Christians and Eugenics

[serenity]

I read an interesting article by Stephen Gould, the late evolutionist who had many problems with Christian creationists--I preface this post like this to avoid charges of "agenda."

According to Gould, the eugenics movement earlier this century--in which "inferior" people such as the mentally challenged, and others--were to be consciously phased out of society, through highly prejudicial, morally-brutal methods (enforced sterilization, for example).

Secular conservatives thought this a grand idea--culling the herd, getting rid of the weak, and so on.

The left saw the movement, bafflingly, as a "progressive" idea.

And who, practically alone, stood against this morally-bankrupt idea?

Christian groups, particularly conservative Christians.

I have no real point here, i guess. I just find this very interesting.

[eugene40]

I read an interesting article by Stephen Gould, the late evolutionist who had many problems with Christian creationists--I preface this post like this to avoid charges of "agenda."

According to Gould, the eugenics movement earlier this century--in which "inferior" people such as the mentally challenged, and others--were to be consciously phased out of society, through highly prejudicial, morally-brutal methods (enforced sterilization, for example).

Secular conservatives thought this a grand idea--culling the herd, getting rid of the weak, and so on.

The left saw the movement, bafflingly, as a "progressive" idea.

And who, practically alone, stood against this morally-bankrupt idea?

Christian groups, particularly conservative Christians.

I have no real point here, i guess. I just find this very interesting.


I doubt they are totally against it. THey just can't admit it because then we as a society would have the power of their god in our hand. And we couldn't do that could we,, because then it might just disprove the power and existence of their almighty... (almighty my arse),,, but they can just go along ignoring the unfortunate like they usually do (not all just the ones I perceive)
I think it is a great idea personally,,, we could get rid of downs syndrome, epilepsy, autism, hereditary diseases like heart disease,, some cancers,, basically the cooler part of gattaca. Is it culling the heard, getting rid of our humility as a human race. Maybe I just see it as giving everyone a chance at a normal life....

[serenity]

I doubt they are totally against it. THey just can't admit it because then we as a society would have the power of their god in our hand. And we couldn't do that could we,, because then it might just disprove the power and existence of their almighty... (almighty my arse),,, but they can just go along ignoring the unfortunate like they usually do (not all just the ones I perceive)

Hey, you know me, Eugene, I"m on your side 99% of the time.

But I don't think the conservative Christians of seventy years ago are the same creature we've got perverting itself today. Thos people, whatever their beliefs, where not nearly a spotent a political force (well, not in most ways...it's a complex issue I suppose); and I see no reason to doiubt that they were speaking largely out of a moral sense...and in fact were right, as far as I"m concerned.

But if a similar issue were to arise today, they would definitely support it, if for no other reason than to attack the evil leftists, who today would likely oppose such a thing.



I think it is a great idea personally,,, we could get rid of downs syndrome, epilepsy, autism, hereditary diseases like heart disease,, some cancers,, basically the cooler part of gattaca. Is it culling the heard, getting rid of our humility as a human race. Maybe I just see it as giving everyone a chance at a normal life....

Through enforced sterilization???

I just can't get behind that.

Besides, I think you like the idea only because "eugenics" is so close to your name.... :) :)

[eugene40]

[QUOTE]Hey, you know me, Eugene, I"m on your side 99% of the time.

But I don't think the conservative Christians of seventy years ago are the same creature we've got perverting itself today. Thos people, whatever their beliefs, where not nearly a spotent a political force (well, not in most ways...it's a complex issue I suppose); and I see no reason to doiubt that they were speaking largely out of a moral sense...and in fact were right, as far as I"m concerned.

You might be right. But I don't know,,, we all know they aren't too big on science :D


But if a similar issue were to arise today, they would definitely support it, if for no other reason than to attack the evil leftists, who today would likely oppose such a thing.

Good point.



Through enforced sterilization???

I just can't get behind that.

Besides, I think you like the idea only because "eugenics" is so close to your name.... :) :)

Not enforced sterilization,,,, but if I was to have a kid and they told me he was going to have autism but they can fix it and make him better before he was developed.. I would say yeah go for it. I can't imagine anyone saying no I would rather them be autistic. Or epileptic, or have some heart defect that will ensure that they never reach 30. I just wouldn't want that for my kid. I would want them to have the best life possible. That is how I view it...

