Should eugenics (preventing 'un-desirables' from breeding) be legalised?

Question

I am currently in colledge in England and one of my classes we have to form a presentation, and my teacher has set me the challenge of the question:

Eugenics: shold we be able to decide who breeds?


If anyone has any positive or negative points, please could you let me know. thank you

Just to clarify, its the general population of humans that it wouldapply to. It has been given a bad name by Hitler when he used it to promote the arien race (blond hair blue eyes) and stop others brom reproducing.

Answer 1

Yes all male babies should be sterilized at birth in a reversible operation. When they reach the point they are thinking of having a child and mating they should apply fora license, a panel could then decide on whether they are genetically, economically, socially and psychologically fit to have children. After conception he would be resterlised. Anyone failing the test would not be permitted to have a child. Any attempt to circumvent this should be punishable by death. All new born males and any resident males should under go this procedure. Any visitors to the country would be required to take an oral contraceptive that would prevent them breeding while they are here.

The Policing of this is remarkably simple. In order to register a child at any stage of life the license is required. If you try to have a child Christened, circumcised, born, starting school, medical treatment etc the license will be required. Anyone failing to produce a license, and the child, will be deleted. We could also have a Report Suspect Birth rewards where reporters are given 1000 pounds for reporting an illegal birth that leads to deletion. The sterilization will be standard procedure at all births; it will be checked routinely as part of the licensing scheme.

The Panel will consist of people of good social and educational repute. It will be a job like any other. The guidelines on who qualifies will be quite strident so there won’t be that much room for dispute. Physical health, criminal record, being ginger, same gender applications, employment and financial status are particularly factual and automatically disallowed. Psychological factors will be judged by a panel of medical experts.

We should also bring in compulsory euthansia for everyone once they reach 60 anyone convicted of a violent or sexual crime and anyone convicted of three or more crimes.

Answer 2

NO i dont think it should be legalised....that would be horrible and nobody should be able to tell anyone whether they should be able to reproduce or not...it has to be the person's decision and not anyone else's reagurdless if they make a desirable looking baby or not...looks or whatever arent the most important thing that people should be focused on....but then again..i guess desirables could fall into a category besides looks..then, who knows...

Answer 3

OK, your question is "should we be able to decide who breeds?"
I think people should breed with who they really love, but as long as they keep abstinence, I hate hearing about these teen pregnancies. It makes ALL teenage girls seem vulnerable, we're not! I think as long as they're married, and love one another, then you can breed, and have children with who ever you want... well, except if it;s like cousin and cousin or sister and brother, then that's just gross.... and usually causes a deformity.
I'm not really good at these kind of questions, but you asked for opinions, so that's what I went with (I still sound stupid) ....... As for the retarded people breeding, I'm not so sure, I had no clue retarded people knew how to 'do it' well, except trailor trash, they're really good at it, (You're in England, and I've seen you're version of trailors, they're waaay nicer than our trailor trash in 'The States'.... it's just a group of inbreds who sleep in a tin box called atrailor.. hehe... but when you say currently, I'm guessing you're jusut in England temporarily, so I'm not sure..... )

Answer 4

NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Besides the fact that ALL human life is precious,

I think eugenics would backfire.

Hitler is exactly what I thought about when I read this question. Under his regime I would not have my son because, although I look really white my grand father is (was when he was alive) Native American. I could have hidden that probably.

But this question brings up a point that I personally know a lot about, something that would have far reaching implications for all society. And this is only one point with far reaching implications. This issue must have at least 1,000,000 points.

I have bipolar (never been "crazy", hospitalized etc. and that is not because I eat xanax all day either). FYI, the "crazy" people are the unmedicated people or the improperly medicated people. But what if the mentally ill were not allowed to breed? I take my meds and have a pretty good life. I honestly believe that I am the sanest, most responsible mentally ill person who has ever lived in the history of the world ever. Most of us are sane and responsible. Most of us you don’t even notice. But I know that the meds are what keep us like that. Like how to diabetics have to have insulin. If mentally ill people could not "breed" then that does not mean their would be fewer mentally ill people. On the contrary, the number of truly "crazy" people would actually increase exponentially because every one would be afraid to seek treatment and get meds for fear of being exposed. That would mean more Andrea Yates, more Charles Mansons, more Jeffery Dahmers, and more of those people that just aggravate the sh*t out of you because you know that they just have to be either unmedicated or the spawn of satan.

Speaking of satan's spawn, what about all the children who would go through school learning nothing because theirs mom is afraid to get them some Ritalin or Focalin. (Yes people!!! ADHA is a REAL disorder for some kids) My son consistently failed everything at school and I got called to the school a couple of times a week every week about his behavior even though both of us were in individual therapy, family therapy, and I was taking every parenting class I could find. Nothing changed until he started on Focalin. He can actually read now. Thank heaven is only 7. But what would have happened if I were afraid to seek treatment for him. Incidentally, he did not genetically inherit the ADHA from me. Kids like him grow up to be addicts and criminals if they don't get treatment. My brother, adopted brother by the way, no genetic relation, but he is still MY brother, I don’t think would have an alcohol problem today if my parents had gotten him some help at least by the age of 8 or 9.

This is just one instance where Eugenics would backfire. The only one that I could personally speak authoritatively about. I am sure there are a million more reasons that I don’t know about.

The only time I could see Eugenics as ok would be if someone was giving birth to child after child after child and then was selling the babies, or having babies so they could be used as child prostitutes with the parents being the pimps. Or having babies for the purpose of sacrificing them in some kind of cult. But if that were the case, in the U.S. at least you could just put these people in prison.

I do know of one case in my home town probably 20 years ago, a mentally retarded couple just kept having child after child. But that was not the problem. The problem was that they were not and obviously did not know how to take care of their children. The children, one by one, ended up in foster care after being horribly neglected. After the woman had delivered her 5th child she was sterilized, and while I don’t know first hand, it is widely accepted that her Ob-Gyn petitioned the courts to get permission to sterilize her without her consent. I don’t know if it was really without her consent. I don’t know if that could have ever happened legally in the U.S. 20 years ago. But the Dr. that delivered the last baby was somehow involved in making sure that the 5th baby would be the last.

That situation makes perfect sense. It should not have gone as far as it did. But it was right that they were first allowed to at least try parenthood once. After the first child, then they knew what kind of parents they were going to be. And who was to know that there was not a responsible grand parent, aunt, uncle, etc that could have taken care of the baby.

But to just dictate that this group and that group cannot breed based on nothing more than a label is evil. And I cannot imagine a program like this not imploding and just causing more chaos in society.

Answer 5

It would be nice to be able to avoid any more morons breeding. But how do you go about that? Can you really stop them? How would it work; shock collars, signs, chainlink fence? Besides, then it would start to sound like another arian nation and I don't think alot of people would go for that. Also, who would we make fun of, if the idiots stopped breeding?

Answer 6

Breeds or reproduces? I do think that some people should not be allowed to reproduce. I couldn't care less who screws who but some people have no business having babies.

Answer 7

I believe that there are some people out in the world who shouldn't be allowed to have children, but that's not my choice, nor anyone elses to make. If you believe in natural selection, then the bad apples will eventually be weeded out anyway.

Answer 8

No that is totally ob surd! If your not as pretty as "your neighbor" who shouldn't get to have children.....what kind of a world do we live in? Who would even suggest that they have the right to tell someone they "can or can not" breed?

Answer 9

I think Hitler had the same idea about creating a master race

Answer 10

of course not - hitler did not give it a "bad name", it is an evil practice.

anytime the government uses aggression (or threat of aggression) to interfere with individual human rights it causes a moral dilemma.
we need to restrict the government to practices we wish only upon ourselves and our loved ones - non aggression and support of liberty.