Whay this is crazily off topic dudes/dudettes.

Since when is an amputated arm an inherited genetic condition? You have to consider not just the quality of life of the particular person with the condition, but the long-term effects of this condition being propagated. And bear in mind, as I've said before, that most embryos don't successfully implant anyway (or in the case of IVF, most are discarded; they're selected for by various methods as it is) - and that there is screening for very serious and easily-detected conditions anyway. It's not a perfect solution - of course it's not. But it's better than wildly allowing severe genetic conditions to spread.


EDIT: For the record, gladstone has been temporarily banned because he is pissed out of his mind and he will break something. We'll let him back in once he's sobered up.

Gladstone can get pissed?



So who's in charge right now?

*takes small steps away from Sentynel*

*prays desperately for someone to make "stoned" pun*

Nat and I looked after things while he was.. indisposed. All back to normal now.

We do still have evidence though. And really, it was for our own good. He might have deleted the forum!
Sorry, Gladdy, but it was really funny. I daresay that you are pleased we took such good care of you - I'd hate to imagine what it'd be like were you stoned

There you go, Luciene. You could have done it yourself though...

wrote:But if we can prevent them being born in the first place we don't have to spend vast amounts of money supporting people who will by definition have a poorer quality of life anyway, while meaning less are conceived in the future.

Now, that's rather interesting. Should all the unhappy people of the world kill themselves? Is one fetus of equal worth to one newborn? Is a newborn of equal worth to one 10 year old?

There's a difference between being a bit unhappy and needing dedicated medical care 24/7. I'm not advocating forced abortions of foetuses that might be a bit short sighted here.
I'd say no, a cluster of a tiny handful of cells that might successfully develop into a person is not of equal worth to a newborn. Beyond that, sure, equal worth.
And surely it's more humane to select genetically healthy foetuses over unhealthy ones at that stage than the "natural" way of controlling genetic disease, which is the people with it dying horribly when they're unable to look after themselves.
Obviously this is far from an ideal solution and in all likelihood we'll have the genetic modification technology to fix such genetic diseases before other methods of controlling genetic disease become necessary, but should direct genetic modification not become possible for whatever reason, better this than a human race overburdened with genetic disease.

You can be an optimistic unhealthy person or a pessimistic healthy person.
Your happiness doesn't always relate to your health.

Post wrote: Now, that's rather interesting. Should all the unhappy people of the world kill themselves? Is one fetus of equal worth to one newborn? Is a newborn of equal worth to one 10 year old?

Everyone has the same right to life I think. Saying a ten year old`s life is worth more than a newborn is ageism.

It's academic, Sent. The people have the right to choose, Life or Death. Things like bans on abortion and euthasia screw things up... but there's always Swizerland.

And Amsterdam, right?

*drags back on topic...*

People have a right to choose, yes, but how does one know when their choice is right.
Choice is nice and all, but how can you know what's the right choice.



I love playing Devil's Advocate...

That's the whole point of choice. If you could know the perfect right answer you wouldn't have a choice.

One always has a choice, even if there's a "perfect answer*" presented to them.
They can choose to f**k it and pick the one they feel like.
Human emotions blow sometimes, all those rash decisions...

Course, that's the Morpheus way of looking at it.
"[Morpheus:]EVerything begins with choice.
[The Marovingian:]No. Wrong. Choice is an illusion, created between those with power, and those without."

I'll take Morpheus' side momentarily.





*No such thing.

Dansariki wrote: One always has a choice, even if there's a "perfect answer*" presented to them.
They can choose to f**k it and pick the one they feel like.
Human emotions blow sometimes, all those rash decisions...

But if the answer was truly perfect, wouldn't it be the one the chooser "feel like"?

Like even if you are a sadist and intent on hurting yourself by choosing the imperfect choice, automatically, the other one is the perfect one for you, because it causes you the most pain.

...You lose major philosophical points for the Matrix example.

Rational human beings always pick the choice that benefits themselves. Basic idea of Economics.

Free economy economics. Consumer sovereign. Not all economics.

Eh? No. The Free Market means there is no governmental control over the economy, the Consumer calls the shots as competition is huge.

The Consumer is not expected to donate a large part of his income to charity.

But it is encouraged through government tax breaks...