Minoritarian politics gone too far? - Page 2

Willem · January 17, 2003, 10:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's
So you are in favour of eugenics?

What on earth? What does that have anything to do with my comment? That's a ridiculous leap of logic. No I don't believe in eugenics for your information.

Solly · January 17, 2003, 11:17

I think I should add this to the contradictory beliefs thread: anti-incest and anti-eugenics.

Eugenics is about not creating "inferior" children. Now if incest isn't exactly the same thing, then tell me what it is.

Willem · January 17, 2003, 11:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's
I think I should add this to the contradictory beliefs thread: anti-incest and anti-eugenics.

Eugenics is about not creating "inferior" children. Now if incest isn't exactly the same thing, then tell me what it is.

You logic is so twisted, I'm not even going to bother getting into this ridiculous debate.

Solly · January 17, 2003, 11:33

Willem · January 17, 2003, 16:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's

If by that you feel you think you've won an argument, think again. I just don't debate with idiots. If you fail to see the distinction between eugenics, the involuntary mutilation of someone's body and the ultimate form of invasion of privacy, and laws that prevent you from ****ing your sister and making babies, then I strongly suggest you seek some psychiatric counselling.

Ben Kenobi · January 17, 2003, 17:57

Willem:

Perhaps there is a different reason for restricting incest than what red_jon cited.

Willem · January 17, 2003, 18:35

Quote:

Originally posted by obiwan18
Willem:

Perhaps there is a different reason for restricting incest than what red_jon cited.

Yes, there is. It's a biological imperative. Look at any species and you will find some sort of mechanism in place to prevent in-breeding. We just use law in order to achieve what other animals accomplish through instinct. You won't find a male lion getting it's balls cut off so it can't breed with it's sister, they're driven out of the pack to find females of their own from some other tribe. It's basic biology.

Solly · January 17, 2003, 18:37

If a couple's first child has Cystic Fibrosis, should they be banned from having any more kids?

What about women over 45 - should they be stopped too?

Gibsie · January 17, 2003, 18:40

Any species? Even those that breed with themselves?

Willem · January 17, 2003, 18:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's
If a couple's first child has Cystic Fibrosis, should they be banned from having any more kids?

What about women over 45 - should they be stopped too?

I certainly wouldn't recommend going into their bodies and amputating their reproductive organs against their will. And that's what eugenics is all about.

Willem · January 17, 2003, 18:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Gibsie
Any species? Even those that breed with themselves?

You won't find very many instances of that with anything more evolved than amoebas, if any.

Gibsie · January 17, 2003, 18:53

I bet Boddies does

Ben Kenobi · January 17, 2003, 20:13

-Gibsie
"Any species? Even those that breed with themselves?"

Hermaphrodite worms?