|
 trendal
J♠
 
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
 Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce?  [Re: spud]
#4464614 - 07/28/05 01:11 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not "regurgitating" current law, I was pointing out the difference between your example (raping children) and the idea of preventing adults from trying to have children. 
The ethics of this are very simple: either you want to give everyone equal freedom...or you want to take freedom away from select groups of people.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
Huehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly
Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,689
Loc: On the Border
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: spud]
#4464622 - 07/28/05 01:12 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
My brother has schizophrenia....he gets along alright...he is a little weird.
--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda
|
spud
I'm so fly.
Registered: 10/07/02
Posts: 44,410
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: trendal]
#4464630 - 07/28/05 01:14 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I have nothing against taking the freedom away from certain individuals.
Also, did you read the article I provided?
A great example of how in this world, arbitrary numbers such as IQ determine A LOT. Even whether or not you will be legally executed.
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: spud]
#4464639 - 07/28/05 01:15 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
spud said:
The top priority of my concern is an innocent, loving child having to live a life with a horrible disease such as schizophrenia due to selfish and inconsiderate parents.
While people with schizophrenia are more likely to have children with the condition, they are not guaranteed to have children with it.
You want to prevent them from even having the chance to do so?
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: spud]
#4464643 - 07/28/05 01:16 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
A great example of how in this world, arbitrary numbers such as IQ determine A LOT. Even whether or not you will be legally executed.
I thought this was supposed to be a "timeless ethics" discussion...not a "regurgitation of current law"
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
spud
I'm so fly.
Registered: 10/07/02
Posts: 44,410
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: trendal]
#4464647 - 07/28/05 01:17 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
35% is statistically significant, according to the field of science.
That is significant enough for me to take action.
Would you allow someone to take a risk that brings them happiness if it had a 35% risk of imposing a horrible disease upon a child?
|
spud
I'm so fly.
Registered: 10/07/02
Posts: 44,410
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: trendal]
#4464649 - 07/28/05 01:18 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said:
A great example of how in this world, arbitrary numbers such as IQ determine A LOT. Even whether or not you will be legally executed.
I thought this was supposed to be a "timeless ethics" discussion...not a "regurgitation of current law"
The article was for your own pleasure, hence me stating IT MIGHT MAKE YOU CHUCKLE.
Oh dear trendal, not everything exists in a vacuum. Can we not share articles as friends?
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: spud]
#4464666 - 07/28/05 01:24 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Would you allow someone to take a risk that brings them happiness if it had a 35% risk of imposing a horrible disease upon a child?
Yes, yes I would. Otherwise you have deprived 65% of those people from having healthy children 
I have nothing against taking the freedom away from certain individuals.
Then you have nothing against someone taking away your freedom?
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
spud
I'm so fly.
Registered: 10/07/02
Posts: 44,410
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: trendal]
#4464678 - 07/28/05 01:27 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
trendal said:
Then you have nothing against someone taking away your freedom?
I am a competent being, so I have do indeed have something against it.
If someone chooses to take away my freedom of raping children, I won't complain too much.
Any who, I'm late for class. Been fun chattin'!
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: spud]
#4464692 - 07/28/05 01:31 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I am a competent being, so I have do indeed have something against it.
Who defines "competent"? You? What is stopping you from drawing the "competent" line wherever you wish?
Such a thing is far too arbitrary to use as a reason to take away freedom from a group of people.
Do you honestly think that, if you follow your family tree back, you won't find one or two of your ancestors who aren't, by your definition, "competent"? Do you think you have come from some prodigious line of pure-bloods who have never had a defective gene in their family?
What if someone decided that one of those relatives shouldn't reproduce because of their faulty gene(s)?
You wouldn't be here right now to live your "competent" life.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
Irradiated_Feces
doomedgeneration
Registered: 07/11/03
Posts: 4,278
Loc: Great White North
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: trendal]
#4464768 - 07/28/05 01:51 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Directed to the thread in general...
Best argument for eugenics right here.
Oh and saying that nature will take care of inheritable disabilities is kind of bullshit, because we don't let nature take care of anything anymore. Our seniors are hooked up to machines keeping them alive. Medical science will keep these people around also and that is not natural.
|
 fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: Ravus]
#4464775 - 07/28/05 01:52 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ravus said:
We evolved to have the potential to create government, and those who utilized the power of government have survived until we get where we are today. By that logic, government is useful to our survival, not by some abstract means but because by using it we are still here.
Quote:
However, we have not used eugenics, nor stopped those with disabilities from reproducing, and yet we are also still here and very successful.
Your two statements in seperate quotes here contradict one another when one considers the fact that these things have occured in our past, especially in our more primitive times, especially infanticide, which was utilized as population control, to remove babies with visible defects, etc. Your first statement, in concrete means, justifies this as a necessary means for our survival. It was even Roman law at one point in time, to kill off a baby if it was defected. Families facing harsh economic factors would kill off their babies... this has been documented in tons of ancient cultures.
Here we are, still here and successful.. thanks to infanticide, which propagated our evolution! 
 
