FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6837|'Murka

Turquoise wrote:

I don't know if this thread has covered this yet, but what about the argument that sterilizing people with severe genetic conditions prevents another life from having to suffer from them?

I'm always leery of giving the state power over this kind of thing, but if it spares society the potential for more people with severe defects from being born, I'd have to support this prospect....
Do you realize the spectrum of disability that goes along with any genetic disorder? Even a genetic disorder as well known and relatively understood as Down Syndrome (trisomy 21) can range from completely vegetative to productive member of society. The fact that someone has or carries the potential for a genetic disorder (of any degree) is therefore irrelevant to the potential for them to have a normal child. My son, who is severely handicapped because of a genetic disorder, could still have normal children.

Before you start making eugenic claims like this, you should probably look into genetics a bit more. Unless you just want to assume that all disabled people are a burden on society...in that case, you should work closely with disabled people a bit more. Or be lucky enough to have one in your immediate family.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6981

FEOS wrote:

Do you realize the spectrum of disability that goes along with any genetic disorder? Even a genetic disorder as well known and relatively understood as Down Syndrome (trisomy 21) can range from completely vegetative to productive member of society. The fact that someone has or carries the potential for a genetic disorder (of any degree) is therefore irrelevant to the potential for them to have a normal child. My son, who is severely handicapped because of a genetic disorder, could still have normal children.

Before you start making eugenic claims like this, you should probably look into genetics a bit more. Unless you just want to assume that all disabled people are a burden on society...in that case, you should work closely with disabled people a bit more. Or be lucky enough to have one in your immediate family.
I can vouch for the productive member of society element: there is a man from the countryside where I am from who has Down's Syndrome and has been happily employed in a local factory for years. Also, how much more intellectually productive than any of us has Stephen Hawking been!?! The state is there to serve man, not the other way around.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-11 02:10:14)

B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7267|Cologne, Germany

So I guess the answer to the overall question would be "No" then ?

Although it might be desirable under certain, very specific practical circumstances, it is not acceptable with regard to our moral values and human rights, and therefore ruled out ?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard