anyone else like watching nature documenteries?

Question

if so, do you think that all the meddling we do with nature will effect the spesies down the line? what i mean is, lets say we help a fawn that is born with some major defect (perhaps not being able to stand on its own): do we have to worry about the entire line that comes from that deer suffering the same problem, or will that problem work itself out the very first generation after we release it back into the wild? will the weakness be cut-off because of its weakness, or did we just totally screw all future deer everywhere by introducing a "lame duck" to breed its "handicap" to the others?

Answer 1

I DO like watching nature documentaries. I usually observe the opposite of what you have described, though. So many programs show us what happens to the less well-suited individuals, and I sometimes wonder how the film-makers can stand by and watch that happen. However, as an environmentalist, I am glad that they allow nature to take its course.

I am more likely to wonder what will happen to the human race as we learn to treat all kinds of ailments and disabilities. Even such things as eyesight ... so we survive with poor eyesight ... are we likely to have poorer and poorer eyesight as generations pass? I'm a hypocrite about that topic, though, as I have a 22-yr-old son who is quadriplegic as a result of a car accident 2 yrs ago. He survived only because of medical interventions, so whatever risk-taking or careless gene he has still lives in him and could be passed on. On the other hand, he has a brilliant mind. On the third hand (if there were such a thing) he and I both have inherited depression.

My point is that we have interefered with natural selection in humans. It isn't too surprising that we interfere with natural selection in the wild. And we have a long history of making both good and bad decisions as a species. Who knows?

Answer 2

You cannot "breed" handicaps unless they are a disease like hemophilia, muscle dystrophy, etc...(must be an allele controlled trait). If the matter is chromosomal, (like Down's Syndrome) the human will never be able to reproduce anyways. (I am talking about humans just to relate the subject) Just because there is a risk of the children having a certain disease, is it right to deny them not to have children? NO, obviously it is not right to deny them to have children. Nazi's believed it was right to kill them, but hopefully you are not a Nazi and do not kill people with handicaps and certain ethnicities or religions. (I am really exaggerating this just to prove a point, but I am trying to say it is not right to deny off spring unless it causes major epidemics, not just disease.)