User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 158

  1. #21
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,859

    Default

    Of the diseases you mentioned, Huntington's and CF are genetic, because they are caused by an error in a certain gene. Cancer, intelligence and behavior are not caused by genetic errors. They are the result of the interplay between genes and environment. So you need to be more specific in your sweeping generalizations.While we're at it, you should tell Stephen Hawking that his condition will send him to the gas chamber too.
    As for violent crime...would you put a man top death for hitting his wife? He acted violently and had committed a crime. where do you draw the line on what constitutes violence and criminality? what about factors that often lead up to criminal behavior? How about drug addiction? It's a none risk factor. Should they be euthanized too? Statistically many of them will be involved in some form of criminal enterprise, some violent. Maybe society should just eliminate them all in deference to statistics.
    IQ: so a spread of 20 points is enough to make one worthy or unworthy of parenthood? Which test gets administered? Who decides that? You? what if you score lowly, despite your grand ideas? Sorry, Perch. Too bad for you if the test is biased against your particular interests or abilities, or cultural background. Off with your balls.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Perch420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    NiTi
    Enneagram
    5w1
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Remember that time royal people only bred close within their own ranks to keep the gene pool 'clean', but their babies were all insane homocidal maniacs with a slew of health problems?

    Or that time that dude with the mustache said that certain genes were clearly superior to all others and tried killing off people with non-desirable traits? I think he started a war over the whole mess that costed a gazillion lives, or so the rumor goes.
    Yes, you are talking about inbreeding. That's what happens when cousins and siblings have sex with each other. When did I even remotely advocate for that? Genetic variation among the population of the world is huge and always increasing. "Inbreeding" would never happen in a world with eugenics.

    Your analogy is absurd since "clean blood" referred to royal blood, and royalty is arbitrary and has nothing to do with things like intelligence and physical fitness. In a world with eugenics, those traits would determine who gets to have children and who doesn't.

    And yes, Hitler did implement eugenics. So what? So did the United States and other European countries. Hitler was also a socialist; does this mean socialism should be condemned because Hitler was somehow involved? What a bunch of tripe. Nobody has yet offered a rebuttal to my argument that made even the slightest bit of sense.
    “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” - G. K. Chesterton

  3. #23
    Senior Member Perch420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    NiTi
    Enneagram
    5w1
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    Not sure if trolling.... Why is this guy always so ambiguous?
    How am I "ambiguous"? What are you talking about?
    “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” - G. K. Chesterton

  4. #24
    No Cigar Litvyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,787

    Default

    -This nonsense that IQ is heriditary is silly; just because a parent has a low IQ does not mean under any circumstance that the child will have a low IQ as well.
    Parents with low IQs have a huge chance to give birth to children with at least average IQs. Look it up.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Perch420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    NiTi
    Enneagram
    5w1
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Question:

    1. Do people who have no problem breaking the law get exterminated as well?

    I mean.. like. Ya know. People who do drugs, especially illegally.. they alter their genes when they do that, so they're screwing with the precious system we're basing all of this theoretical geneocide (HAHA See what I did there?) on, and everyone knows smoke inhalation is the worst of all of this..

    The drug laws in the United States at least are incredibly stupid. There is no harm done to anyone by smoking a joint or eating mushrooms. How do they alter their genes? What are you talking about? What does smoke inhalation have to do with any of this?

    So can everyone that smokes cigarettes and pot be exterminated as well? Those are the leading gene alterations.. all sorts of cancers have been born specifically because of smoke that previously did not exist, and they also increase their chances of hypertension and all sorts of medical disorders that is then passed on to their kids. People who do drugs are more likely to have their kids do drugs as well, science totally said that. Those pot-smokers are a menace.. and worst of all they try to justify messing with the gene poool. OUR PRECIOUS GENE POOL.

    Again, "gene alteration" is impossible and probably some sort of reefer madness type nonsense. Therefore, your entire "argument" is worthless.

    So do they get eliminated??
    d
    “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” - G. K. Chesterton

  6. #26
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perch420 View Post
    Yes, you are talking about inbreeding. That's what happens when cousins and siblings have sex with each other. When did I even remotely advocate for that? Genetic variation among the population of the world is huge and always increasing. "Inbreeding" would never happen in a world with eugenics.
    The point of the inbreeding was that genetics of everyone else, as in the variety given by other people coming in (aka commoners.. the other 99% of the entire world) was 'dirty'. It is just food for thought.

