AzurePhoenix

Notevery child that can be born should be. Every egg and sperm combo has the potnetial to become someone, but the vast majority never do. Does that mean each one that isn't fulfilled is a victim of immorality? No, I'm saying people don't have to be crippled when something can be done about it beforehand. And I'm sorry, but you can't see the future or change the past. Every month you decide not to get pregnant you could be "killing" the next Einstein. What's done is done, we can't regret what "might have been" in such an esoteric possibilty. This is a strawman, we aren't talking about persecution. Again, this is simply about health. Forced sterilization is the most horrible aspect of eugenics, as it denies human rights by seizing the ability to reproduce from that person and degrading them by saying they aren't worthy to reproduce. It says that there is a possibility their selfishness could result in a suffering or doomed child. Why, when they could adopt a parentless child to love as there own, a child that might be forced into a life of hardship otherwise? That's right, it is inhuman. Too bad, that's nature. But by comparing this to the Nazis is a logical fallacy.And I would rather sacrifice my ability to breed if there was a reason behind it. By reducing the role of a family to being the biological source of your child, I think that you're amkign the entire relationship far more shallow than it should be,

I would equate this to murder to a certain extent. While a state of nature is desirable, that doesn't mean we have the right to condemn others if our technology allows for it to be otherwise. I do think it is our moral responsiblity to do what we can to help those already here to surivive in comfort, if that's what they want, or, in the case that they can't indicate what they want, that their fmaily wants for them.

I ahve nothing to say about genetic "purity," simply the removal of distinctly dangerous, disease causing traits. And I don't see it as unethical. I see doing nothing as the unethical choice. Being responsible means that sometimes you have to make a choice that isn't good for everyone, that to do the right thing, you have to do some wrong things. There are two choices, what must be done, and what should be done. Sometimes they don't agree, but what must be done is simply that, what must be done for the greater good. And that is simply your opinion. Continuing to do what we are doing now is what I see as morally unforgivable. It won't be done because society is in the hands of cowards who refuse to do the right thing because it doesn't line up with being sensitive with the most mundane needs of individual people. That is an atrocity to every victim that will suffer for such misguided pity. The Nazis were prejudice, they didn't care about the well being of people, they cared about spreading their likeness and bringing down the rest. I and those who agree aren't talking about exterminating the Gays or the Ethnic groups or any races, we're talking about lifethreatening diseases. As is it said "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing" The goal of science is understanding, discovering what we can about the world around us, and ourselves, the simple pursuit of knowledge. The goal of medicine is to help people, but it goes against the very goal of humans as as species, which frankly is to survive, something that we cannot do if we continue along this path. No one is calling them inferior, but it can't be denied that they harbor a danger within them. Should they be punished no. But they shouldn't be let to harm the species. Therapy is only a temperary solution, unless we can find a fully effective method of purging the disease from their very genes (I believe we're still a long way off) we are simply continuing to allow the threat to spread, and there's a chance we won't always have our snazzy treatments to hold them off.

It's not caused by heat or spin, but by mass.

For a long while most people just looked at "protists" as (mostly) single celled eukaryotes and clumped them all together regardless of their origins or evolutionary lines, so any confusion is gonna be with them. Once you get to the level of fungi, plants and animals, the separating facotrs are very distinct.

When anaimals choose their mates, they are faced with choosing mates that for some reason or another are the best at surviving; two peacocks in similar areas have different genes, one is better at getting food, he is stronger and has more energy to waste on growing vibrant, impressive plumes. These plumes display to the females that he is succesful. And humans? We have hairdye. And while that is true, it's not the point, the major point is that there is nothing actively selecting against bad genes, because we give everyone equal opportunity to survive, and those with deadly genes are helped to live and breed, spreading the poor genes even further. We have no natural predators, or at least, the great majority of us don't. We don't have to struggle to find new ways of finding food or hunting down our prey. We are nothing like normal, naturally enduring species. It's not our job to make sure that every child that can be born will be born. The morality of this point can be argued to death by people of varying degrees of sensitivity and the different concepts of "moral" that accompany them, but the key thing about genetic diseases is that the best method to stopping them is stopping them at their source. By letting them thrive ("them" the genes), even helping them do so, we are committing a crime against every generation that comes after us, and again a crime against the entire species.

