How could they ever improve on this:
Posted on 09/29/2003 4:44:06 PM PDT by Sweet_Sunflower29
How could they ever improve on this:
It's not the least bit controversial.
You're an a$$hole, professor. Period. End of discussion
Actually dates back farther to Plato and Socrates, probably even farther than that. Any history buffs out there?
Agreed - don't financially reward reproduction, but there is no reason to make the leap that some self-appointed elitists could possibly have the right to dictate who may or may not reproduce. Perhaps today, it would be "low IQ" people, but remember that he who defines IQ decides who gets to have kids. Pretty convenient way to control ones' enemies. I would expect liberals to use it frequently.
Hitler was not a eugenicist
Actually, he was. He pushed eugenics as one of the main reasons for the concentration camps. Forced sterilization of "defectives" for this reason was explicitly one of the crimes some Germans were tried for at Nuremberg. The great movie, "Judgment at Nuremberg" with Spencer Tracy actually centers around just such a case.
From what I know about eugenics, that would be a compliment. I did some research on the eugenics movement in the US in the early 20th century. It was shocking, outrageous and terrifying. The brains behind it were the same ones behind the "peace movement" - the intellectual liberal elites in the Universities. They believed that populations (that is, people) could be manipulated just like a scientific experiment.
Margaret Sanger, founder of planned parenthood, was heavily involved with the leaders of the eugenics movement Many of those leaders were also the board members of the fore runner of Planned Parenthood.. Abortion was to be made available to the "lower races and defectives" in order to limit their numbers and keep them from polluting the pure blood of whites. Hitler spoke specifically of his admiration for her views in this regard. Sanger wanted to offer "certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization" ("A Plan For Peace", April 1932 Birth Control Review). Many feel that she meant concentration camps when she said segregation. After World War II the predecessor of Planned Parenthood was disbanded and reformed (with the same board members) under the new name in order to "wash away the smell of Nazism."
This was the root of the social engineering we see today. Except the guys back then took it to extremes. Did you know that the last mandatory sterilization law was not taken off the books until 1974? If you want to be truly offended, check out the information at http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/
I agree with your concept, except where you imply the folks "back then took it to extremes" not entertained by this same movement today. Just look at this guy, or the "ethicist" that thinks "abortions" should be allowed until a child is 3 years old. This is at the heart of Planned Parenthood to this day. If you have a reason, kill it. If you don't have a reason, kill it. It doesn't deserve to live because it has been ruled just a lump of flesh, not a person, by the courts. Sounds familiar. They also argued that way in Dredd Scott.
Hitler didn't do anything new. He just went way off the deep end with the 'science' that was already accepted and practiced in the US and elsewhere. The Nazis used what was commonly called the "Indiana Prodecure". (Yes, that Indiana.)
Yep. They also justified themselves with the results in the California Experiment in forced sterilization.
I suppose we can laugh and joke and say, 'Oh, yeah. Sounds good to me'. That is until the court shows up at your door with your mandatory sterilization order in the name of progressive sociology. Eugenics is a road we do not want to travel again.
Or until they show up when you get your pregnancy test results and say "sorry, your not allowed" for whatever reason, you have to have an abortion. Kinda like what is already happening in China.
Been around the world and found
that only stupid people are breeding.
The cretins cloning and feeding...
and I don't even own a TV.
So is child rape. (To engage in a formal fallacy.)
But if the Danes want to give it a go, and they don't get crazy about it and violate anyone's human rights, or euthanize anyone, etc., then I say, what the heck, have at it. It might work with spectacular results. In a century or two Denmark might become a nation of Niels Bohrs.
Well, the professor might be an a$$hole, but if he is, then so am I.
And please could you provide one logical (not emotional) reason why this should be the end of the discussion?
"We are all aware of this problem, but we don't dare talk about it. But we should, for the sake of society and the future, so that we can have productive citizens and not people who need help"
I think this is a core issue. Why don't we dare talk about it? What exactly is wrong with debating the issues and letting ideas sink or swim in the marketplace? This PC way of killing discussion before it happens is the last thing I would have expected to find at Free Republic.
Cheers,
Lloyd
I submit that it's logically impossible, and that this impossibility is self-evident.
Isn't that how legalized abortion is suppose to work? The problem with it is the liberal's are losing a huge voting block through their self-extinction plan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.