Are some people too weak to live?

[Dis]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
Everyone who actually agrees some people are "too weak to live" disgust me.

First off, consider that it's human life. Human life--no matter what kind--has a value to it. Just taking out the parts you don't like is inhuman; it's still murder. This thread disturbs me, so I'll go ahead and Godwinize it by reminding you how the Nazis had the whole "lives not worth living" thing.

Secondly, "weakness" is only as weak as society defines it. Today, being a vegetable is weak. 200 years in the future, who knows what could be weak? Be careful with what you're doing.

Thirdly, "weak"--disabled mentally or physically--people teach us things. They teach us that it's alright not to be perfect, or even that it's alright to be much less than normal. Amongst themselves there are exceptional exceptions that show us how incredible perserverance or hard work can make up for nature giving them a shitty go, and they can still be prosperous citizens.

And, think about this for a minute. If you remove the "weak" people, there's still going to be a class that's weaker than the others. It will only be natural for society to adjust so that the line for "weak" moves up that much higher, and then you've got a whole 'nother class of citizens that are probably quite normal by today's standards but after the first cleansing just the bottom layer of the world.

Finally, would you like it if everyone was perfect? What would be the point?

---

Not sure how much I leaned off the main topic. But the "I don't think some people are too weak to live, but I do think that some people are too weak to live" people started me off.

did you read the thread? no where does it discuss removing people from society. What kind of cold hearted people do you think we are.

Half the thread posts deal with the word irregardless.

[mrmitchell]

well, dissident, uber saying "we save far too many people," was enough. Not saving them when you can is really not too much different than just removing them.

[Sava]

I'm not saying we shouldn't save people...
EDIT: hmm that didn't come out right... we should discourage passing on genetic deformaties and defects...

btw mrmitchell, my dad is disabled, so you can suck deez nutz

[Dis]

but everyone has a right to reproduce don't they?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Dissident
but everyone has a right to reproduce don't they?

I don't believe that right usurps humanity's collective right to protect itself from genetic deformaties... I'd like to see technologies progress to the point where if people at high risk of passing on birth defects wish to have children, they can go to a clinic and have some sort of artificial conception and insemination.

[mrmitchell]

. we should discourage passing on genetic deformaties and defects...

btw mrmitchell, my dad is disabled, so you can suck deez nutz

See? You just proved it yourself. Just because your dad was disabled doesn't mean you are.

I don't believe that right usurps humanity's collective right to protect itself from genetic deformaties..

Oh, yeah, sure. Crush the individual. Everyone who doesn't work toward the greater community is selfish.

[:) Smiley]

A tech fix to genetic defects will solve most of the problem, who after all is gonna want their kids to have defects?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Sava
I don't believe that right usurps humanity's collective right to protect itself from genetic deformaties... I'd like to see technologies progress to the point where if people at high risk of passing on birth defects wish to have children, they can go to a clinic and have some sort of artificial conception and insemination.

Oh, so now it's OK for them to reproduce, so long as they don't get to enjoy the fun part? Geeez, you're a mean one, Mr. Grinch.

[Sava]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
See? You just proved it yourself. Just because your dad was disabled doesn't mean you are.

he became disabled from a stroke, not by birth... and plus, many here would argue I AM disabled

Oh, yeah, sure. Crush the individual. Everyone who doesn't work toward the greater community is selfish.

again you keep mischaracterizing me... I think we need to find a balance between personal liberty and what is in society's interest. You are making me out to be some Nazi or something... your don't know **** about my life and the struggles my family has been through because of my dad's disability. So when you make stupid assertions and elude to the notion that I'm against helping people, it pisses me off.

Doc: they can still have sex

[:) Smiley]

All this sex and genetics made me just realize something. If conservatives were so opposed to homosexuality, then they should just legalize it completely. Given that homosexuality is determined genetically, and since gay couples can't have children genetically, then within a century there would be no more homosexuals.

