Forced Genetic Screening

[BLADE]

Wants everyone to post gifs.
Did not post a gif.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Wants everyone to post gifs.
Did not post a gif.

 

[Kaeb]

 

[Cailst]

THat said genetic testing is something I would consider a decent idea anyway regardless of the nature of the breeding pair, simply for the knowledge of any potential problem genes that could afflict a child, genetic markers for say, some degenerative disorder that passes though the gene pool but only activates in certain situation or every few generations or so...I know many people whom are basically on medication for life because their parents passed on a host of bad bad genes that even a century ago would have made their offspring non-thrivers that would have never survived to adolescence now as adults have passed on the same problems - and often times worse to their children, who are even more in need of aid.

so incest or not? Its not a bad idea to do so ahead of time so potential parents can be prepared for the possibility of what they may have to contend with....forcedd? I dont know...Part of me thinks so just to try and straighten our own species genepool - survival and all- but at the same time the idea also sickens me due to the whole big brother state sorta overlord feel to it. I wont lie, the father of my children was chosen from a collection of my male friends and I did some " minor" levels of asking and talking about family health and such before I settled.... and If there was finally clearance for human testing on the " female to female fertilization) I'd have a look into the potential issues that could come from my wife's ( or anothers) genetics too, for my own knowledge...but the idea of forcing it sits uneasy with me

Yes, it could have some aspects of big brother to it but the government already does many things for the safety of its people. The CDC does tons of things for public safety. People aren't allowed to knowingly transmit AIDS. Why should it be okay to inflict that on the next generation?

Forced anything, especially regarding reproduction and sexuality, is nearly always a bad idea.

Banning child molestation is a pretty popular measure due to the negative effects on the children inflicted with it. Genetic diseases also inflict pretty negative consequences on children. But now, we can predict them, they are no longer God's punishment upon the parents but something that should have been avoided.

 

[BLADE]

 

[Kaeb]

Good ol' Tumblr.

 

[BLADE]

A-yep.

Banning child molestation is a pretty popular measure due to the negative effects on the children inflicted with it.

We ban child molestation because children lack the maturity to give consent. Negative effects of any sexual morality ban are weighed against individual and collective rights. Is the inability to grasp concepts like this hereditary or environmental?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Rane Maldalay]

I apologise ladies and gents for my righteous high horse.

Genetic screening... Oh, so much can go wrong with this... Even if the end goal is to protect the children to be born, the rights and freedoms we would give up for this is beyond measure. Right to freedom of choice, gone. You could no longer choose who to be with without at least some government agency scrutinizing the decision. The databases, who gets control of them? Get one bad apple agency with that power, hello genetic profiling and segregation. It'd be the Aryan Nation everywhere. Skin tone is a little different, you cannot breed with my son, no sir. Hair a different color, not my daughter you Cad.

There are so many things wrong with this concept that the benefits, even if they are for the children, are far far outweighed by the cons. We give up freedom of private choice, the threat of being tracked, profiled and judged based on whatever misfortune our genetics bring us. We did not choose to be born so we should not, in the slightest, be judged by those circumstances. Hell, its in our constitution, (The US constitution for those who are not of the US.) the second one in this document.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I am not particularly religious myself, but I do believe in the right of Free Will. The right to make mistakes, choose for ourselves what horrors or blessings we bring into this world, through right or wrong decisions. If two people of close relations couple and a child is produced with genetic defects because of it, then those two people have a responsibility to take care of their child or children.

And of course, this has the potential to throw a significant wrench into the subject of love. Two people who love each other but aren't... 'genetically compatible" can adopt, but while that is a stop gap measure upon the couple at best, one that does admittedly have the potential for real growth, it is still stopgap. It does throw a strain upon a relationship if they are stopped by 'law' from procreating. And yes, while the argument can be made that if they can't get around that stumbling block, they didn't really love each other, I say it does have more of an impact than one might think.

To deliberately misquote a character from a game... "I am all for following the rules, until they stop people from doing what is in their right to do." Laws are supposed to be here to protect the common man from other men, to allow a legal manner in which to proceed with Justice against any and all trespasses. When the laws themselves overstep their intended boundaries and begin infringing upon the people they are supposed to serve, what then?

Okay, I'm getting off the horse now.

 

[Vaanes]

How amusing. Skin color is rapidly losing its way of segregating people so a new way must be found! We must go deeper! Into the genetic code itself!

