Author Topic: Eugenics  (Read 7232 times)

Offline BigJohnStudd

  • Posts: 1478
  • +67/-65
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #25 on: March 09, 2009, 12:01:51 PM »
Drug companies would oppose curing diseases.

a slight edit....

Chris Rock said it best "the money isn't in the cure the money is in the medicine."

 If they can make you live with it they will, so they can get more of your money.
Final World rank 25th
Final 2007 rank (last year of CI keeping tabs... 2nd in the world)

Offline piperspitt

  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 8565
  • +373/-375
  • You don't throw rocks at a man with a machine gun!
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #26 on: March 09, 2009, 12:43:01 PM »
I'm guessing chris Rock isn't an expert on the subject. If there is a cure they sell that instead plus any maintenance drugs, they still get their money.
"I was Rowdy before rowdy was cool!"

Offline Centipede

  • 2005 LCQ Champion
  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 2410
  • +0/-0
  • Killers are Quiet
    • View Profile
    • Weeblick Ts
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #27 on: March 09, 2009, 02:47:06 PM »
If there's a cure, then there isn't any maintenance.  If maintenance is required, it isn't a cure, it's a treatment.
The man, the myth, the Macek

Weeblick Ts

Not every story has explosions and car chases. That's why they have nudity and espionage.
- Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum

Offline piperspitt

  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 8565
  • +373/-375
  • You don't throw rocks at a man with a machine gun!
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #28 on: March 09, 2009, 02:56:47 PM »
I depends if you're curing the disease or curing the symptoms.
"I was Rowdy before rowdy was cool!"

Offline Joey Cilo

  • Posts: 341
  • +2/-11
  • Future Sports Entertainer.
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #29 on: March 09, 2009, 06:15:55 PM »
Uhh yea i breifly read this post and I am completely the whole genetic engineering thing for a couple of reasons

1) We can't play GOD, its immoral, messed up, and downright wrong. If you people want to alter your children to your liking then you really dont appreciate the child

2) Everyone would remotely be the same. If everyone is looking for the "perfect child" they will mostly look alike making individuality quite irrelevant and we'd be judged purly on personality. Who the hell wants that

3) There will probably be horrible side effects. Congrats you decided to give your daughter blue eyes but in the process of mutation she somehow developed teeth in her va-jayjay. That sounds like a crappy movie that scared men all over the globe (Teeth is the title, look it up its horrifying)

4) This is not something money should be wasted on, spend it on aids reasearch etc etc not altering genetics that can be done later.

Offline Niki Heber

  • Posts: 2516
  • +20/-17
  • Dont mind me, just trollin'
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #30 on: March 10, 2009, 10:34:42 AM »
I think the biggest issue that this would bring up is a snowball effect.  one decision gets made, which spawned dozens, hundreds, and thousands more that ultimately in the end would make human beings look back and say "huh... WTF were we thinking?"

I understand IF you NEEDED a specific trait to be passed on, like having a boy or a girl, or hair color or other such superficial nonsense, then yes... it's somewhat acceptable.  BUT Superficial reasons are never good enough.  If it turned out that Blonde haired people had a much larger chance to contract fatal illnesses, then removing that gene might prove to be useful.  But passing on blonde hair because YOU want your child to have blonde hair for superficial and physical reasons, nothing more, is pointless.  If your child wants blonde hair, let them dye it blonde.  If you want your child to have blonde hair, tough crap, you're gonna get what you shoot out.

Human beings have historically been horrible at figuring out the consequences of their actions, and for the most part have only sought instant gratification.  Human beings (mostly of western thinking) as a whole are mostly self-serving and impatient  (I say mostly because there are some of you out there that are patient and selfless). 

Why should it ever be YOUR choice what someone else's life is going to be like?  Each human being (no matter what you believe) is given the ability to choose for themselves what they want.  Do genetic predispositions affect these decisions and rule out some choices all together?  yes.  BUT the greatest human beings take their very best assets and turn them into tools to achieve greatness.  Through hard work and passion, you can become a good football player, a good basketball player, a great warrior, a great artist, or anything.  Do some people have a natural talent for certain skills over others?  Yep.  you're always going to have that.  By taking some of these choices away, you deprive humanity of it's greatest asset:  each human being's ability to be unique in a melting pot of cultures and ideas.


Genetic manipulation is already being done, and I can see it sooner or later reaching a point where it'll happen to humans.  Look at the food that we eat.  Human beings have done genetic manipulation of food for centuries.  The corn that we eat today is a product of genetic manipulation.  Avocados too.  There are tests being done on animals as well to produce 'better meat' (Translation:  CHEAPER, MORE MEAT PER ANIMAL, who cares if it's grisly and disgusting).


