(August 10, 2017 at 11:57 pm)Astonished Wrote:(August 10, 2017 at 5:49 pm)Alex K Wrote: If editing out diseases is commonplace, why would rabid eugenicists still want to force-sterilize people? It seems to me like the capability of editing out undesirable traits in the germ line would drastically reduce any support for the inhuman brute force approach. As misguided as they may be, eugenics proponents don't automatically want to hurt people unnecessarily. At least I don't see how it would follow from gene editing capability that people get sterilized.
Exercise a little critical thinking. If people aren't getting sick, they're not dying, living longer, consuming more resources, and generally more likely to do lots and lots of fucking. Overpopulation would become the one 'disease' that can't be overcome. Building in a safety net against that would be the only logical thing to do rather than asking people to use their own discretion in birth control and contraception. If all the important shit is done in a lab anyway, fertility doesn't seem to need to happen anywhere else. Besides which, as I mentioned earlier, parents can be screened and evaluated for fitness in child-rearing so that unfit and abusive parents or those in an unstable and financially rocky situation don't end up with kids they can't properly care for. There's literally no downside to this.
Where on earth did you get the idea that health and economic prosperity correlates with having too many children?
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