Peace. 
--------------------
 
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
  
 
|
Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: fireworks_god]
#4464810 - 07/28/05 01:59 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Your two statements in seperate quotes here contradict one another when one considers the fact that these things have occured in our past
A lot of events have occured in our past; that is the point of chaos and random variation from different cultures and time periods. Yet I don't believe these statements contradict each other, because we have been consistently using government as a way to further ourselves, while the periods in which we've used eugenics/ infanticide have been temporary and is no longer used. I can't say what the world would be like if the Romans had never killed off defected babies, but from simple observation we can notice that in the modern day we allow those with defects to survive and even reproduce, and we are still here thriving.
It's like saying praying to the sun is necessary to our survival because it's occured in the past and yet we're still here, but we have to look at these events realistically, and if these ways of thinking died out and yet cultures without them thrived, we can conclude that they're not necessary to humanity's survival. I can't think of any cultures that have lived without at least some primitive form of government and leadership, and even those with primitive governments were often taken over by those with a stronger, more intelligent form of leadership.
--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: Ravus]
#4464851 - 07/28/05 02:10 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I agree with you; I think my basic point is that everything that we concern ourselves with is utilized at a specific point in time and serves its purpose within that. Some concepts prove to be more useful for whatever task we apply them to and we use them for a much longer time. A time when we are without a necessity for government certainly can present itself, and government would no longer be useful to us for those tasks.
There are plenty of paths, plenty of goals, and plenty of possibillities, plenty of options that might be more capable than others that have proven to be useful in the past. This is really just carry over from your thread, and I must note that I am now getting mildly delirious from need of sleep.
Have a good one, man! 
Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: fireworks_god]
#4464870 - 07/28/05 02:15 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
How did infanticide propagate our evolution in your eyes?
I would think that people looking to not have to do this is what has resulted in a huge growth spurts. We look for new ways to care for the poor and disadvantaged or disabled through co-operative, technological and medical advancements.
Sure, like with plants, if you cut off the crap, they thrive naturally. Wanting to save the crap and turn it into something of value may spawn innovation and rejuvenitive progress. The ability to create and innovate is what sets us apart from the animals.
If a horse in the wild is born lame it will die and the other horses can't do a thing to save it. If a human is born lame, we can keep it alive and it can lead a productive life. Thats pretty cool. Before that happens, we have to have the desire for it to live.
Many couples adopt disabled children they have so much desire to nurture and care for a human life.
If anyone should be kept from reproducing it should be those without the ability to care for or love another or those without the means to at least feed, cloth and shelter it properly. Those are the ones I would like to see neutered or spayed.
Look at healthy moms who give birth to healthy babies and throw them in dumpsters or dead beat dads. Those are the ones I would clip and snip first if we had too.
Even those types spawn a reason for the evolution of compassion, forgiveness and generosity to come out of us.
I think we will progress best technologically and spiritually if we just let it be.
--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
#4464887 - 07/28/05 02:18 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
gettinjiggywithit said:
How did infanticide propagate our evolution in your eyes?
Beyond the fact that every single interaction that our species participates in propagates our evolution?
Perhaps you missed my sarcastic tone or my point in that statement up there...
Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: fireworks_god]
#4464969 - 07/28/05 02:37 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I sensed a minor dose of sarcasm in it as I couldn't picture you killing your puppy if it was born with 3 legs or blind or something.
Yet its true, everything takes us forward even if its backwards  Funny how that works sort of like rip tides.
--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
PuZuZu
Board Bum
Registered: 05/27/04
Posts: 671
Loc: Idaho (USA)
Last seen: 18 years, 7 months
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
#4465564 - 07/28/05 05:42 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
<edit> Cleared up who my quotes are from for folks. =)
Quote:
trendal Preventing parents from even trying to raise children is preventing them from making "mistakes" that they haven't made yet and may never actually make.
Yeah this totally correct. If we don't let less healthy people or nonstandard parents have kids then life would be unbalanced anyways. First this would hurt the parent's feelings leaving you with a question of whether or not a healthy child could come into this world. And even if an unhealthy child were born what harm does it do to us fellow humans? Yeah, the child doesn't live the best life but that isn't our decision. That child won't hate you for letting it be born. Its part of that circle of life. Unhealthy kids are born every day for a reason in mind, to touch those around them. Plus you know, handicapped people and those with deadly inherited diseases can teach you special things that 'normal' people couldn't. I'm glad for the variety in this world. I won't pity a child being 'born' on this earth because life is an awesome gift. I will pity the pain they endure to show us other aspects of life. Maybe even try to prevent it but I won't finish it off by destroying a reproduction process.
Its all natural... diseases and disabilities. By trying to stop it with laws and morals isn't living an accepted life. How about we let this children be born so someday they will have a cure since the disease can be observed through them. Then that way, if the problem does get cured, you can get appreciation from that person. That would be awesome.
Quote:
irradiated_fecesOh and saying that nature will take care of inheritable disabilities is kind of bullshit, because we don't let nature take care of anything anymore. Our seniors are hooked up to machines keeping them alive. Medical science will keep these people around also and that is not natural.
Its not natural for the human mind to be curious and strive to better its world through letting others live? It is natural to love your seniors and let them be on this earth longer so you can enjoy them. I think you should work in a nursing home for awhile to understand this.
--------------------
"If you worried about falling off the bike, you would never get on."
Lance Armstrong
Edited by PuZuZu (07/28/05 05:58 PM)
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: PuZuZu]
#4465594 - 07/28/05 05:50 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Me thinks you replied to the wrong person
--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
 Re: Should people with serious inheritable disabilities be allowed to reproduce? [Re: spud]
#4465655 - 07/28/05 06:07 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
While I agree that laws should never interfere in people's personal lives, there's a bigger issue.
What if the child to be isn't just destined for disability. What if that child is destined for a short life of deformity, mental retardation, and constant intractable pain before death at, say, age 10 and this can be shown through genetic analysis that it is a certainty?
Now should the law prevent the parents from conceiving?
--------------------
Republican Values:
1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.
4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Bulk Substrate 
Red Vein Kratom 
Sterilized Grain Bag 
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
shroomydan
Diploid
cleaner
Positronius
secretmachine
felix4life
sir tripsalot