NBC's Snyderman: "It's Pro-Science To Abort Children With Genetic Defects"

reply to post by Sinny

...see the beauty of selective breeding means, as long as you select those qualities to breed, you end up with em!

Selective breeding only works when the environment (and its effects) are totally controlled. Not possible. In fact, run-amock environmental changes are causing all the genetic, cellular and protein mutations behind all our "modern diseases."

Doesn't make any sense to me to kill the victims and let the contaminations continue. Like the farmer said, "Gotta clean the barn before you treat the herd."



[You might wanna run a quick search on "epigenetic."]

Originally posted by Sinny
reply to post by beezzer

 

Noo noo noo, see the beauty of selective breeding means, as long as you select those qualities to breed, you end up with em!

No it doesn't.

Not when science doesn't have the slightest clue of how the human genome even works...

What if selectively breeding for traits you want, is actually what your "gene pool" doesn't need at all... What if it needs to do what it's currently doing, in order to maintain the survival of your genes and "ideal traits'. Long term, what could happen if you remove the natural order of the human genome itself, and interrupt it with your own naive assumption of how the genome should operate. Based on the crude method of, "Take out the bad stuff and keep the good stuff."

I think it will have compounding, exponentially destructive results, as already seen with breeding of dogs, and other animals. Abnormalities, some obscene, and most unseen. I think it could halt human progress altogether.

Nobody is asking the right question, should you trust the people running these tests? What if they make a mistake and you murder a healthy child? What if the wrong people get put in charge of the testing?


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Kind of scary to think about.

Is it possible this abortion dilemma in the US will one day come about to people advocating genocide and eugenics? Here in this day and age? What happens when doing the "right thing" doesn't solve a problem and doing the wrong one does? Yea, that's a problem alright. The world is going to get A LOT smaller in the future and there is only so much to go around.

reply to post by SyphonX


Well... Practice makes perfect come on! You know the gov have f*cked around with humans! Its just all shhhh..

And to the poster above you, I agree, some things are purely genetics, others are environmental, I'm all for cleaning the environment to

Originally posted by Sinny
You say "Eugenics"

I say "Selective Breeding"

www.msnbc.msn.com...

China has had a eugenics program in place for some time now the ratio of men to woman will leave about 40 million men unable to find wives. It only stands to reason that homosexual behavior will become rampant eventually leading to a civil war due to the communists outlook on this type of behavior. See the above link for more details.

reply to post by Finalized


There'll stil be 6 bilion of us left


Noo I'm completely joking! Lol.. Its been hard day of debating and I'm rather cynical at this point ahaa.

reply to post by Azadok2day


Ohhh well, that's Chinas problem, not mine lol.

Controls population, which I agree with though. But that's a different can of worms I can't afford to go into right now...

Please don't bash me! LOL

On a closing note, before I grab dinner, I don't view humans as superior to other animals, and we practice all sorts on those.

I never have double standards, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Stop killing the wolves and pigeons, and I might consider pro life ideals

Well hoorah for Eugenics!

Well Hoorah for the master race!

Who made the supporters of that ideology GOD?

Disgusting?

Yeah.

It's not pro-science to abort children because they have genetic defects. Wouldn't t be the exact opposite? Pro-Science would be finding a way to correct these defects so they hopefully don't appear in the future. Saying it's pro-science to abort a children because of genetic defects just give lead way for a new Hitler of our time to get rid of certain ethnic groups he or she doesn't like. Personally I probably would want to abort a child because I don't want to have deal with a child like that. I understand it might seem wrong in the eyes of other people but it's just a preference of mine. This view might change later on though since I'm still young but it's just the way I feel.

Forgive me if this post strayed off or didn't stay off topic or is restating something that somebody had already said in the thread because I just read the first page and the last page before I posted.

Never mind I did not read the last page I though there was only four pages.

