Conspiracy What's your take on eugenics and human genetic enhancement?

[Cortex]

It will backfire hard and fall upon itself once we have the wholesomx le transhumanist Areeyan society some people want to acheive.

The reason humans deviate in physical characteristics, which eugenics WILL get rid of, is general resistance to diseases. So if this happens a pandemic will follow suit that will kill of humans.

And God will smite the sinners down.

Eugenics doesn’t have to be that extreme. If a parent has a high likelihood of passing down a severe disorder to their kid, then I don’t see why we don’t prohibit them from reproducing. Is there really anything wrong with that?

 

[X Immigrant]

Eugenics doesn’t have to be that extreme. If a parent has a high likelihood of passing down a severe disorder to their kid, then I don’t see why we don’t prohibit them from reproducing. Is there really anything wrong with that?

I don't know a good answer or have any good thoughts on this light eugenecism you speak of. I supported it before but based on what Aedra's said it's apparently unchristian.

 

[Cortex]

I don't know a good answer or have any good thoughts on this light eugenecism you speak of. I supported it before but based on what Aedra's said it's apparently unchristian.

I haven’t heard of a convincing argument. If anything, it should be unchristian to willingly play the genetic lottery with your kids.

 

[baqqrih]

Eugenics doesn’t have to be that extreme. If a parent has a high likelihood of passing down a severe disorder to their kid, then I don’t see why we don’t prohibit them from reproducing. Is there really anything wrong with that?

I believe that there is, as you're still restricting life from a baby who clearly isn't wanting to lose that life by its instinct of remaining alive. One may then say, "Ah, but their life will still be burdensome anyway with their disorder, so we do the children a favor by ending it early" and I believe that a statement like this is still invalid. We are as uncertain of the future suffering of this person as we are their future joy. However, a baby with retardation or no legs or whatever-it-may-be can not live a fulfilling life in the first place if it is wholly locked out of that opportunity by being ripped apart in the womb of its mother, or having its child-wanting parents restricted from reproduction. The scriptures have said that we are to multiply ourselves by producing children. It does not say to "be fruitful and multiply, unless your child will be an imbecile, in which case, do not". Who are you to say that they are unworthy of life, over The Lord's will in having provided them with the potential for one? Are we to go by man's standards of perfection, in this endeavor to build a "proper society" in this wicked world, or God's, in preparing us for His proper society beyond this plane? To express this position, I must also consult a tale of Lord Jesus Himself, documented in the Gospel of John.
>As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man's eyes with the mud and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing. - Gospel of John, Chapter 9, Verses 1-7
Thus, the works of God may be displayed in all of the physically disadvantaged, then, and so to prevent a work of God from culminating is to smack His glory like a disobedient dog, and to do that is defiant to The Lord, and all that defies The Lord is evil, for evil is all that is contrary to The Lord's character, and so this idea is evil.

 

[Cortex]

I believe that there is, as you're still restricting life from a baby who clearly isn't wanting to lose that life by its instinct of remaining alive. One may then say, "Ah, but their life will still be burdensome anyway with their disorder, so we do the children a favor by ending it early" and I believe that a statement like this is still invalid. We are as uncertain of the future suffering of this person as we are their future joy. However, a baby with retardation or no legs or whatever-it-may-be can not live a fulfilling life in the first place if it is wholly locked out of that opportunity by being ripped apart in the womb of its mother, or having its child-wanting parents restricted from reproduction. The scriptures have said that we are to multiply ourselves by producing children. It does not say to "be fruitful and multiply, unless your child will be an imbecile, in which case, do not". Who are you to say that they are unworthy of life, over The Lord's will in having provided them with the potential for one? Are we to go by man's standards of perfection, in this endeavor to build a "proper society" in this wicked world, or God's, in preparing us for His proper society beyond this plane? To express this position, I must also consult a tale of Lord Jesus Himself, documented in the Gospel of John.
>As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man's eyes with the mud and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing. - Gospel of John, Chapter 9, Verses 1-7
Thus, the works of God may be displayed in all of the physically disadvantaged, then, and so to prevent a work of God from culminating is to smack His glory like a disobedient dog, and to do that is defiant to The Lord, and all that defies The Lord is evil, for evil is all that is contrary to The Lord's character, and so this idea is evil.

I’m not saying we should perform abortions for potentially disabled kids, I’m saying we should discourage parents from reproducing in the first place so we don’t get to that point.

 

[baqqrih]

I’m not saying we should perform abortions for potentially disabled kids, I’m saying we should discourage parents from reproducing in the first place so we don’t get to that point.

I equated that to the act of abortion in my statement when I said "or having its child-wanting parents restricted from reproduction". In either case, I believe that the idea still goes against the will of the Almighty, which wills that some people be born with these conditions.

 

[X Immigrant]

I equated that to the act of abortion in my statement when I said "or having its child-wanting parents restricted from reproduction". In either case, I believe that the idea still goes against the will of the Almighty, which wills that some people be born with these conditions.

God never said you should have cripples, all he said is that cripples are the result of sin, and that Jesus can heal them. We should still strive to prevent them.

