@Lucienne d'Anwyl do you feel that the benefits of traditional eugenics outweigh the compromise to classical liberalism (if you answer no to that that might clear up alot of the moral fagging here)
Eugenics would mean removing fatal genetic diseases from populations, not producing superhumans or other fantastical ideas
@Storin society already practices a base level of eugenics
Pig people?
for example
you wouldnt fuck someone with down syndrome
@Fenririri citation? Sorta interested to read
no such animal Saul
You would not want a baby with a downie
you likely wouldnt fuck someone with a major birth defect
this is eugenics like or not
there are such things as mutual exclusions in the human condition
and it keeps bloodlines from becoming contaminated with major disorders
Just like a white person having a baby with a black girl and the baby coming out black and looking nothing like them must surely be GUTTED
lol
@Storin not brave new world, but adult gene therapy and editing
@Saul I am kinda pissed off right now, so I am not going to bother searching for a sauce, if that's alright with you.
Aint on board dude <:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>
Editing your own genes sounds good
etc
if possible
Imagine wasting our genetic mastery on curing diseases there are better uses
or even better
robotic limbs/lungs
Keep your clone troopers to your self <:PepeL:625351341656506378>
@Kealor i mean i honestly could care
/heart etc
It's more moral to remove a dysgenic trait from the population via eugenics then to allow it to pollute the population
so can live for a long time
i think people should fug who they want
and just keep the brain
but eugenics comes in degrees
he is focused, pysically tough; but she reads people better and anticipates what he doesn't
if for example
specialization
Why can we not use robotic lungs etc
@Flavius Stilicho like changing people into dinosaurs
people sterilized people for having certain conditions
that is genetics
@ManAnimal so there are no strong, brave and smart people? Lol ok
eugenics