Let's switch gears a little bit.  Lets say that this technology came to fruition.  let's say that people were given a choice, without COST attached, to decide on their child's physical attributes with NO ill consequences / side effects.  What would happen?  society would become more superficial than it already is.  The already impossible standards of beauty would go even higher.  People would start to look past just the face or hair and REALLY start to nitpick and judge people's personalities, which you had no original control over.  While the standards of 'pretty', 'strong', and 'gifted' change constantly, somewhere down the line, there will be an open social revolt.  someone, will make a decision and let things go back to either the natural way, and then another will follow and another.  People that were burned by society's standards would rise up against society and turn the clock backwards, while the still superficial members of society would blindly follow 'trends' and what the cool people at the top want.  sorry, As much as a social revolt sounds fun, that's not a society i want to live in.
~Niki Heber
Leader of Team Niki Heber and Friends
and Mitch ... and Drunken Joe ... and Jon .... And 'Goth for good measure.  Yeah.  I don't care if you don't want to be on my team 'Goth, you are.

Mess with me and 'Goth with Ban you.

Offline CreedP

  • Voice of Reason
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21086
  • +492/-369
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #31 on: March 10, 2009, 11:10:02 AM »
Exactly.  "Dude, how come your parents didn't make you blonde and blue-eyed like the rest of us?  I guess they don't love you..."  lol

Well said, Niki.. you continue to rock, even if you did give up Raw Deal.. ;)

CREED
V9: NXT Takeover ("A" Section) - Coming Dec. 25

"Opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding. The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another’s world." - Bill Bullard

Offline Niki Heber

  • Posts: 2516
  • +20/-17
  • Dont mind me, just trollin'
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #32 on: March 10, 2009, 12:56:08 PM »
Exactly.  "Dude, how come your parents didn't make you blonde and blue-eyed like the rest of us?  I guess they don't love you..."  lol

Well said, Niki.. you continue to rock, even if you did give up Raw Deal.. ;)

CREED

just remember creed...

i'm never gonna give you up.
never gonna let you down.

... and all the rest of that rubbish.
~Niki Heber
Leader of Team Niki Heber and Friends
and Mitch ... and Drunken Joe ... and Jon .... And 'Goth for good measure.  Yeah.  I don't care if you don't want to be on my team 'Goth, you are.

Mess with me and 'Goth with Ban you.

Offline SmartAssAssassin

  • post whoererere
  • Posts: 2662
  • +100/-100
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #33 on: March 10, 2009, 06:38:16 PM »

Ya know this is where it gets out of hand for me, and Nikki hit it pretty much on the head. If people start altering hair colors or eye colors, i think its silly but i guess i could see it. If the blonde and the red head wanna make sure thier kid is a red head, go for it i guess.

But if the technology to choose traits and genes would ever advance, i think it could get downright scary. As many people have said, what if you can start picking speed, and strength, musical or comedica talents, etc etc etc. If in 2090 the "smartest person in the world" was given, lets say the "intelligence" gene, would that person really be that special? Record holder of the Olympic 100 yard Dash was implanted with a speed boost: so why should i care? Did he actually train to be faster, or did he just use what he had? What if someone else is given a speed gene? Will they be better?

Thing is, as has been said, your killing individuality. Are you good/the best at something because you worked at it? or because youve got it in your genetic code? Maybe its a little bit of both. How ya gonna prove it?

IF, and obvioulsy its a big if, but if something like this happened in 100 years, say you've got a guy that you know has been genetically altered, and he wins a race. The guy who comes in second wasnt altered at all. You can tell me the guy who won trained just as much, if not more than the second place guy: but thats who im gonna respect, the guy who didnt have any extra help.

To be honest, im somewhat biased on this topic, because im not really good at anything right off the bat. i CAN be good at just about anything, but it always takes me some time and practice, and im actually proud of the work i have to put into things. My best sport was (and always will be) track, because im light and fast. But im most proud of what i can do playing hockey, because i had to work hard to get to where i am now. It was 2-3 times a week of running my ass off, making embarassing mistakes, and losing ALOT of games to get to where i am now, and im proud of what i had to put in.

I think if you start picking and choosing, you take away individuality, you take away respect for individuality, and , to just get real basic right now, i think in the long run the negatives of the whole process would wind up out weighing the positives.

