737- Eugenics is not necessarily bad
Yes it isn't necessarily bad
Or no it isn't necessarily bad?
The answers are poorly chosen.
Eugenics doesn't have to mean "killing off people with this trait"
It could be elimination in the population through gene therapy.
Gene x is dominant and increases chance of developing a type of cancer by 110%.
A 20$ shot is produced which does nothing but replaces gene x with a benign partner gene.
If we have everyone with Gene x get that shot, we've eliminated the trait from our gene pool.
That's also eugenics.
Or, we find out that there really is a gene that causes, say, pedophilia (unlikely)
We then provide incentives to people with that gene not to breed.
Then we eliminate pedophilia.
Eugenics is always bad.
Eugenics leads to taking away the freedoms of some by those who suggest that they know better than the rest. Ultimately, it leads to death.
Right and wrong are subjective.
“Or, we find out that there really is a gene that causes, say, pedophilia (unlikely)”
Maybe if we really find that there is a gene that causes, say, homosexuality, we could eliminate that disease from our world. Unlikely though because homosexuality is a choice.
Hopefully if we do have a eugenics supporting fascist take over of, ctskapski is the first one that gets put in the death camp due to his clear mental retardation
Max ... there’s no gay gene and there’s no trans gene and there’s no pedophile gene. Deviants just need to take responsibility for their choices.
Max9908, you salty dog, are you trying to seduce me?
I agree ... the answer choices are muddled.
I'd may, it doesn't necessarily.
Saying that it will is fallacious.
Saying that it may allows us to be aware of the possibility and watch out for it.