I've been waiting for this for ages. Soon, the true extent of my domination over all that lives shall be put into practice!!! Mwuaha, evolution beware.

Humans don't play by the same rules. We don't exist in a natural state of existence, and by doing so we are very clearly manipulating our genetics, negatively at that. One person's rights have no weight against the suffering of countless children. By strictly adhering to absolute laws, we set ourselves up for trouble. The RIGHT thing requires flexibility, and sometimes the setting aside of lesser ideals for the greater ones. Sex is perfectly possible for the sterile. You see it all the time, procedures are done, and the people go about their merry way condom and baby-free.

I agree (except microorganisms are more abundant than plants, enormous biomass, not even to think about individual numbers within their population)

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. In the types of societies we reside in, aspects that we'd normally look for in choosing a good mate for our children are masked by a number of things. People just end up pairing up without any concern for the survivability of the mate. Granted, in today's world it doesn't seem much of an issue, but where might that lead far down the line? What happens if it spreads too far, and say fro some reason society eventually collapses? WOuld we be able to cope without our nifty safeguards? hehe, just look at modern custody battles, people don't even want their chosen mates influencing their kids; hindsight as the truth is revealed

crap, I was thinking mammals alone rather than animals. I always do that. Well then, yes, there are millions, sorry. A thousand apologies. Insects certainly don't fall into plant or fungi An animal is an animal, and insects have all the characteristics, as do corals, starfish, clams and sponges. It's mostly common misconceptions that cast peoples' understanding of this into doubt. Again, sorry.

Indeed they're not. They fall under the domain bacteria. Animals are an entirely lower grouping (kingdom) under the domain eukarya. It's a whole taxonomic cladistic order of descent thing. Bacteria are in no way animalian. A's wrong too. There aren't more than some five thousand + species of mammals (known at least) but the total figure of known and unknown probably wouldn't add up anywhere near millions. Only D is correct

Well, I don't suppose anyone's talking about focusing in on Nebraska or Utah, this is something that affects the entire human race, and should be treated as such.

I always considered it irresponsible to alow the human race to go on the way it has been. Not for the race itself exactly, though that is certainly a factor, but for the individual victims harmed by this ease of survival. If people who shouldn't have children aren't allowed to (for the sake of their potential offspring), think about how many of the children that are born but for some reason lose their parents can find homes in the arms of people who otherwise couldn't have their own. The benefits are incalculable. The negative aspects come down to a negligable question of a single branch of ethics while ignoring more important issues. I'd never propose the extermination of the weak, whether that be mental or physical, indeed, such people should tended with the utmost care, be allowed to enjoy life how they choose. But why should we work to create a world where ever more and more people are prone to such things? ---edit--- Sorry, tired, must've missed it when I skimmed.

I spent an hour just trying to rustle up the materials to properly represent the holiness that is the Penguin Buddha and went through dozens of buddha-hats and lotuses... loti?

Quite possibly the saddest photoshop job I've ever been unfortunate enough to gaze upon ()

Revel in the frostily fluffy glory that is the Penguin Buddha

If only the Penguin Buddha chose to raise her glorious flipper in violence, then indeed she would trounce the fools. For now, she has to kick-ass through the medium of her draconic leopard seals.

GAH! How could... buh...Yoda!!!! The media has abandoned the greatest of the great! Oh woe is me! Dammit, Yoda could have crammed Mr.Roger's skinny ass through a meat grinder and cooked up sausage patties.

I love how the two gandalfs are separate entities.

Interesting, I almost feel remorse. Almost.

Erm, right for the first, not the second. The pale skin is specifically to abosrb MORE light in lowlight conditions see post five

Change the books forever, pluralize the red spots. I love it when the next generation gets to learn something completely different. Hoorah for history in the making.

I hear the X-Files themesong suddenly