And though the name is great and is attractive... it doesn't hold any power over me....

[serenity]

but if I was to have a kid and they told me he was going to have autism but they can fix it and make him better before he was developed.. I would say yeah go for it. I can't imagine anyone saying no I would rather them be autistic.

ok, I gotcha. Hard to argue with that one.

[Antipathy]

I remember reading about "positive" and" negative" eugenics. Where positive - if I recall correctly - is the promotion of selective breeding and genetic engineering. And negative is things such as culling and sterilization.

Still, even with positive eugenics, I would be wary of it. I mean, who decides what the desirable attributes are?

[lord tammerlain]

I assume it would have been the Northern conservative christians who would have been against eugenics as a policy. Like the protestants and Lutherians of the Mass and further northern states.

It would not have been the Southern States conservative christians.

[cpwill]

I doubt they are totally against it

:confused: WHY? because you can't imagine that christian groups would actually hold a moral position rather than being the power-grasping christian versions of khomeni that many on the left wishes they were?

i have bad news for you; christian groups have been at the forefront of major moral movements throughout history, from the abolition of slavery to the progressive era of social care.

THey just can't admit it because then we as a society would have the power of their god in our hand.

:lol: now that's a laugh. have you ever heard the story of the tower of babel, my friend?

And we couldn't do that could we,, because then it might just disprove the power and existence of their almighty...

:rolleyes: alright, explain to me how the ability to sterilize a crippled person means there is no God :p

I think it is a great idea personally,,,

yeah, creation of a master race of humans devoid of any weakness has been a reoccuring idea throughout several 20th century movements. typically we remember these movements for their brutality.

we could get rid of downs syndrome, epilepsy, autism, hereditary diseases like heart disease,, some cancers,, basically the cooler part of gattaca.

by depriving them of their basic human rights, yes. i thought you were a big fan of individual rights? thought that was why you opposed the christian conservative movement?

Maybe I just see it as giving everyone a chance at a normal life....

except, of course, those that have to be "neutralized" first.

[eugene40]

WHY? because you can't imagine that christian groups would actually hold a moral position rather than being the power-grasping christian versions of khomeni that many on the left wishes they were?

Yeah pretty much ;) ha

i have bad news for you; christian groups have been at the forefront of major moral movements throughout history, from the abolition of slavery to the progressive era of social care.
Really,, then their were no religious people in the south. And moral is still subjective,,, like the whole gay thing.

:lol: now that's a laugh. have you ever heard the story of the tower of babel, my friend?
Isn't this a strip club in new york?


:rolleyes: alright, explain to me how the ability to sterilize a crippled person means there is no God :p
Well if god makes everyone then he makes handicapped people... If we can supress and change that... then what does that mean for God. It means A. he doesn't exist, or B he exists but we don't need him anymore.



yeah, creation of a master race of humans devoid of any weakness has been a reoccuring idea throughout several 20th century movements. typically we remember these movements for their brutality.
I am just speaking personally if I could spare my child of a hard life of being handicapped, I would take that opportunity.

by depriving them of their basic human rights, yes. i thought you were a big fan of individual rights? thought that was why you opposed the christian conservative movement?

How do you figure that,, I am for putting landmines on the border. Pro death penalty, Pro choice, Think people like Bush cheney et all should be beaten about the head and face.. Think bureacrats should have their achilles heal sliced at the first screw up due to their idiocy. How is that pro human rights? And technically like embryos that are aborted they aren't people they have no rights yet. did I say round up the handicapped in pens and liquidate them.. no I said if we can take preventative measures to reduce and eliminate these diseases then I am all for it. And I am opposed to the christian conservative movement because they are trying to force their beliefs on the rest of us... I am not trying to force a belief just for making a opportunity for people to choose if they want a better life for their kids. I am kooky like that.


except, of course, those that have to be "neutralized" first.

You're silly.

[cpwill]

Yeah pretty much

well then you can't exactly be counted on for the most objective analysis, can you? ;)

Really,, then their were no religious people in the south.

:) you must not be aware that the abolition movement actually started in and originally was based in the South.

And moral is still subjective

everyone says that, and nobody believes it.

