TheBitzMan Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Dubz41 said: Wow. You just can't stop trying to put me in a little box can you?!? That's so cute if it wasn't deplorable. Your 'wif us or agin us' attitude is the problem. You're trying to put us all in the Tea Party and that IS hilarious. You argue like a teenager. Jumping to conclusions. Assuming all kinds of things that just aren't so. Good luck to you in your puberty years. Irony at it's finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Dubz41 said: Wow. You just can't stop trying to put me in a little box can you?!? That's so cute if it wasn't deplorable. Your 'wif us or agin us' attitude is the problem. You're trying to put us all in the Tea Party and that IS hilarious. You argue like a teenager. Jumping to conclusions. Assuming all kinds of things that just aren't so. Good luck to you in your puberty years. I will first tell of how bad demons are. Then I will tell them you are a demon. Then we can ignore all of what you have to say because we have established that demons are bad. YAY PC! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubz41 Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: This is a question I have for a lot of people, and they don't like it... Why is eugenics wrong? We do it with the food we eat. We do it with the pets we own. What is wrong with Steve and Susan both being 6'2 and wanting a tall child? As long as they are not forced to breed with each other, or the people with "undesirable" traits aren't sterilized or culled, what is the problem? Would the world not be better with more Wladimir Klitchkos and fewer Cletus from the Simpsons? Eugenics: Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, it fell into disfavor only after the perversion of its doctrines by the Nazis. I think this is why. It was tainted by the Nazi's. Since then it has carried racial overtones. It flies in the face of natural selection, but that's kind of been tossed out the window too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: This is a question I have for a lot of people, and they don't like it... Why is eugenics wrong? We do it with the food we eat. We do it with the pets we own. What is wrong with Steve and Susan both being 6'2 and wanting a tall child? As long as they are not forced to breed with each other, or the people with "undesirable" traits aren't sterilized or culled, what is the problem? Would the world not be better with more Wladimir Klitchkos and fewer Cletus from the Simpsons? There is nothing wrong with Eugenics in certain situations. But there is something wrong with Eugenics in other situations. Curing blindness, autism, and other birth defects pre-birth is no problem. Attempting to select out of homosexuality, race, etc. is a problem. Bell was squarely in the Nazi-esque camp of eugenics. But your right, there is nothing inherently wrong about it depending the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBitzMan Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 1 minute ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: I will first tell of how bad demons are. Then I will tell them you are a demon. Then we can ignore all of what you have to say because we have established that demons are bad. YAY PC! LOL! You guys put me in a box immediately for disagreeing with your point of view. Triggered much? 1 minute ago, Dubz41 said: Eugenics: Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, it fell into disfavor only after the perversion of its doctrines by the Nazis. I think this is why. It was tainted by the Nazi's. Since then it has carried racial overtones. It flies in the face of natural selection, but that's kind of been tossed out the window too. Of course this is where this conversation went... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubz41 Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 1 minute ago, TheBitzMan said: LOL! You guys put me in a box immediately for disagreeing with your point of view. Triggered much? Of course this is where this conversation went... Since you couldn't see that there were two different conversations going on, because being PC you naturally assume it's all about you! I was responding to a question on Eugenics. Not on your headupyourassisms. Just wanted to clarify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Dubz41 said: Eugenics: Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race, it fell into disfavor only after the perversion of its doctrines by the Nazis. I think this is why. It was tainted by the Nazi's. Since then it has carried racial overtones. It flies in the face of natural selection, but that's kind of been tossed out the window too. Well, selective breeding is no longer "natural selection," anyway. And humans have thrown quite a wrench in that, across multiple species. I mean, if we can do it for chickens, and dogs, and corn, and soybeans, and bananas, and horses, why is it so bad with Homo sapiens? Is it really the Nazi thing? Maybe I should start insisting that they be called "National Socialists." And while we were at it, did you know that the National Socialists thought it was really cool to watch soccer, and drink coffee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBitzMan Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Dubz41 said: Since you couldn't see that there were two different conversations going on, because being PC you naturally assume it's all about you! I was responding to a question on Eugenics. Not on your headupyourassisms. Just wanted to clarify. Hence why I had two separate quotes? This went from a person defending a racial slur to a discussion about eugenics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 10 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said: There is nothing wrong with Eugenics in certain situations. But there is something wrong with Eugenics in other situations. Curing blindness, autism, and other birth defects pre-birth is no problem. Attempting to select out of homosexuality, race, etc. is a problem. Bell was squarely in the Nazi-esque camp of eugenics. But your right, there is nothing inherently wrong about it depending the circumstances. But is creating the super man like the Nazis were attempting even wrong? Is it much different than say the royal families of Europe? Their end goal wasn't Ivan Drago, but to keep their lines in power, they have selectively interbred for hundreds of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBitzMan Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: But is creating the super man like the Nazis were attempting even wrong? Is it much different than say the royal families of Europe? Their end goal wasn't Ivan Drago, but to keep their lines in power, they have selectively interbred for hundreds of years. super man has already been created tho.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 So a player's worth and ability on the field and in the lockerroom has everything to do with their politics now? Total disaster. Very sad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said: super man has already been created tho.. He is definitely one of the prototypes that would be used. I was going to say Michael Jordan when I was giving examples, but stopped at Klitchko. LeBron is probably a better example than Jordan. Bigger and stronger. Nearly as fast. I cannot speak on his intelligence, because I have nothing to base it on. I do hope that LeBron is dumber than a box of rocks, because he can't be better than me at everything, damnit! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 19 minutes ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: But is creating the super man like the Nazis were attempting even wrong? Is it much different than say the royal families of Europe? Their end goal wasn't Ivan Drago, but to keep their lines in power, they have selectively interbred for hundreds of years. And that worked out terribly. Hemophiliac tsars, Kings with rare diseases, etc. But I know that's not your point. As I said, I have no problem selecting out medically undesirable traits, but aesthetic traits become a problem because that is completely subjective. If a government mandated eugenics project arises then there is no diversity left. I'd be more willing to hear out an argument for parental choice, but I'm undecided on that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 8 minutes ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: He is definitely one of the prototypes that would be used. I was going to say Michael Jordan when I was giving examples, but stopped at Klitchko. LeBron is probably a better example than Jordan. Bigger and stronger. Nearly as fast. I cannot speak on his intelligence, because I have nothing to base it on. I do hope that LeBron is dumber than a box of rocks, because he can't be better than me at everything, damnit! Now that I think about it, I probably take Kobe if I took just one single NBA guy (likely there would be more than one), because I know he is intelligent, whereas I don't know that about LeBron. Kobe is fluent in Italian and (I think) French, and legit got into Duke before deciding to go pro out of high school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 15 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said: And that worked out terribly. Hemophiliac tsars, Kings with rare diseases, etc. But I know that's not your point. As I said, I have no problem selecting out medically undesirable traits, but aesthetic traits become a problem because that is completely subjective. If a government mandated eugenics project arises then there is no diversity left. I'd be more willing to hear out an argument for parental choice, but I'm undecided on that point. A voluntary government program or a few individuals agreeing to a marriage pact? This is fun. It is making my work day between tests go by faster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts