Scientist Suspended for Race Remarks Also Discussed 'Defective' Children

Cybercast News ^ | 10-19-07 | Patrick Goodenough

[yankeesdoodle]

Noting that some abnormalities are not discovered until after birth, he suggested that a baby should not be considered legally alive immediately on being born.

"If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice that only a few are given under the present system," he said. "The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so chose and save a lot of misery and suffering."

[sobieski]

Human children are completely helpless. If people decide they are unfit, they are unfit and do not get resources. That’s evolution; it doesn’t matter that we are smart. It’s still all about fitness and competition for resources. You don’t make your parents happy, you don’t pass your genes along.

[LongTimeMILurker]

STUPID NOBEL LAUREATE COMMENT OF THE DAY.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8SEFAKG0&show_article=1

“Stupid is as stupid does.”-Forrest Gump

[Calpernia]

ping

[Calpernia]

Gattaca

Excerpt:

During this time society analyzes your DNA and determines where you belong in life. Ethan Hawke's character was born with a congenital heart condition which would cast him out of getting a chance to travel in space.

Excerpt:

Vincent is one of the last "natural" babies born into a sterile, genetically-enhanced world, where life expectancy and disease likelihood are ascertained at birth. Myopic and due to die at 30, he has no chance of a career in a society that now discriminates against your genes, instead of your gender, race or religion.

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

This is so sick, I don't even no where to start:

Noting that some abnormalities are not discovered until after birth, he suggested that a baby should not be considered legally alive immediately on being born.

[Constantine XIII]

He’s a real winner, isn’t he? ><

[kenth]

I’m waiting for some posters to come to his defense now that another aspect of his feelings of superiority come to light.

[wagglebee]

He sounds like a typical Darwinist following in the footsteps of Margaret Sanger, Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Rachel Carson.

[Marie]

Someone should inform the doctor that this is *not* Sparta.

[Marie]

What I’m saying is, it’s not wrong to say what you BELIEVE.

Here's the deal: In a free society, you have the right to say whatever you want.

However, you do not have the right to be heard and you will have to deal with the consequences of those words.

[darkangel82]

Watson sounds like he belongs in the psychiatric ward.

[Marie]

Hard-working people with strong backs.

Lately my kid has been flirting with the idea of becoming a doctor and I am *horrified*! I keep showing him the student loans of a doctor vs the student loans of a diesel mechanic and the (surprisingly) similar salaries. (A friend of mine makes six figures a year as a welder. Another makes more than the first as a plumber.)

Now which decision is actually the *smart* one?

[8mmMauser]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

8mm

[Pinkbell]

There is no moral difference in killing a child at 3 days old in the womb or 3 days after births. Watson and Singer realize this, and they are perfectly ok with killing children up until 3 days after birth. They hold little regard for the value of life and believe people that are ill or handicapped have less value than healthy people and deserve to be killed.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

This guy should take care that he doesn’t get carpet burns on his knuckles.

[2ndClassCitizen]

Did he make the mistake of reading the Bell Curve?

[2ndClassCitizen]

When the embryo divides in the first several hours the newly created being has a complete and separate DNA that remains the same for his or her whole life.

The mother’s DNA is different than this little being.

The mother has no legql right, unless she was raped or her life is in actual danger, to kill her unborn baby.

[Clemenza]

You cannot be a scientist and tell the real truth about human genetic diversity.

[ModelBreaker]

His views are completely contrary to evolutionary theory. Under evolutionary theory, natural selection is the decider. He is advocating that man be the decider. That's not consistent with the theory or Darwin's personal views. In fact, it would turn natural selection on its head.

I don't think this is correct. Evolutionary theory postulates that the fitness landscape is the totality of circumstances that impact an individual's ability to survive and have kids. For humans, the ability to survive the behavior of other humans has always been part of our "fitness to reproduce." Evolutionary theory also postulates that the fitness landscape is always changing. The globe warms up and cools down. Droughts come and droughts go. Guys like Peter Singer get power and then lose it.

The evolutionists see other humans as just another aspect of the fitness landscape. So why can't killers like the bioethicists (Singer and Watson) just be a part of the fitness landscape? Killers like Vlad the Impaler and Josef Stalin were just part of the fitness landscape for their unfortunate subjects. Think of it this way. It's like male chimpanzees killing the offspring of other males. It's natural! So it must be moral, right?