    And yes, Hitler did implement eugenics. So what? So did the United States and other European countries. Hitler was also a socialist; does this mean socialism should be condemned because Hitler was somehow involved? What a bunch of tripe. Nobody has yet offered a rebuttal to my argument that made even the slightest bit of sense.
    I didn't call you a dirty socialist or anything, don't get your panties in a wad. I just implied that Hitler had a very clear idea of what he thought produced the best, most able children.. Obviously, plenty of children that were smart, and able, and actually had awesome survival skills (aka the slew of surviving children from the holocaust) were unnecessarily burned and abandoned without any say in anything because they didn't fit "the profile" of what was "good". Creating that profile causes issues. That's all I am saying. Hundreds of thousands of people died fighting that profile.. THE ENTIRE WORLD fought that profile. So I think it is safe to say a majority of the world did not agree with it. I don't think, no matter what profile you came up with, a majority of people would agree with yours either. You'd just start another war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Perch420 View Post
    d
    http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessati...-gene-function

    I typed into google "smoke alters genes" and got this. It's about.. frikken everywhere you look. It is a recent discovery in the medical field, and it is important to know the true causes of why drugs affect people. It is because, on a cellular level, the DNA is disturbed from the toxins and foreign substances entering them. They cannot keep up, and get altered, and then don't know how to stop. Cancer, and other things, develop as a result of these run-down train-wrecks of cells, and thus people otherwise never genetically prone to things like cancer and hypertension are suddenly victims of it--Oh, and since it is on a GENETIC level, their children are also more likely to develop diseases as well.

    Also, smoking is legal .. so all those dumb laws are keeping a lot of the pot research from being done. Suppose they discover pot smoke does the same thing? Can we be sure it doesn't, in light of this evidence? I say we cannot sleep at night knowing pot heads are out there destroying our gene pools just for a bit of fun.

    So, NOW can we kill all the pot heads?
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  7. #27
    Senior Member Perch420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    NiTi
    Enneagram
    5w1
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nebbykoo View Post
    Of the diseases you mentioned, Huntington's and CF are genetic, because they are caused by an error in a certain gene. Cancer, intelligence and behavior are not caused by genetic errors. They are the result of the interplay between genes and environment. So you need to be more specific in your sweeping generalizations.While we're at it, you should tell Stephen Hawking that his condition will send him to the gas chamber too.
    As for violent crime...would you put a man top death for hitting his wife? He acted violently and had committed a crime. where do you draw the line on what constitutes violence and criminality? what about factors that often lead up to criminal behavior? How about drug addiction? It's a none risk factor. Should they be euthanized too? Statistically many of them will be involved in some form of criminal enterprise, some violent. Maybe society should just eliminate them all in deference to statistics.
    IQ: so a spread of 20 points is enough to make one worthy or unworthy of parenthood? Which test gets administered? Who decides that? You? what if you score lowly, despite your grand ideas? Sorry, Perch. Too bad for you if the test is biased against your particular interests or abilities, or cultural background. Off with your balls.
    Gas chambers? When did I even remotely mention euthanasia of any kind? Someone like Stephen Hawking would be an exception to the sterilization program providing his disease is inheritable because of his high intelligence.

    Yes, someone who beats his wife should be in jail. And yes, they should be sterilized.

    Drug addicts should be offered help, but they should not be allowed to have children. Aside from the fact that a mother that uses a hard drug transmits it to her fetus and therefore causes addiction and other problems, people who are addicted to drugs are not the type of people with the qualities necessary to raise an ethical, intelligent child.

    IQ tests are not biased in any way, neither towards cultural background nor towards interests and abilities. I took an IQ test and got above 80. If for some reason I didn't, I would probably think there was some sort of mistake and do it again. What's your point?
    “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” - G. K. Chesterton

  8. #28
    Senior Member Perch420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    NiTi
    Enneagram
    5w1
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    The point of the inbreeding was that genetics of everyone else, as in the variety given by other people coming in (aka commoners.. the other 99% of the entire world) was 'dirty'. It is just food for thought.



    I didn't call you a dirty socialist or anything, don't get your panties in a wad. I just implied that Hitler had a very clear idea of what he thought produced the best, most able children.. Obviously, plenty of children that were smart, and able, and actually had awesome survival skills (aka the slew of surviving children from the holocaust) were unnecessarily burned and abandoned without any say in anything because they didn't fit "the profile" of what was "good". Creating that profile causes issues. That's all I am saying. Hundreds of thousands of people died fighting that profile.. THE ENTIRE WORLD fought that profile. So I think it is safe to say a majority of the world did not agree with it. I don't think, no matter what profile you came up with, a majority of people would agree with yours either. You'd just start another war.

    Except in Hitler's case, "the profile" was stupid and based off of psuedoscience. In fact, Ashkenazi Jews, on average, have the highest IQ of any ethnic group in the world. This is due to the strong tradition of arranged marriages in European Jewish communities; parents would rather their child marry a successful businessman or something instead of the town drunk. The majority of the world did not agree that the "Nordic" race is superior to all others; neither do I. I'm not saying that at all.

    http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessati...-gene-function

    I typed into google "smoke alters genes" and got this. It's about.. frikken everywhere you look. It is a recent discovery in the medical field, and it is important to know the true causes of why drugs affect people. It is because, on a cellular level, the DNA is disturbed from the toxins and foreign substances entering them. They cannot keep up, and get altered, and then don't know how to stop. Cancer, and other things, develop as a result of these run-down train-wrecks of cells, and thus people otherwise never genetically prone to things like cancer and hypertension are suddenly victims of it--Oh, and since it is on a GENETIC level, their children are also more likely to develop diseases as well.

