Genetic Dissemination Inherent Tendencies in relation to Attraction

[BookerT]

It is not illegal in every country for a woman expecting a child to have tests ran to check the development of her fetus, and then choose to terminate the fetus based on test results. YOU KNOW THAT. Why lie or pretend just to argue?

 

Can you tell me what it is that I support? I'm dying to know.....

 

You didn't read my post properly. I said the parents have control........

 

What the OP would be suggesting is if we followed it is somethign similar to the genetic dictatorships we had in the early 20th century.

 

The thing is where do you draw the line? We're keeping millions of people alive that should have died a long time ago. Even our old people.

Edited October 13, 2009 by BookerT

[sally4sara]

You didn't read my post properly. I said the parents have control........

 

What the OP would be suggesting is if we followed it is somethign similar to the genetic dictatorships we had in the early 20th century.

 

And I said the same thing, but you can't seem to read properly; you intent to think I support something else.

 

What would that be?

 

Please quote the OP where it was suggested that we force terminate anyone.

[BookerT]

And I said the same thing, but you can't seem to read properly; you intent to think I support something else.

 

What would that be?

 

Please quote the OP where it was suggested that we force terminate anyone.

 

Tell me where it says unborn fetesus should be aborted!? aha! But you assume he's indicating that.

 

But read up one paragraph and he's talking about living humans that would not have survived 300 years ago. Hence it would be logical to assume he's talking about not letting live humans survive. Pull the plug so to speak.

 

Again, many mental defects are not detected till the late stages of pregnancy anyway. Some servere physical and mental defects don't start showing till a child is an infant.

 

Again, either way, where do you draw the line? Btw, you seen the movie Gattaca?

[BlueHarvest]

There are numerous pre-birth tests that can be done to detect abnormalities in children, it is the responsability of not only the parents, but the hospital to do everything in the power to make sure the child is born healthy. Yes, they won't catch "every" child with a birth defect. However, my QUESTION I originally stated was that...given *minor* mental disabilities...would they not further be muddying the gene pool? We aren't talking about major mental disabilities like the Ashley X girl. We are humans...but we are still a species that is growing faster then our planet can sustain us.

 

Not only that, I would rather a couple have an abortion (I'm catholic but I advocate pro-choice) with a child that might have a possible birth defect, and try again then to bring a child into the world with a mental disability. If you go to the parents of these children, and they will tell you that they love their child and that is very admirable...But I guarantee you they weren't wishing for their child to born with a birth defect.

 

But back to the tests that can be done pre-birth.

 

Aside from Ultrasound there is...

 

Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS)

Amniocentesis

Tandem Mass Spectroscopy

Alpha-fetoprotein Screening (AFP)

 

In addition...most parents should, if their family has a history of genetic disorders, or a previous child has a birth defect, have genetic counseling before they plan another child.

 

These are all specific tests and prevention methods that parents can take. Aside from those, they have screening tests every trimester that give the ratio risk values with possible birth defects.

 

And Booker, sorry but you are incorrect, these tests...especially Amniocentesis can detect mental defects before birth. This test is a reliable indicator of chromosomal abnormalities such as Down syndrome or genetic disorders such as Tay-Sachs disease, Hunter's syndrome, and others.

 

Also..my statement ...and I can't seem to reiterate it enough because reading comprehension is at an all time low right now...was that I stated a question. Not a statement.

 

I do find it slightly amusing that people ignore the majority of the post and hop on the controversial topic, that wasn't my goal at all. It's rather sad because I was hoping to get more conversations and some opinions on the whole non-visual cues then to have to defend my original opinion because some irrational people want to take up arms to a cause they probably have never defended in the first place, only defending it for the sake of putting on a show and being in the center spotlight.

Edited October 13, 2009 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[sally4sara]

Tell me where it says unborn fetesus should be aborted!? aha! But you assume he's indicating that.

 

I was talking about that! It is called a discussion. Some people were trying to have one in case you didnt' notice.