Dave
« Last Edit: March 10, 2009, 08:36:54 PM by SmartAssAssassin »

Offline Centipede

  • 2005 LCQ Champion
  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 2410
  • +0/-0
  • Killers are Quiet
    • View Profile
    • Weeblick Ts
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #34 on: March 11, 2009, 03:52:45 PM »
Uhh yea i breifly read this post and I am completely the whole genetic engineering thing for a couple of reasons

1) We can't play GOD, its immoral, messed up, and downright wrong. If you people want to alter your children to your liking then you really dont appreciate the child
How so?
Quote from: Joey Cilo
2) Everyone would remotely be the same. If everyone is looking for the "perfect child" they will mostly look alike making individuality quite irrelevant and we'd be judged purly on personality. Who the hell wants that
Really? Your concept of beauty is the same as mine?  We both find the same things beautiful and would therefore choose the same characteristics for our children?  I don't think so.

As for judging people based solely on their personality, I think that's the best possible outcome imaginable.  An actual end to shallow snap judgments based only on appearance?  Sing me up right now.

Quote from: Joey Cilo
3) There will probably be horrible side effects. Congrats you decided to give your daughter blue eyes but in the process of mutation she somehow developed teeth in her va-jayjay. That sounds like a crappy movie that scared men all over the globe (Teeth is the title, look it up its horrifying)
Not talking about splicing new genes, merely selecting which of your own genes are passed on to your children, thereby determining their potential looks, intelligence, strength, etc. based on your own.

Quote from: Joey Cilo
4) This is not something money should be wasted on, spend it on aids reasearch etc etc not altering genetics that can be done later.
The cosmetic changes would most likely be a byproduct of research into making people gentically immune to such things as HIV, cancer, and other diseases.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2009, 03:56:29 PM by Centipede »
The man, the myth, the Macek

Weeblick Ts

Not every story has explosions and car chases. That's why they have nudity and espionage.
- Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum

Offline Centipede

  • 2005 LCQ Champion
  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 2410
  • +0/-0
  • Killers are Quiet
    • View Profile
    • Weeblick Ts
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #35 on: March 11, 2009, 03:55:40 PM »
Sorry, hit quote instead of modify
The man, the myth, the Macek

Weeblick Ts

Not every story has explosions and car chases. That's why they have nudity and espionage.
- Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum

Offline Centipede

  • 2005 LCQ Champion
  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 2410
  • +0/-0
  • Killers are Quiet
    • View Profile
    • Weeblick Ts
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #36 on: March 11, 2009, 04:01:28 PM »
I think if you start picking and choosing, you take away individuality, you take away respect for individuality, and , to just get real basic right now, i think in the long run the negatives of the whole process would wind up out weighing the positives.

Dave

And if everyone has that speed gene, that intelligence gene, that strength gene, what would the downside be?  People will still have their own personalities, their own interests and chosen focus.  The human race in general would be stronger, more robust.  The only potential downside I've seen pointed out is an end of individuality, but people would still have their own personas.  Even if they can be influenced on a genetic level, the parents choosing those persona traits would still have different priorities from another set of parents making those same choices, so individuality is still preserved.
The man, the myth, the Macek

Weeblick Ts

Not every story has explosions and car chases. That's why they have nudity and espionage.
- Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum

Offline SmartAssAssassin

  • post whoererere
  • Posts: 2662
  • +100/-100
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #37 on: March 11, 2009, 04:58:03 PM »
I think if you start picking and choosing, you take away individuality, you take away respect for individuality, and , to just get real basic right now, i think in the long run the negatives of the whole process would wind up out weighing the positives.

Dave

And if everyone has that speed gene, that intelligence gene, that strength gene, what would the downside be?  People will still have their own personalities, their own interests and chosen focus.  The human race in general would be stronger, more robust.  The only potential downside I've seen pointed out is an end of individuality, but people would still have their own personas.  Even if they can be influenced on a genetic level, the parents choosing those persona traits would still have different priorities from another set of parents making those same choices, so individuality is still preserved.

while its true individuality and parent possessed traits are preserevd AT FIRST, my biggest fear is future studies in the topic, when two blonde haired parents could choose to have their child have brown hair.

Now, to be fair, rejecting or discounting an idea because of what could potentially happen is, in most rational terms, a joke, and im not afraid to say it applies here as well. Because while theres a possiblity this could result in parents having total control over who and what their children are, theres also the possibility further study could result in discoveries to cure cancers, physical abnormalities, mental defects, etc etc.

My problem stems from having too much power. History will show that trying to play God, or for the non-religious, attemting to attain ultimate power/control, usually doesnt ened well. I think the same would be true here.

Theres a ton of good that could come from the Eugenics movement, but theres alot that could go wrong too. I think the whole idea would have to be very well monitored and regulated to keep things from getting out of hand.

Dave

Offline Niki Heber

  • Posts: 2516
  • +20/-17
  • Dont mind me, just trollin'
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #38 on: March 11, 2009, 10:04:54 PM »

Quote from: Joey Cilo
4) This is not something money should be wasted on, spend it on aids reasearch etc etc not altering genetics that can be done later.
The cosmetic changes would most likely be a byproduct of research into making people gentically immune to such things as HIV, cancer, and other diseases.