 

[baqqrih]

God never said you should have cripples, all he said is that cripples are the result of sin, and that Jesus can heal them. We should still strive to prevent them.

We should end this suffering by preventing these people from possessing life (thus having a soul) and getting to be with God in salvation? No condition of suffering should halt someone's life from getting to be in the presence of our Lord.

 

[DOLL]

You should go out and get tested with your wife to see if you have any dangerous genes. Beyond that though, if you get married you should be having children. There are families born with several healthy children and one with autism or some other disease; it is not a guarantee nor should it be a limiter on your family size. The risk factor should not push you away from your obligations to your faith. No one here can make the moral determination of what life is worth more than another without committing blasphemy or taking God's name in vain. He said to be fruitful and multiply, not optimize gene selecting to get a result you want. This is how you find yourself in Brave New World very quickly.

 

[X Immigrant]

We should end this suffering by preventing these people from possessing life (thus having a soul) and getting to be with God in salvation? No condition of suffering should halt someone's life from getting to be in the presence of our Lord.

Better to never exist than to have a chance of burning in hell. BTW I'm purely talking about encouraging the disabled not to have kids, abortions are out of the question.

 

[Cortex]

You should go out and get tested with your wife to see if you have any dangerous genes. Beyond that though, if you get married you should be having children. There are families born with several healthy children and one with autism or some other disease; it is not a guarantee nor should it be a limiter on your family size. The risk factor should not push you away from your obligations to your faith. No one here can make the moral determination of what life is worth more than another without committing blasphemy or taking God's name in vain. He said to be fruitful and multiply, not optimize gene selecting to get a result you want. This is how you find yourself in Brave New World very quickly.

So if the couple does have dangerous genes that will likely be passed down to their kids, should they still reproduce knowing the consequences?

I equated that to the act of abortion in my statement when I said "or having its child-wanting parents restricted from reproduction". In either case, I believe that the idea still goes against the will of the Almighty, which wills that some people be born with these conditions.

Oh okay. So you think souls are predestined, then?

 

[DOLL]

So if the couple does have dangerous genes that will likely be passed down to their kids, should they still reproduce knowing the consequences?

Yes. They should mitigate the risks the best they can and prepare themselves, but putting your family's future in the hands of a doctor with a machine is abhorrent. Doctors have been and will be wrong, and if the fear overwhelms you then there are many children up for adoption right now.

 

[baqqrih]

Better to never exist than to have a chance of burning in hell.

This statement is the most horrible set of words that I have read this month. I believe that this idea of yours is rooted in senseless paranoia and a misguided sense of the Almighty. The gift of the soul is the greatest that man may give to another. This is why we are told to love our parents. They have given us mortal life so that we may find eternal life in our Lord, who is Christ. Do you not see it as selfish to keep God's gift only to all of the currently-existent? Hell comes to those out of God's will just as eternal salvation does the same. It is not in any man's place to make this prediction on the behalf of The Lord's judgement, to pollute it with worldly leanings and prognoses of "he will sin" and "he will not". Are we not the soldiers of The Lord just as He wears the crown? Like our great Saint Paul once said in his second epistle to Saint Timothy:
>Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him. - Second Epistle to Timothy, Chapter 2, Verses 3-4
We are not to deny existence to our potential children. There is no compromise in God's commandment to have them by our capability. Our duty is not to make pre-judgements for God when making a consideration of having children. That's an absolutely retarded sentiment, in the bluntest words I can muster. Our duty, as given to us by The Lord, is to have children. That's all that He's said in that commandment! There's no fine print to it! That's all it is, in its entirety! Making these stupid remarks in an attempt to bind The Lord's own guidances that He gave to us into your own puny cage of worldly ideas is what has misguided many ever since Lord Jesus first came to us, and I don't want you to stumble off of that cliff of treacherous language like the unfortunate apostates of the past did, either (not to call you an apostate outright, but to warn you of the potential for apostasy with bad thoughts like these).

 

[baqqrih]

Oh okay. So you think souls are predestined, then?

I don't think my words suggested that, but, no, I don't think that, and I don't know how much it matters in this subject to try and figure out when God's will decides something to happen. What I'm saying is that Christ's words there from John's Gospel make clear an extended desire by Him for incapable or disabled folk to still exist in society until He returns, in which case their conditions will all be healed and perfected by His presence, so, God's own desire for the current world is to have these people in it, no matter the idea of if He's planning the events of their lives before they happen or if He's willing things to happen as time progresses.

 

[Dremora]

I do not understand the "but disabled children will suffer" argument. It carries a certain materialistic assumption with it, the assumption that we come to this world to enjoy our lives or live through it easily.

Suffering is not necessarily a bad thing. Suffering is an indication of another kingdom which we look forward to. If being a Christian meant being "happy" in this life, then we wouldn't need the Kingdom of Heaven.

The other assumption within genetic modification is the idea of "improving" the human race. As if it can be improved in the way they mean it. Take for example, this idea of making humans live longer.