 

But read up one paragraph and he's talking about living humans that would not have survived 300 years ago. Hence it would be logical to assume he's talking about not letting live humans survive. Pull the plug so to speak.

 

And that is part of the problem here. You keep assuming and it kills any chance of logical thought.

 

Again, many mental defects are not detected till the late stages of pregnancy anyway. Some servere physical and mental defects don't start showing till a child is an infant.

 

I'm going to take a tip from you here and ASSUME you're just willfully lying and pretending the tests I'm linking here are not common knowledge. They are standard tests. You are correct in only that not all defects are detectable. That is why late term abortion happens in most cases. Please try to educate yourself on that subject before you speak on it for a change.

 

http://www.healthinsite.gov.au/topics/Tests_During_Pregnancy

 

Again, either way, where do you draw the line? Btw, you seen the movie Gattaca?

 

Love that movie, but I get the feeling the point was missed on you that Vincent WASN'T DEFORMED.

 

And I noticed you couldn't quote what I asked.

[northstar1]

Everyone with an IQ under 95, please form a line at the gas chamber doors.

 

Wouldn't that significantly reduce your dating pool?

[BookerT]

Love that movie, but I get the feeling the point was missed on you that Vincent WASN'T DEFORMED.

 

And I noticed you couldn't quote what I asked.

 

Well Vincent was meant to die at the age of 28 or something like that. The whole message of the movie is that to discriminate against someone's genetics is unethical.

 

In any case since you use the word deformed. There are plenty of people over 300 lbs in this world. They don't even look like the way healthy human beings should look, plus they're too lazy to get on a treadmill, and some of them are predisposed to getting fat, so many be should select them out of the gene pool too. Also the people prone to depression and alcoholism.

 

So where do we draw the line?

[BookerT]

Wait correction. Depressed or alcoholics are not deformed. I take that one back!

[clv0116]

Wouldn't that significantly reduce your dating pool?

 

Nope, it would eliminate a lot of my non-dating pool and most of my fellow LS posters.

[sally4sara]

Well Vincent was meant to die at the age of 28 or something like that. The whole message of the movie is that to discriminate against someone's genetics is unethical.

 

In any case since you use the word deformed. There are plenty of people over 300 lbs in this world. They don't even look like the way healthy human beings should look, plus they're too lazy to get on a treadmill, and some of them are predisposed to getting fat, so many be should select them out of the gene pool too. Also the people prone to depression and alcoholism.

 

So where do we draw the line?

 

IMO, non ambulatory, non cognitive, nigh vegetative state, with a life of barely manageable pain. Like Ashely X. And one doesn't need to confer with nazis to come to that conclusion; you only need to consider what you would wish to be spared if you were the afflicted person.

There are even people in these states that were not born that way and we give their family the option to pull the plug. There is no reason to get squeemish over a conversation with similar themes about genetics and start assuming the worst.

 

In Gattaca, Vincent was completely ambulatory, able to comprehend new information, he dealt with some pain issues, but nothing constant. Further to the point, his borrow ladder Jerome, was only partially ambulatory and even he was useful. That was the point of the movie's message; most everybody is of some use to society - even the imperfect.

 

Fat people, depressed people, drunks - all these people are capable on some level.

[BookerT]

In Gattaca, Vincent was completely ambulatory, able to comprehend new information, he dealt with some pain issues, but nothing constant. Further to the point, his borrow ladder Jerome, was only partially ambulatory and even he was useful. That was the point of the movie's message; most everybody is of some use to society - even the imperfect.

.

 

The point is no one, even Vincent knew he would be productive to society. Had the parents aborted him then he never would have been born. It was only in hindsight they we knew he was able to be successful.

 

Also Vincent made a huge effort. That's speaks more than lazy people on welfare by choice or fat people that can't get off their butts and run a few laps. Had Vincent not made the effort he would have been below average.

 

Again for a lot of mental illnesses, still can't be detected early on.