[voletti]

Nature, nurture whatever...I believe, one ought to take moral responsibility for one's own actions and not seek to deflect blame. Though for something that is inborn, how does the case play out?

[Dallas59]

After murdering the entire town, the accused was found not guilty..because he couldn't help the way he was born!

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Sounds like yet more efforts to advance the infamous Communist Goals posted frequently at FR.

Search Words: Communist Goals
ARCHIVE, Match Exact Phrase

[anniegetyourgun]

Why, any good liberal knows that man is basically good. That is, after all, how we can achieve utopia through social evolution. It's important that we don't acknowledge evil...but where it exists, we make up an excuse having to do with environmental factors, or we blame it on a wrong-headed notion of what constitutes evil to begin with.

Got it? If not, you will require re-education immediately.

[calex59]

Yep, it is never the fault of the individual we are all slaves to our genes. If we are gay we have gay genes, if we are homicidal maniacs we have killer genes and if we are rednecks we have blue jeans.

The famous liberal blame anyone but the person syndrome.

[litehaus]

INBORN? We can identify? We lock it up instantly? We execute born killers cause we know they are? Endless great possibilities from these so-called scientists..( Sigh-Kye-a- trysts)

[Ol' Sparky]

This is yet another attempt to diminish or eliminate the idea of personal responsibility and morality. Evil and misconduct are really the fault of genetic defect after all.

[joshhiggins]

If it's "genetic" we need to remove them from the gene pool.

If it's "upbringing" we still need to get them out of the pool.

[nmh]

That's B.S..

The only thing that can be said is that there are ATTRIBTUES that are passed down into a child BUT they can learn that some tendencies are wrong and overcome them.

[nmh]

The Economist ALMOST GET'S IT!

"Though the genes in question have yet to be identified, this result suggests they are TOO ABUNDANT TO BE THERE BY CHANCE—in other words they are being kept in the population by natural selection because psychopathic behaviour confers a selective advantage. "

They can't identify the genes ... .

Yes, LIFE and all that it involves is NOT BY CHANCE! It is by Intelligent Design. Then they screw it all up by crediting "natural selection" which is TOTALLY idiotic.

[elmer fudd]

"Though the genes in question have yet to be identified, this result suggests they are too abundant to be there by chance—in other words they are being kept in the population by natural selection because psychopathic behaviour confers a selective advantage. If it does, such an advantage probably pertains only when psychopaths are in the minority (a state of affairs known to biologists as a balanced polymorphism). But it does mean that far from being an aberrant behaviour, psychopathy may be disturbingly normal."

This is the part I found most interesting. The rest of it seemed more like common sense. Everyone who has been around babies knows they are born with their own personalities and dispositions.

[Redmen4ever]

First, I think we can say that some people have a genetic predisposition to certain forms of mental illness and personality disorder. This includes bipolar disorder and may also include homosexuality.

Second, genetic predisposition argues very strongly that children be raised by their buiological parents if their biological parents are successful and happy in life. This way, the childred can learn from their parents how to successfully deal with their genetic inheritance, to their advantage rather than their disadvantage.

Third, related to this, a high preference in adoption would be close relatives who are themselves successful and happy in life.

Fourth, also related to this, custody in divorce should be given to the successful and happy parent, not simply be awarded all the time to the mother. In particular, if the marriage ended for no reason other than the mother decided to leave the family home, and the mother has never held a job, or established any social relationship outside of her close relatives, red lights should go off that maternal custody would be risky.

Fifth, people with certain genetic predispositions deserve our sympathy and not be automatically condemned, e.g., those who are inclined to be homosexuals. This doesn't mean we should make them into youth ministers at our churches or cub scout leaders. In other words, the gay gene doesn't mean we ignore what are temptations for people with this condition.

[streetpreacher]

Biological Positivism: same old abysmal lie wrapped in new clothes every 4-5 years.

BTW, all of the major American Biological Positivists of the early 20th century were also admirers of Hitler and the Fascist system.

[ViLaLuz]

ping

[penowa]

This is a truly laughable conclusion for these scientists to reach. They should have saved themselves a hundred years and looked at the conclusions reached by animal breeders. (And yes, even when the mother doesn't raise the offspring, it makes little difference in the personality traits present.)

[Cvengr]

There is no temptation too great than that which may be overcome. Only though faith in Christ is there salvation.

[Iris7]

If psychopathic criminality is inborn then preventive detention for the individual's lifetime is in order. If the individual can control his actions, however, then he is responsible for his actions, and need not be permanently incarcerated.

I personally don't believe any personal subjective reasons exist that reduce criminal responsibility. "I didn't mean to", "I was insane for a moment", "I am insane", etc. should mean less than nothing in assessing guilt. The whole idea of "criminal intent" is bogus. "There is only do, and not do."