Reminds me of the movie where something like this is a main part of the plot, everyone gets tested and any genetic defects could potentially bar you from something that you want to achieve. Gattaca, that's it. Sounds like a pleasant way to deal with the problem of losing the genetic lottery to me.

Personally the last thing I would want is for some government agency to have a map of my DNA on file somewhere. Call me paranoid but it seems like a breach of privacy. Besides, maybe in the future there might be a way to "scrub out" the bad genes that cause the sort of thing this might be introduced for.

 

[Cailst]

How amusing. Skin color is rapidly losing its way of segregating people so a new way must be found! We must go deeper! Into the genetic code itself!

Reminds me of the movie where something like this is a main part of the plot, everyone gets tested and any genetic defects could potentially bar you from something that you want to achieve. Gattaca, that's it. Sounds like a pleasant way to deal with the problem of losing the genetic lottery to me.

Personally the last thing I would want is for some government agency to have a map of my DNA on file somewhere. Call me paranoid but it seems like a breach of privacy. Besides, maybe in the future there might be a way to "scrub out" the bad genes that cause the sort of thing this might be introduced for.

The aim would be to prevent people from having poor genetics in the first place. And we already use DNA to solve crimes, it wouldn't be any greater breach of privacy than what we currently have.

I apologise ladies and gents for my righteous high horse.

Genetic screening... Oh, so much can go wrong with this... Even if the end goal is to protect the children to be born, the rights and freedoms we would give up for this is beyond measure. Right to freedom of choice, gone. You could no longer choose who to be with without at least some government agency scrutinizing the decision. The databases, who gets control of them? Get one bad apple agency with that power, hello genetic profiling and segregation. It'd be the Aryan Nation everywhere. Skin tone is a little different, you cannot breed with my son, no sir. Hair a different color, not my daughter you Cad.

Every government program has the risk of a few bad apples. Still, we maintain the capacity to destroy the world and we have not exercised it. I'm sure we would be careful in selecting people to maintain the system.

There are so many things wrong with this concept that the benefits, even if they are for the children, are far far outweighed by the cons. We give up freedom of private choice, the threat of being tracked, profiled and judged based on whatever misfortune our genetics bring us. We did not choose to be born so we should not, in the slightest, be judged by those circumstances. Hell, its in our constitution, (The US constitution for those who are not of the US.) the second one in this document.

Why should we have the freedom to doom others to unfortunate genetics?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I am not particularly religious myself, but I do believe in the right of Free Will. The right to make mistakes, choose for ourselves what horrors or blessings we bring into this world, through right or wrong decisions. If two people of close relations couple and a child is produced with genetic defects because of it, then those two people have a responsibility to take care of their child or children.

The freedom to wreck the life of a child?

And of course, this has the potential to throw a significant wrench into the subject of love. Two people who love each other but aren't... 'genetically compatible" can adopt, but while that is a stop gap measure upon the couple at best, one that does admittedly have the potential for real growth, it is still stopgap. It does throw a strain upon a relationship if they are stopped by 'law' from procreating. And yes, while the argument can be made that if they can't get around that stumbling block, they didn't really love each other, I say it does have more of an impact than one might think.

Homosexuals and infertile people seem to be capable of loving each other.

To deliberately misquote a character from a game... "I am all for following the rules, until they stop people from doing what is in their right to do." Laws are supposed to be here to protect the common man from other men, to allow a legal manner in which to proceed with Justice against any and all trespasses. When the laws themselves overstep their intended boundaries and begin infringing upon the people they are supposed to serve, what then?

Okay, I'm getting off the horse now.

And a law similar to what I'm proposing would protect children from the uninformed decisions of their parents.

We ban child molestation because children lack the maturity to give consent. Negative effects of any sexual morality ban are weighed against individual and collective rights. Is the inability to grasp concepts like this hereditary or environmental?

Inquiring minds want to know.

The reason why sex requires maturity to consent is because it potentially harmful. There are tons of things we do that require no consent from an affected party but do not have the potential to harm.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Obviouzly zos vanting to not submeet to ze screening procezz must have somzing to hide. /nazi voice

 

[BLADE]

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Obviouzly zos vanting to not submeet to ze screening procezz must have somzing to hide. /nazi voice

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

 

[Crosby]

I only read the first paragraph and decided I didn't like where this was going.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I only read the first paragraph and decided I didn't like where this was going.

 

[Kaeb]

This forum has become as gif crazy as I am.

I like it.