as huntington disease it is very possible that you may already have children before you develop any symptoms.
Yes, I consider myself fortunate. The guilt I would feel having a child who inherited my disease could only be compared to the guilt I would feel if I killed an innocent person in a car accident. I no longer drive because sometimes I get disoriented or dizzy. Having that happen behind the wheel of a car is more serious than walking into a wall because I got a little dizzy. I won't do it.
Quote Posted by ilweran
In a way we do as miscarriage or fertilised eggs failing to implant can be caused by genetic abnormalities.
Late term spontaneous abortions are usually called premature births and every attempt is made to save them. Many premature babies end up on life support and end up with life long health problems. Modern medical progress has tried to eliminate that aspect of natural selection.
Quote Posted by Renegen
So you want humans to go beyond natural selection but you are practicing it yourself?
Nothing we can do will reduce the numbers of disabled significantly, natural selection in this case sounds more like discrimination. Think of wolves, only the alpha wolf breeds yet each generation you still have weak wolves, evolution takes hundred of thousands, millions of years. Crips will come from the alpha male just as much as the one without an arm, there's little we can do about it.
Considered a lot of women marry the best provider I think natural selection is present in our society, it's a touchy subject for sure.
Yes, that seems to be a contradiction; however, no matter what I wish, the reality is that people are getting less & less healthy with the passing of time. I do not choose to contribute to that decline.
And, yes mutations occur constantly, good & bad. In fact, favorable mutations are how species progress evolutionarily. But,the weak wolves don't usually get to breed, so that mutation stops in a single generation. There is little propagation of unfavorable traits in a natural environment. I don't consider the way humans live to be a natural enviroment, but a totally artificial construct.
Amen to that! It is a very touchy subject and a difficult one for some people to view rationally. I guess it all comes down to whether or not you believe life is sacred or just a biological function. In this artificial environment, a good provider is not necessarily the strongest or most fit candidate. How many women are attracted to, marry & have children with drunken losers who beat them? How is that a good selection?
Para?noid on 5/11/2006 at 18:31
Like has been said before, we are talking about children that are born severly, severly fucked up and a miracle they are still alive. I'll give you a real world example:
I help out on a farm during lambing season. We generally stay up till about 3am and go out every 2 or so hours to keep an eye on the mothers as they start popping sprogs. Most of them come out fine and you wipe away the crap and dip their umbilical cords in some iodine type shit or whatever and make sure they don't lose their mothers. However sometimes you gotta dig deep and you pull out sheep that don't actually have skeletons and are litterally lamb-shaped bags of fluid or you pull out lambs that are still ALIVE but have no legs and are completely blind and deaf because their brains have more in common with a plate of mashed potatoes than an actual brain.
These are the kind of children we are talking about here. Utter abominations that would require 24/7 life support to ensure their survival in what would only be a life of constant torment and pain.
paloalto on 5/11/2006 at 21:37
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
It seems I'm on a roll with pissing everybody off tonight, so why stop a winning streak?
Humans are the only animals that perpetuate non-viable genetic faults. We have eliminated the idea of survival of the fittest. Using modern medicine and science, we nuture and protect individuals that would die out in any non-domesticated species. Before you wail & gnash your teeth & call me names, stay with me a bit longer. An animal which cannot feed itself will die. Many disabilities would preclude a person's continued survival if they had to provide for themselves. This also means these genetic traits would be less likely to be perpetuated because animals that can't eat, can't breed. So, we have removed nature's control for eliminating non-productive genetic mutations. Therefore, humans reproduce virtually uncontrolled and weaken the whole species. This parallels the problems with purebred animals. We breed selectively for single traits, not the well being of the entire breed. It is well known that particular breeds suffer predictable health problems due to inbreeding and selective breeding which promotes "ideal" appearances or temperments rather than healthy animals. We won't help Fido & Fluffy, but will we help ourselves? I doubt it. Too many people think that any life is better than no life, nevermind quality of life or the individual's preference. I would rather die than be confined to a bed on a ventilator for the rest of my life. That's my preference. Too often when people get seriously ill, they are kept alive by machines. Once the machines are hooked up, it becomes a criminal act to turn them off. But what if I didn't want the machines in the first place. I would be denied my right of free choice to die. Just because someone is alive, doesn't mean they should be forced to stay beyond their body or brain's ability to function. Of course, if you deny the basic truth that humans are just very fancy animals, you probably think I'm nuts. But, that's OK. I probably am.
Aah Eugenics.Someone else had that idea I think.Hitler, Margaret Sanger and some more.Who will judge who lives and dies?
Hopefully the decisions being made about the original subject of this thread will be based on ethics and not by a bitter individual who bielieves that the universe is out to get him for some reason or another.Or that he got some unlucky role of the dice.
Personally I bieleve all diseases have a karmic component to them.A lesson to be learned so to speak.
SD on 5/11/2006 at 21:40
Quote Posted by paloalto
Personally I bieleve all diseases have a karmic component to them.A lesson to be learned so to speak.
Glenn Hoddle?