We know for a fact that the world is fallen, we know for a fact that it is passing away in the most literal sense of the word. Adam lived for 930 years after the fall, then he died. For how long do modern humans live? Sure, you have your fancy tools (modern medicine) which might buy you another decade or two compared to previous generations but death will come for us all at the end of the day. From the Bible we can already observe that the life span of humans became shorter over time. This is the curse of mortality, and nothing other than Christ can overcome it.

Perhaps there’s a clue in listening to the patriarch Jacob before he died. He said in Genesis 47:9:

"The days of the years of my sojourning are 130 years. Few and evil have been the days of the years of my life, and they have not attained to the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their sojourning."

Christ is the only exit from this world, from our curse. All other exits - sexual rapture, political utopia, economic independence, are blind alleys in which rot the corpses of the many who have tried them. Same applies to eugenics. Same applies to genetic engineering.

 

[baqqrih]

This statement is the most horrible set of words that I have read this month. I believe that this idea of yours is rooted in senseless paranoia and a misguided sense of the Almighty. The gift of the soul is the greatest that man may give to another. This is why we are told to love our parents. They have given us mortal life so that we may find eternal life in our Lord, who is Christ. Do you not see it as selfish to keep God's gift only to all of the currently-existent? Hell comes to those out of God's will just as eternal salvation does the same. It is not in any man's place to make this prediction on the behalf of The Lord's judgement, to pollute it with worldly leanings and prognoses of "he will sin" and "he will not". Are we not the soldiers of The Lord just as He wears the crown? Like our great Saint Paul once said in his second epistle to Saint Timothy:
>Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him. - Second Epistle to Timothy, Chapter 2, Verses 3-4
We are not to deny existence to our potential children. There is no compromise in God's commandment to have them by our capability. Our duty is not to make pre-judgements for God when making a consideration of having children. That's an absolutely retarded sentiment, in the bluntest words I can muster. Our duty, as given to us by The Lord, is to have children. That's all that He's said in that commandment! There's no fine print to it! That's all it is, in its entirety! Making these stupid remarks in an attempt to bind The Lord's own guidances that He gave to us into your own puny cage of worldly ideas is what has misguided many ever since Lord Jesus first came to us, and I don't want you to stumble off of that cliff of treacherous language like the unfortunate apostates of the past did, either (not to call you an apostate outright, but to warn you of the potential for apostasy with bad thoughts like these).

@X Immigrant Don't take a personal offense to any of those negatively-connotative words I've used, like "retarded" and "stupid", by the way. I will still always love all of my Christian brethren, including you, brother. We all stumble around in our ideas a bit, from time to time. We are young, lacking wisdom, and so our ideas can lose their sense every now and then. My mind has suffered from similar misconceptions before, as well.

 

[DOLL]

Vocaroo | Online voice recorder

Vocaroo is a quick and easy way to share voice messages over the interwebs.

voca.ro

 

[Harlequin]

It will backfire hard and fall upon itself once we have the wholesomx le transhumanist Areeyan society some people want to acheive.

The reason humans deviate in physical characteristics, which eugenics WILL get rid of, is general resistance to diseases. So if this happens a pandemic will follow suit that will kill of humans.

And God will smite the sinners down.

We can just make ourselves immune to disease

 

[Cortex]

We can just make ourselves immune to disease

How?

I do not understand the "but disabled children will suffer" argument. It carries a certain materialistic assumption with it, the assumption that we come to this world to enjoy our lives or live through it easily

That’s a non-Christian belief. Because from our point of view, this world is all we have.

 

[X Immigrant]

@X Immigrant Don't take a personal offense to any of those negatively-connotative words I've used, like "retarded" and "stupid", by the way. I will still always love all of my Christian brethren, including you, brother. We all stumble around in our ideas a bit, from time to time. We are young, lacking wisdom, and so our ideas can lose their sense every now and then. My mind has suffered from similar misconceptions before, as well.

No, it's just, I'm a pretty misguided person sometimes. It's confusing, trying to mix all the information around me I'm made aware of and the book.

 

[Tsar]

Keep the government away from tools that can enable them to play as gods is all I can say.

 

[Harlequin]

How?

Polygenic risk score for various illnesses perhaps. It would be hard to do without unintended consequeces right now, but once we master the human genome it would probably be possible to just make all natural viruses unable to make us sick/die. Either way, it's unlikely that eugenics would result in more susceptibility to illness as it only targets a tiny fraction of the genome

 

[FisherKelTath]

I want to be a genetically augemented Space Marine.

 

[panchito]

It will backfire hard and fall upon itself once we have the wholesomx le transhumanist Areeyan society some people want to acheive.

The reason humans deviate in physical characteristics, which eugenics WILL get rid of, is general resistance to diseases. So if this happens a pandemic will follow suit that will kill of humans.

And God will smite the sinners down.

imo eugenics should be applied to a degree, maybe giving homes to people and making them live in different groups with each of them having close genetical features, due to normgroid's natural behaviour of searching different people than their own, they will search for another people outside of their group but still be close enough as to not fuck up their estrogen/testosterone genetics

 

[panchito]

I want to be a genetically augemented Space Marine.

anything is possible if you put your heart in it