Should science embrace eugenics again?

[Votto]

LONDON, November 21, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A leading international anti-religion crusader and supporter of Darwinian theory, Dr. Richard Dawkins, has said that the pseudo-science of eugenics that drove the Nazi regime’s genocidal project “may not be bad.”

Since the end of the second world war, the name of eugenics, the social philosophy that the human species or particular races ought to be improved by selective breeding or other forms of genetic manipulation, is one that conjures instant images of the Nazi death camps and “racial hygiene” programs.

In a letter to the editor of Scotland’s Sunday Herald, Dawkins argues that the time has come to lay this spectre to rest. Dawkins writes that though no one wants to be seen to be in agreement with Hitler on any particular, “if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?”

Dawkins holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, but is best known as one of the world’s most outspoken current opponents of religious belief, giving lectures and interviews and writing articles in which “fundamentalist” Christianity is among his favourite targets.

“I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them,” Dawkins wrote Sunday.

Dawkins’ campaign against religion has led him to publish a book, “The God Delusion”, in September this year and he is one of the instigators of the notion, popular with journalists, that the Catholic Church’s opposition to artificial contraception will result in mass starvation.

 

[Moonglow]

There was eugenics going on during colonialism and the slave trade......which was ordained by the papacy and the protestant religions of Jesus Christ...Though Christ never said it was okey dokey which makes it worse...

 

[alang1216]

LONDON, November 21, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A leading international anti-religion crusader and supporter of Darwinian theory, Dr. Richard Dawkins, has said that the pseudo-science of eugenics that drove the Nazi regime’s genocidal project “may not be bad.”

Since the end of the second world war, the name of eugenics, the social philosophy that the human species or particular races ought to be improved by selective breeding or other forms of genetic manipulation, is one that conjures instant images of the Nazi death camps and “racial hygiene” programs.

In a letter to the editor of Scotland’s Sunday Herald, Dawkins argues that the time has come to lay this spectre to rest. Dawkins writes that though no one wants to be seen to be in agreement with Hitler on any particular, “if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?”

Dawkins holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, but is best known as one of the world’s most outspoken current opponents of religious belief, giving lectures and interviews and writing articles in which “fundamentalist” Christianity is among his favourite targets.

“I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them,” Dawkins wrote Sunday.

Dawkins’ campaign against religion has led him to publish a book, “The God Delusion”, in September this year and he is one of the instigators of the notion, popular with journalists, that the Catholic Church’s opposition to artificial contraception will result in mass starvation.

Absolutely improve the breed. Not by selective breeding but there are other forms of fetal genetic manipulation, CRISPR, that can go through a genome and remove 'errors'. There are ethical questions since we might all agree that the gene for MS should be removed, however other genes (height?) might be in a different category.

Things like this WILL happen so we need to have rules in place to guide the research. Happily, I think we already do.

 

[Votto]

LONDON, November 21, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A leading international anti-religion crusader and supporter of Darwinian theory, Dr. Richard Dawkins, has said that the pseudo-science of eugenics that drove the Nazi regime’s genocidal project “may not be bad.”

Since the end of the second world war, the name of eugenics, the social philosophy that the human species or particular races ought to be improved by selective breeding or other forms of genetic manipulation, is one that conjures instant images of the Nazi death camps and “racial hygiene” programs.

In a letter to the editor of Scotland’s Sunday Herald, Dawkins argues that the time has come to lay this spectre to rest. Dawkins writes that though no one wants to be seen to be in agreement with Hitler on any particular, “if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?”

Dawkins holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, but is best known as one of the world’s most outspoken current opponents of religious belief, giving lectures and interviews and writing articles in which “fundamentalist” Christianity is among his favourite targets.

“I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them,” Dawkins wrote Sunday.

Dawkins’ campaign against religion has led him to publish a book, “The God Delusion”, in September this year and he is one of the instigators of the notion, popular with journalists, that the Catholic Church’s opposition to artificial contraception will result in mass starvation.

Absolutely improve the breed. Not by selective breeding but there are other forms of fetal genetic manipulation, CRISPR, that can go through a genome and remove 'errors'. There are ethical questions since we might all agree that the gene for MS should be removed, however other genes (height?) might be in a different category.

Things like this WILL happen so we need to have rules in place to guide the research. Happily, I think we already do.

Abortion is also eugenics, so in a way, it never left us, even after what Hitler did.

 

[alang1216]

Abortion is also eugenics, so in a way, it never left us, even after what Hitler did.

I would sooner trust a parent to make such a difficult decision than I would trust ANY other party.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I'd support it to remove cancer, heart disease and to extend life span. Anyone that would argue against such would whether see someone suffer and die painfully.

 

[deanrd]

Look at those whites living in Appalachia. So many are such nasty people.

Then you look at how much the gays have brought to society.

Maybe figure out why gays are so beneficial.

And right wingers are such damaging leeches.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Look at those whites living in Appalachia. So many are such nasty people.

Then you look at how much the gays have brought to society.

Maybe figure out why gays are so beneficial.

And right wingers are such damaging leeches.

Most gays and Trans are highly educated and most likely learned to accept who they really are within the environment of higher learning. They're already much more open minded and aimed towards self betterment compared to the hicks.

 

[fncceo]

Anyone that would argue against such would whether see someone suffer and die painfully.

Depends on the person.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Look at those whites living in Appalachia. So many are such nasty people.

Then you look at how much the gays have brought to society.

Maybe figure out why gays are so beneficial.

And right wingers are such damaging leeches.

Regional eugenics is also believed by backwards people

 

[Old Rocks]

While removal of several types of genetic disabilities would be a boon, we still know too little about how genetics work to be fooling with factors like intellect and physical ability. Will we have that ability some time in the future? Yes, then comes the ethical questions. That will be for other generations to answer.