[mrmitchell]

Smiley:

Then again you also have genes that skip a generation (I forget the term) and also just out-of-the-blue mutations. So you couldn't completely eliminate it that way.

(But what do I know? I'm no doctor or geneticist.)

[Dis]

ahh but it is not genetically passed down.

homosexuality is an anomaly in the brain. It is something that happens to a certain percentage of the population irregardless of the family's history of homosexuality.

[Sava]

no Diss, the gay hating conservatives believe homosexuality is a CHOICE!

[mrmitchell]

D'oh! Or, Smiley, you have that it's not passed down by genetics (thanks Diss).

[GePap]

Wake up people!
Human beings are a species of animals, and the point of all species is to be fruitful and multiply. We might be sentient but we aren't going to break free of our one reason for being in this world, which is to make more humans.

[Tingkai]

Why do so many have allergies and asthma these days. Back when I was a young-un, way back in the 60s, I knew one kid who had asthma. Now it seems like half the kids get it.

Pollution. Modified foods. Chemical flavour enhancers. Are we creating a world that we're allergic to?

[Urban Ranger]

I think it's the pollution.

[Az]

modified foods? pray tell, how would that work?

I actually don't think it's pollution. I think it's the way kids are raised, being sheltered and indoors all the time.

[East Street Trader]

Hitler thought it a good idea to help nature along by killing off people he thought defective and by encouraging those who conformed to his idea of a master race to inter-breed.

Not many have subsequently shared his views.

But I do think that an issue is developing as to exactly how far society can sensibly be expected to go to adapt the physical world, institutions and behaviour and so on with the object of smoothing the path of those who have particular needs.

In the UK the single strongest lobby group - for many years now - have been the disabled lobby. That is partly because it is, for a politician, a route to some cheap sympathy but it is also because our House of Lords is chock full of elderly folk who are themselves suffering all those disabilities which advancing age tends to bring with it.

Anyway there is just no way to please this lobby. Measure after measure is introduced favourable to disabled folk but whatever measure is discussed it is never enough, always they demand far more still.

So my sympathy ran out a long time ago. I am just unwilling to spend the vast sums needed to adapt the whole of the physical world so that it is accessible to every person no matter what highly specific set of specific needs that person has. There are lots of situations in life where I have to adapt my own behaviour because others have organised things in a way that suits them. Expecting the way to be perpetually made smooth is unreal.

Fundamentally, if you have a peanut allergy and special measures are required, the obligation to take those measures is yours.

[Az]

Originally posted by GePap
Wake up people!
Human beings are a species of animals, and the point of all species is to be fruitful and multiply. We might be sentient but we aren't going to break free of our one reason for being in this world, which is to make more humans.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I think it's the pollution.

Do a lot of Chinese children have allergires?

[JellyBean]

Originally posted by Smiley
A tech fix to genetic defects will solve most of the problem, who after all is gonna want their kids to have defects?

Surprisingly, some deaf people were surveyed and found to be unwilling to select gametes so that their children were not deaf, even if it were possible. The motivation, apparently, was that they would then stay within their parents' rather segregated deaf community.

I can't find the original article (from about four years ago), but here's a similar sentiment :

We will oppose any uses of genetic technologies that seek to eliminate deafness from society however unrealistic that goal.

I've heard speculation that the increasing prevalence of immune disorders (asthma, allergies, etc) may be due to decreased exposure to allergens in the environment. Basically, we're not being exposed to as many different bacteria as our ancestors, so our immune systems have less to do and start attacking other things (like pollen grains or peanuts).

Finally, a hypothetical question for those who believe that human life must be preserved at any cost:

If there were one person in the world with such a bizarre range of life-threatening illnesses that it took the dedicated effort of the rest of humanity to keep them alive and functioning, should it be done? No rest, no free time, just every single moment growing the crops that feed the researchers who desperately develop new antibiotics to keep up with one of their patient's menagerie of chronic infections.

