politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
What you're talking about, with using IVF to reduce the chances of genetic conditions, is called prenatal screening. And while it relies on genomics, and even borrows some concepts from Eugenics, it is not Eugenics, at least as far as most people understand and use that term. Eugenics is widely understood to be the pseudo-scientific shield fascists frequently hide behind to justify bigotry, forced sterilization, genocide, and other atrocities. You may think this is just a semantic argument over an umbrella term that can cover anything to do with improving the human genome, but modern geneticists are very careful to disassociate anything they do with the term "Eugenics", due to the authoritarian implications it carries.
So you think the government should have no laws about reporduction?
If a father wants to reproduce with his own daughters, assuming he waits till they're 18, you're cool with that?
Any law against inbreeding is eugenics after all, and your pretty clear that because someone corrupted it, the baby has to go out with the bathwater.
Like, you realize on a long enough timescale, all you're arguing for is the repeated and continual renaming of every system after someone abuses, which only leads to a general populace ignorant of history and that any system can be abused.
You think this is just me being pedantic, but word choice literally shapes how we think.
It matters more than you think it does.
And what you're arguing for is literally why so many ericans are against socialism.
That's the ironic part, you're method is easily and recently disproven. But likely due to that very train.of logic you don't understand it.
It's like a blind man arguing everyone should be blind be cause he never sees anything scary, ignorant that if everyone was blind we'd all be fucked
My guy, you wanna stop putting words in my mouth and have an honest, productive discussion, I'm all for it. Otherwise, don't bother replying.
Also, pay attention to usernames when replying. That was my first comment in this chain, but I have a feeling you thought you were replying to someone you'd already been talking to.
If I've replied to you once why start with this:
This is a two day thread I've blocked multiple low activity accounts in, and a new one only shows up after I block the last one...
Like, it should be obvious what's going on here, but I'm betting a new account will reply in a couple hours after I don't reply to your next one.
Because your one reply to me claimed that I was saying a bunch of stuff that I never said in my one comment?
My account is over two years old with thousands of other comments. My writing style is vastly different than anyone else's in this thread. I'm not creating new accounts to avoid blocks. I'm not out to get you. I'm flattered, but it's not that serious.