    Also, smoking is legal .. so all those dumb laws are keeping a lot of the pot research from being done. Suppose they discover pot smoke does the same thing? Can we be sure it doesn't, in light of this evidence? I say we cannot sleep at night knowing pot heads are out there destroying our gene pools just for a bit of fun.

    So, NOW can we kill all the pot heads?

    I don't know nearly enough about the subject, but if it is shown that smoking tobacco does indeed cause significant damage to genes, which in turn increases significantly the chance of the smoker's offspring getting cancer, then yes, they should be sterilized. If the same is true with marijuana, then marijuana smokers should be sterilized as well, providing it affects genes significantly enough, which I doubt, since marijuana is much safer than tobacco in almost every way. If it only increases the chance by a small percent that isn't even relevant, than I guess not. Again, I don't know enough about the subject to have an opinion in this case.
    d
    “Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” - G. K. Chesterton

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    Originally posted by Perch420
    No it wouldn't. The only thing that would be even remotely difficult is administering IQ tests to everyone in the country. How does this make eugenics immoral?
    Have you no imagination? Take a damn second to think of al the possible errors that could occur with your theory and then you'll see why mandated IQ tests and eugenics is very bad.

    And so what if people object? Too bad for them. What if I object to the fact that homosexuals are alive and not stoned as the Bible suggests? There are plenty of stupid fucks in the world, and the only way to deal with them is to ignore them.
    So if people disagree, then too bad for them? Who the fuck do you think you are kid? Although I suppose I could trust the one bit of advice that you did get right; I'll ignore you

    Such as?
    *babble incomprehensible jibberirsh at this insane statement* What-wha-what!? How would you like it if someone told you that you weren't allowed to have biological children because they told you so? How can you not conprehend the ethical dilemmas involved in these matters?

    When did I call for perfect control over the gene pool? All I'm saying is that things like intelligence, criminality, and diseases all have a genetic component, and it is in the best interest of society to increase the quality of life future generations of the human race; eugenics is a small component of that. How isn't "monitering" the gene pool in any way beneficial?
    Most of eugenics is based around the idea of controlling and perfecting the gene pool. Intelligence, criminality, and diseases are not inherently genetic; in fact, excluding disease, IQ and being a criminal are not based on a persons DNA. What you're advocating isn't fair to most people because no one wants to be told who they can and cannot procreate with.

    Me.
    Well that's nice, you're 15 and you think you know what's best the world. Do you see the problem with that?

    Did you even read what I wrote? A person who has committed a violent crime is either genetically predisposed to violent behavior, in which case sterilization is an even more obvious solution, or is a victim of poverty and crime, in which case they probably are uneducated and lack a moral compass, in which case they still should be sterilized because it is important for a child to be intellectually curious and ethical. Yes, some convicts may be troubled geniuses, but the vast vast vast majority are not
    That's bullshit, just because someone commits a violent offense does not mean that they are genetically inferior nor predisposed to violent behavior nor means that their children will be. Your generalizing entire groups of people here, people whom you are advocating should be subject to abstinence, visectomies, or whatever other means you think are appropriate for keeping them from procreating.

    Really, it's "silly"? There have been literally hundreds of studies done in the area of IQ heritability and the conclusion is that, while not completely genetic, obviously, intelligence is determined in part (estimates range from 40% to 80%) by genetics.
    Proof?

    What? How does not letting people breed irresponsibly create mass "suffereing" of any kind? What a bunch of nonsense. Again, if you want a child, adopt one; there's plenty of unwanted children out there looking for a home.
    No, just no.

  10. #30
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perch420 View Post
    Gas chambers? When did I even remotely mention euthanasia of any kind? Someone like Stephen Hawking would be an exception to the sterilization program providing his disease is inheritable because of his high intelligence.

    Yes, someone who beats his wife should be in jail. And yes, they should be sterilized.

    Drug addicts should be offered help, but they should not be allowed to have children. Aside from the fact that a mother that uses a hard drug transmits it to her fetus and therefore causes addiction and other problems, people who are addicted to drugs are not the type of people with the qualities necessary to raise an ethical, intelligent child.

    IQ tests are not biased in any way, neither towards cultural background nor towards interests and abilities. I took an IQ test and got above 80. If for some reason I didn't, I would probably think there was some sort of mistake and do it again. What's your point?
    Do I really need to say it?
    It's a shame you didn't get enough mother-love in infancy. The fact that you would put this out in public as if it was sensible, shows that your narcissistic needs were not met and this deficit will continue to dog you for the rest of your life. due to this socially deleterious behavior, I recommend that you not be allowed to spread your genes. And because narcissism is almost impossible to reverse, suggesting a STRONG GENETIC COMPONENT.

    All joking aside, you will get more mileage from trying to improve yourself rather than worrying about the collective.

Similar Threads

  1. What's wrong with hypocrisy?
    By Athenian200 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 01-31-2009, 02:15 PM
  2. What's wrong with a little deflation?
    By ygolo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 12-01-2008, 11:05 PM
  3. What is Wrong with Economy
    By wildcat in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-31-2008, 09:15 AM
  4. [MBTItm] What's wrong with being an xNTJ, anyway?
    By Enyo in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-18-2008, 02:27 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO