Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Eugenics is preventing it from happening in the first place
and culling when it does.
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).
Positive eugenics | Define Positive eugenics at Dictionary.com
Yes JB, words DO have meaning and your definition of eugenics is WRONG. EVERY source disagrees with you. Eugenics does NOT include genetic engineering, it is the process of selective breeding. Please accept that the definition you proposed in the beginning was incorrect and that you are referring to genetic engineering NOT breeding and then we can move on.the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).
Because like anything there can be negative gene therapies. I am PRO positive gene therapies, as in the breast cancer example.
Which you will have to agree fits with the OP
It fits with the OP if I ignore the fact that what the OP is describing is not eugenics, it is genetics. Eugenics is about breeding humans, period, and it is psuedo-science. The fact that JB keeps trying to claim that I am wrong, even when his own links prove I am right, more than makes that point.
The problem is you are ignoring the bolded part. Other then what you two went off the rails about, the OP is asking about a discussion of positive uses for gene therapy.
Again: Semitics.
It fits with the OP if I ignore the fact that what the OP is describing is not eugenics, it is genetics. Eugenics is about breeding humans, period, and it is psuedo-science. The fact that JB keeps trying to claim that I am wrong, even when his own links prove I am right, more than makes that point.
The problem is you are ignoring the bolded part. Other then what you two went off the rails about, the OP is asking about a discussion of positive uses for gene therapy.
Again: Semitics.
No, the OP is talking about positive uses for EUGENICS. NOT the same thing.
And it's SEMANTICS, not SEMITICS. Semitics are Jews. That's a pretty major freudian slip right there, when you're talking about eugenics.
Positive eugenics | Define Positive eugenics at Dictionary.com
Yes JB, words DO have meaning and your definition of eugenics is WRONG. EVERY source disagrees with you. Eugenics does NOT include genetic engineering, it is the process of selective breeding. Please accept that the definition you proposed in the beginning was incorrect and that you are referring to genetic engineering NOT breeding and then we can move on.the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).
 /ɪˈspɛʃ
Show Spelled[ih-spesh-uh-lee] Show IPA 
Positive eugenics | Define Positive eugenics at Dictionary.com
Yes JB, words DO have meaning and your definition of eugenics is WRONG. EVERY source disagrees with you. Eugenics does NOT include genetic engineering, it is the process of selective breeding. Please accept that the definition you proposed in the beginning was incorrect and that you are referring to genetic engineering NOT breeding and then we can move on.the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).
fail
especially =/= exclusively
es·pe·cial·ly
 əli/
adverb particularly; exceptionally; markedly: Be especially watchf
If you're going to quote a definition, make sure it doesn't prove you wrong first
The problem is you are ignoring the bolded part. Other then what you two went off the rails about, the OP is asking about a discussion of positive uses for gene therapy.
Again: Semitics.
No, the OP is talking about positive uses for EUGENICS. NOT the same thing.
And it's SEMANTICS, not SEMITICS. Semitics are Jews. That's a pretty major freudian slip right there, when you're talking about eugenics.
yes i KNOW. I didnt check it before I posted.
SEMANTICS I say it many times in other posts if you care to look. So take your perceived Freudian slip and shove it.
And besides if I were to rid the earth of anyone its not the jews.
Positive eugenics | Define Positive eugenics at Dictionary.com
Yes JB, words DO have meaning and your definition of eugenics is WRONG. EVERY source disagrees with you. Eugenics does NOT include genetic engineering, it is the process of selective breeding. Please accept that the definition you proposed in the beginning was incorrect and that you are referring to genetic engineering NOT breeding and then we can move on.
fail
especially =/= exclusively
es·pe·cial·ly
 əli/
adverb particularly; exceptionally; markedly: Be especially watchf
If you're going to quote a definition, make sure it doesn't prove you wrong first
hmm... so no. I guess I will just have to write you off as throwing a childish fit. Apparently your drive to be 'right' overpowers your ability to debate. Goodbye.
Semantics boys.
How about the term positive gene therapy instead of positive eugenics? That gets rid of QW's bit about breading programs and culling. AND it allows for genetic choices to be made by parents.
No, the OP is talking about positive uses for EUGENICS. NOT the same thing.
And it's SEMANTICS, not SEMITICS. Semitics are Jews. That's a pretty major freudian slip right there, when you're talking about eugenics.
yes i KNOW. I didnt check it before I posted.
SEMANTICS I say it many times in other posts if you care to look. So take your perceived Freudian slip and shove it.
And besides if I were to rid the earth of anyone its not the jews.
It's still a freudian slip, shove it yourself. It's not perceived at all. It's just very interesting you'd say "semitics" when trying to assert that genetics and eugenics are the same thing. Particularly after using the term correctly.
Thanks for admitting you don't know what the hell you're talking about. I'll continue to give your straw man attempts to divert the attention from the real subject the focus their deserve. None, of course.
We need to denut any 10 year old boy who has an IQ below 120. That should be the cut off.
We need to denut any 10 year old boy who has an IQ below 120. That should be the cut off.
Bottom line: everyone in this thread wh's been honest enough to answer has said they will avail themselves to The use of genetic technologies that we possess or shall come to possess to enable parents to determine what genetic traits are passed on to their children, with the stated aims and goals of eliminating genetic disease, improving the human form, prolonging life, and improving the quality of human life [1], when it't their children when talking about.
Some of us are honest enough to state openly that these are eugenic aims by any fair application of the term, granted that attention is paid the the differentiation between positive and negative methodologies, to willful versus compulsory participation, and what we do and do not support. Some are not so honest*. In the end, though, they're willing to do the very same things as we are when their children are to benefit.
*The difference seems to be much like that between those of us who state openly that we are social democrats, socialists, leftists, or whatever other ideology we may adhere to, and those who who do not. Those who coopt the name 'liberal' when they do not adhere to the ideology of liberalism and those who refuse to acknowledge their eugenics aims and the history of the aims and methodologies they've gone on record as supporting are the same in that they refuse to identify with an accurate term out of soret sort of PR concerns.
The difference is that you think eugenics and genetics are the same thing,
So you'd rather flip coin and let your child suffer a horrible disease than ensure your child's health?At any rate I say NAY to eugenics.....natural selection is the only way to go.
So you'd rather flip coin and let your child suffer a horrible disease than ensure your child's health?At any rate I say NAY to eugenics.....natural selection is the only way to go.
You have no laugh or compassion for your own children?
Do they also go without shoes and vaccinations?