Personally, my test is this: if the effort required to keep them functional is greater than the amount of effort they would then have to give back to society, it's not worth it.

[Dis]

Originally posted by DaShi


Do a lot of Chinese children have allergires?

hmm I never thought of that. But I still doubt the air quality in China is nearly as bad as U.S. cities. Remember, most of them ride bikes, walk, or use mass transit. Maybe it has to do with automobile exhaust.

[Az]

JellyBean: that's that stupid 'deaf culture' argument. Personally, I think people should be persecuted for causing such disabilities upon their children.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by JellyBean


Personally, my test is this: if the effort required to keep them functional is greater than the amount of effort they would then have to give back to society, it's not worth it.

So do you just euthanize all the elderly?? It would seem to be the logical extension if you only put the amount of effort into people that you expect to get back. That would be a scary society

[Ben Kenobi]

Azazel:

Then you would persecute me. I would not be willing to interfere, but for a different reason than the nebulous 'deaf' culture.

Gamete selection? Could they tell which sperm bore the defective gene?

[Az]

Apparently they can. Otherwise it's a purely hypothetical question, albeit still a very interesting one.

[I Am Jeff]

I have a unique insight to what is wrong with this kid, I too have a nut/peanut allergy along with asthma. Not to mention a few other problems that have made life a bit more difficult but have made me a better person (considerably imo). (I wrote a lot, skip to last paragraph if you feel like it)

First off I think the parents/doctor are being a little extreme about the nut allergy thing. There is no need for a nurse with needle ready incase he feels the need. Simple solution is ban food from class rooms and only have it in lunch rooms. Then the kid should have an epipen, which is a needle that will inject itself and can be carried around with you. If he feels or knows he ate a nut he could open this up, have it inject and then get help to go to the hospital. BOTH sides are being unreasonable. And it is ridiculus to say that it could take 30 minutes the get the meds, he could carry them around on his person.

Also for an allergic reaction to occur (in my experience) it needs to get into the body. Good places for this are the mouth, nose, eyes, etc. Touching it on your skin does not cause a reaction. Again in my experience.

For example the last time I had an allergic reaction (back in 88 or 89), I was in preschool and we were preparing for passover. I had the job of moving nuts from one bowl to another (why they gave me this job is beyond me they knew my allergy). I did it and I was fine, about 10 minutes later I reacted. Why you may ask? I rubbed my eyes and it was clear because that is the area that was swollen. There is nothing that frequent washing of hands can not cure.

Personally I had it worse (at least medicaly) then this kid and I was able to attend school almost on a normal basis.

I think his mother and doctors made him paranoid about everything and I think it is all overblown. Trust me it sucks how almost all candy/cookies "May contain traces of peanuts". Look it is there. But I eat them anyway and I decide to take the risks because I feel the risks are worth taking in order to live an good life. And Like I said it has been almost 16 years since my last nut reaction, AND I TAKE ALL OF THESE RISKS. All it takes is a little bit of smarts and common sense to figure out what is most likely "safe" and what is probaly dangerous. Shame on the school, the parents, and doctors. (unless this kid has some strange condition not mentioned)

[mrmitchell]

About the thing with making your kids perfect before they're born:
Why? What good does making them babied do? I wouldn't want my parents to have configured me to not have X disease, or so forth. Painful things, even if they suck, serve a good purpose for humans.

---

But I still doubt the air quality in China is nearly as bad as U.S. cities

But there's five times as many of them.

(And IIRC don't winds bring in a lot of dust from the desert in Mongolia to China?)

---

Personally, my test is this: if the effort required to keep them functional is greater than the amount of effort they would then have to give back to society, it's not worth it.

Damnit. Does no one around here get the point of valuing human life?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Sava

Doc: they can still have sex

Just so long as they don't reproduce some other way right? What are you, some kind of anti-Pope?

"Sex for making babies? Ugh! How sick!"