RE: Eugenetics : the thread

Kev

I think you misinterpreted me. Of course mentally disabled people can enrich our lives. All I meant was that this is an individual thing; they are unlikely to contribute to society as a whole.

RE: Benjamin……

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 27-07-02 AT 07:44 AM (GMT)]Geforce

I used to feel spoilt and fat as you describe. But I accept now that things are beyond my control and just try to chill. Besides, poverty isn’t all grime and crime. I took this snap last year – the airport had no scheduled flights at that time. There was a weekly Cessna Caravan I flight to Lusaka (the capital of the country) operated by an American charity. We actually had to hire a Piper Aztec + pilot for a week just to get here!
Attachments:

RE: Benjamin……

You are unfortunately correct Sam. It’s another case of generalising.

Third world is a misleading term, as it implies a country is backwards. It is more useful to categorise countries as either “developing” (Phillipines, Turkey) or “undeveloped” (Malawi, Afghanistan).

Even then, some countries defy pigeon-holing. South Africa is one example. From some angles, it is undeveloped. Sometimes it is developing. In some areas it is First World. Driving from Cape Town airport is a great way to see the reality of this – in a new hire car, on a modern road, past a township, through some residential and light indsutrial areas (quite Western) and into a wealthy and cosmopolitan city. Unfortunately I tend to miss all this because the sight of Cape Town itself and Table Mountain distracts me!

RE: Let there be piece

Hey, at least us Brits aren’t getting at Ze Germans or Le Escargots!

I think there are serious differences in perspective between Americans and Europeans. I am keen to see why this is, that’s all. I’m not anti American, I just disagree with the majority of Americans!

I just read a book by Howard Marks (title – Mr. Nice), the notorious dope smuggler whom the DEA had a vendetta against. It provides a good insight into the different mindsets involved. Why not take a peek?

http://www.mrnice.co.uk/

RE: Eugenics

I am still curious as to what exactly eugenics is.

For instance, if parents have a designer baby (ie. preselection of attirubutes) is this a similar thing?

You could even stretch the argument a little with reference to selective breeding to achieve a desired result – like with race horses. Is this similar?

I’m not trying to be disingenious. But I do see similarities here and I have no idea where the line is.

Kev, you mention that some disabled kids are remarkable. I agree – my cousin was mentally disabled from birth, but he was a happy presence until he died in his mid 20’s. If they aren’t mentally disabled, they may even contribute something to society as a whole. Stephen Hawking is a good case, although his disability was progressive and he was not really handicapped as a child.

But, what if your doctors told you and your pregnant wife that your child was going to be disabled – but that, hypothetically, you could alter his genetic basis to remove the disability. You might kill off a genius, or you might bring joy to someone eho otherwise would be at a disadvantage. What would you do??

I appreciate that such personal stuff is a step removed from wholesale mass eugenics ala Hitler or Churchill. But the morality sems vaguely similar. I suggest you check out the following work on figuring out morality:

http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htm

“Mongu the Money Mad Moralist”

RE: Comet

Geforce is right, Comet.

I don’t believe anyone ever told hospitals to put refugees ahead of everyone else for operations. It is just a lame and easy excuse to trot out for the chaotic state of the NHS. And that, is mostly due to incompetence and corruption by those working within the system.

I don’t agree with you on the Aborigines either. They are a bit of a mystery to anthropology – no one knows where they came from, or when. Just that they went to Australia a long time ago.

The worst treatment of the Abos was long ago when Australia was first colonised. Many thousands died because of alien bacteria and viruses born by the colonists, against which they had never developed a natural immunity. Some were also shot for sport, but that was only a small percentage.

The government plan to take children away from their parents was misguided. It had benign intentions though – to put these children in care, educate them and develop them. A lot of Aboriginal parents were unfit, judged by Western standards. In the end, the plan failed because they were taken from some bad parents and then given no parents at all. Some help!

They were often sent home to their tribes or tribal areas, but they had grown up in the towns and cities so lacked the culture and understanding of their fellows. So a lot of them were completely out of place both amongst their own people and in the towns and cities; resultingly, a lot returned to the urban areas, became alcoholic and basically worthless bums. It does mostly stem from the governmental interference in their childhood.

But don’t forget the good intentions; it is not comparable to the South African system of racial Apartheid. That too, was benign at first. But it quickly deteriorated, especially when Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd lost his marbles.

RE: Aye Cayramba, haha very funny…

Sorry to post twice in quick succession, but I was curious about Kev’s and Geforce’s stance on Eugenics?

Why do you object so strongly? I’m not saying I agree with it, but your rejection seems very absolute.