While it is possible that the cosmetic and superficial potential could come from the changes made to our systems to make us immune to SPECIFIC STRANDS OF VIRUS.  Virus' and Bacteria are very capable of changing their own genetic structure to survive in otherwise bad conditions. 

What if by our actions prohibiting the current strand of HIV virus caused the virus to mutate over time into something worse?  while a cure is nice, we don't know (nor do we really care) the full consequences of our actions because human beings are more focused on the now, not the future.  It would suck is HIV became a severely contagious airborne transmitter, huh?  What are you gonna do?  genetically change us so we don't have to breathe?

While we find new ways to survive, bacteria and virus' have been doing it for ALOT longer than us. 

good intentions are fine, but there is a line where 'the greater good' blinds even the wisest men from a horrible end.
~Niki Heber
Leader of Team Niki Heber and Friends
and Mitch ... and Drunken Joe ... and Jon .... And 'Goth for good measure.  Yeah.  I don't care if you don't want to be on my team 'Goth, you are.

Mess with me and 'Goth with Ban you.

Offline Centipede

  • 2005 LCQ Champion
  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 2410
  • +0/-0
  • Killers are Quiet
    • View Profile
    • Weeblick Ts
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #39 on: March 12, 2009, 11:50:05 AM »
I wasn't suggesting that the cosmetic changes would come about because of a change to make us immune to a certain disease, but that we would learn how to make the cosmetic changes on the way to creating genetic immunities.  Something along the lines of "I thought by changing random gene Q it would aid the bodies immune system, instead it altered the test subjects eye color."  Accidental discoveries happen all the time.  As for viruses mutating and overcoming immunity, how well has that worked for smallpox?
The man, the myth, the Macek

Weeblick Ts

Not every story has explosions and car chases. That's why they have nudity and espionage.
- Bill Barnes and Gene Ambaum

Offline CreedP

  • Voice of Reason
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21086
  • +492/-369
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #40 on: March 12, 2009, 12:14:49 PM »
I think the biggest problem we're having with this 'discussion', is that there's two sides to the discussion... yours, and everyone else's.  ;)  But it seems that while the people posting are of varied opinions on what level this would be acceptable, we're primarily disagreeing with you because this would massively fail in execution.  You seem to be (and I could be mistaken, of course) discussing the 'on paper' theories of benefits and such, but most everyone seems pretty well sure that this would lead to disasterous results in the hard reality of it.

That's just how I'm seeing it, anyway...

CREED
V9: NXT Takeover ("A" Section) - Coming Dec. 25

"Opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding. The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another’s world." - Bill Bullard

Offline SmartAssAssassin

  • post whoererere
  • Posts: 2662
  • +100/-100
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #41 on: March 12, 2009, 06:28:43 PM »
I think the biggest problem we're having with this 'discussion', is that there's two sides to the discussion... yours, and everyone else's.  ;)  But it seems that while the people posting are of varied opinions on what level this would be acceptable, we're primarily disagreeing with you because this would massively fail in execution.  You seem to be (and I could be mistaken, of course) discussing the 'on paper' theories of benefits and such, but most everyone seems pretty well sure that this would lead to disasterous results in the hard reality of it.

That's just how I'm seeing it, anyway...

CREED

my take on it:

Centapede is looking at the "on paper" good (and explaining/defending potential harmful effects)

everyone else (myself included) is looking at the "on paper" ill effects, while sprinkling in some of the potential positives.

either way, its a tough call. Like i mentioned earlier, it seems ridiculous (to me at least) to shoot down any idea because of potential harm (within reason) but this one just seems like so much could go wrong, it might not be worth it.

As for viruses/Bacterias that could be eradicated or then change:

While its true some thing like Smallpox, Measles, other viruses have been, for all intenets and purposes, wiped out....
Look at the flu virus: every year vaccines are created which "cure" the past seasons strand, and yet every year a newer (and as some people will tell you, tougher) strand emerges with an immunity to the vaccine.

Dave

Offline frehocc

  • 2005 Raw Deal World Champion
  • TCO Donor
  • ****
  • Posts: 2580
  • +221/-179
  • I think I just had an evilgasm
    • View Profile
Re: Eugenics
« Reply #42 on: April 29, 2009, 07:28:16 AM »
Crap... I see the title and come in expecting everyone who went through Eugenics to be able to play everyone's finisher with a silly grin.
Suckiest card... EVER... Frankie Takes Hollywood. Sucks so hard it is practically a black hole.
God of War gives it: 2 blades of chaos down