Isn't this a strip club in new york?

former monument to man's smallmindedness, stupidity, and most of all, pride.

Well if god makes everyone then he makes handicapped people... If we can supress and change that... then what does that mean for God.

:shrug: nothin.

It means A. he doesn't exist, or B he exists but we don't need him anymore.

:lol: now how do you figure?

I am just speaking personally if I could spare my child of a hard life of being handicapped, I would take that opportunity.

alright, here i was thinking you were agreein with the reasoning of the original post "enforced sterilization to cull the herd".

How do you figure that

well, to quote you, the gay thing, for example.

I am for putting landmines on the border. Pro death penalty, Pro choice

:lol: pro killin anybody, eh? ;)

Think people like Bush cheney et all should be beaten about the head and face

no, just given a book of economic theory and had border security politics explained.

And technically like embryos that are aborted they aren't people they have no rights yet.

what makes 'em not human?

And I am opposed to the christian conservative movement because they are trying to force their beliefs on the rest of us..

that'd be where that bit about individual rights earlier would come in.

You're silly.

:D silly like a fox.

[Soren]

Well if god makes everyone then he makes handicapped people... If we can supress and change that... then what does that mean for God. It means A. he doesn't exist, or B he exists but we don't need him anymore.The bit in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy(the book) about the man who proves black is white and white is black and then proceeds to get run down at nearest zebra crossing seems appropriate here.
I am just speaking personally if I could spare my child of a hard life of being handicapped, I would take that opportunity.Is this choice about their suffering or your own? There are worse evils than suffering.

[cpwill]

I assume it would have been the Northern conservative christians who would have been against eugenics as a policy. Like the protestants and Lutherians of the Mass and further northern states.

It would not have been the Southern States conservative christians.

:lol: and where in the world do you get this?

[eugene40]

[QUOTE]well then you can't exactly be counted on for the most objective analysis, can you? ;)
umm,,, hmmm good question.

:) you must not be aware that the abolition movement actually started in and originally was based in the South.
Actually yes I did know that, Yet remind me history major,, Were they the minority or the majority in that one.. And wasn't the majority religious as well... Could it be the denomination that was the difference?

everyone says that, and nobody believes it.
Actually I believe that,,, and a lot of people that I know believe that as well.. why don't you believe it.

former monument to man's smallmindedness, stupidity, and most of all, pride.
Doh,,, I always mix the two.

:lol: now how do you figure?
God has a plan for everyone correct? God had a plan for a child to be autistic, We undid that.. Does that mean he doesn't exist or we don't need him anymore.

alright, here i was thinking you were agreein with the reasoning of the original post "enforced sterilization to cull the herd".
Oh for crying out loud,, i am not that far..... right :D ;) :p

well, to quote you, the gay thing, for example.
So because I care for and support my friends and relatives I am against christianity,,,, there is far far more complex reasons why I do not like not believe in christianity... not just the majority of them not liking gays.

:lol: pro killin anybody, eh? ;)
Well let me think,,, criminals or potential terrorist crossing our border, Convicted killers, and the potential for life but not actual life.... Oh yea pretty much anybody... come on CP,,, please... I wouldn't be pro killing say Elisha cuthbert,, she is way too hot. Or any other hot girl for that matter. :D

no, just given a book of economic theory and had border security politics explained.
They need a lot more then that,,,, a PR 24 in certain areas would so them so good I would think.

what makes 'em not human?
because they are potential for human beings,, not actual human beings. Read any abortion thread,, or thread that turned into abortion thread on here.


that'd be where that bit about individual rights earlier would come in.
Just trying to keep that the way things are,, without anyone trying to hedge the line a little bit.

:D silly like a fox.
Yes,, yes you are...

[eugene40]

The bit in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy(the book) about the man who proves black is white and white is black and then proceeds to get run down at nearest zebra crossing seems appropriate here.
Yes it would,,, accept zebra's are real.

Is this choice about their suffering or your own? There are worse evils than suffering.
I have worked with austistic, and other handicapped children and seen how rough their life is and I am sorry if I wouldn't want to have my kid have to rely upon someone for the rest of their life or for the severe ones be in a home for the rest of their life... I am selfish like that. sheesh.