I don't see the down-side to this. We are the ONLY species on the planet that not only prolongs the lives of our genetically inferior offspring, we allow and encourage them to mate, thus contaminating the gene pool further. We not only should be allowing this type of prenatal procedure, we should be encouraging it, if not demanding it be done. Preemptive eugenics is the only smart thing to do to advance the species in a positive direction.

Ask Juliana Wetmore
source

and her sister.... another source
see what they think.

There was a time (a long time) in the history of the human race, when a child born with severe defects was left/allowed to die. Mammals now, such as our buddies cats and dogs, allow their defective offspring to die.

Treacher Collins Syndrome

Treacher Collins syndrome (TCS), also known as Treacher Collins–Franceschetti syndrome,[1] or mandibulofacial dysostosis[2] is a rare autosomal dominant congenital disorder characterized by craniofacial deformities, such as absent cheekbones.[3]:577 Treacher Collins syndrome is found in about 1 in 50,000[4] births. The typical physical features include downward slanting eyes, micrognathia (a small lower jaw), conductive hearing loss, underdeveloped zygoma, drooping part of the lateral lower eyelids, and malformed or absent ears.

is what affected Juliana Wetmore. Her parents decided to have another child...same problem. Who's being selfish?

Really? Do you all want Juliana's life?

I'm with Sinny -- broken package? Please, let me go. I will survive...my soul will find another unbroken package.

I have seen WAY too many suffering kids, with extreme disabilities that are never completely overcome, who are NOT enjoying a decent quality of life.

Flame away....just, if in a future life my mother discovers I would have Juliana's problem, or her sister's "...please, mommy....NO! I don't want to...it's horrible."

@ beezzer: A person who becomes "disabled" as a result of an accident or injury is NOT THE SAME, as Juliana. Her condition is genetic.

reply to post by Azadok2day


CORRECTION: China had a population control program in place. They were expanding faster than their available resources would support. That is COMPLETELY different than what is being suggested here. You are trying to compare apples to corn in this case...

reply to post by dreamingawake


Well, we all knew this is where things were headed, it was only a matter of time. Unfortunately, I can already tell you that this is just the beginning. Eventually, it might become state mandated to abort children with genetic defects, as well as state mandated to"euthanize" old people instead of providing them proper medical treatment (this would simply be good policy as health care has become nationalized, and the country is low on money, where the money goes needs to be rationed). In addition, there has been talk of denying medical care to overweight individuals because they have not been eating properly.

Unfortunately, this will continue until science can prove that individuals are intrinsically valuable, which will not happen anytime soon, even though it should be obvious enough.

In the end, of course, this kind of policy will only serve to harm those who made it, as they will be looked upon by future generations as tyrants, idiots and scientifically and philosophically inept.

Originally posted by Mandrakerealmz
Its "Pro Science"........... Wow. And how did these babies get these genetic defects? Could it be a group of old men with too much power consistently poison the planet and our environment to further there NWO agenda?

Is that "Pro Science" or "Pro Retarded Old Men"?

My thoughts exactly.I wonder if they would track back the genetic defect to where it really came from and what company caused it.I remember Thalidmide was given for moring sickness in the 50s but I doub't that they paid all of the disabled childrens medical costs... instead medicaid did.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Sinny
reply to post by beezzer

 

Noo noo noo, see the beauty of selective breeding means, as long as you select those qualities to breed, you end up with em!

That scares the hell out of me.

WHO gets to decide?

WHAT is their criteria?

reply to post by beezzer


Exactly, Beezzer. And this kind of thinking is probably going to start being applied to many more aspects of policy in the next decade.

Finally a way to rid us of people with red hair......

Originally posted by Mandrakerealmz
Its "Pro Science"........... Wow. And how did these babies get these genetic defects? Could it be a group of old men with too much power consistently poison the planet and our environment to further there NWO agenda?

Is that "Pro Science" or "Pro Retarded Old Men"?

EXACTLY ... well said! ... these elitists are in for a surprise when their NWO eugenics plan BACKFIRES in their inbred faces.

talk about genetic defects...LET'S START WITH THE ILLUMINATI BLOODLINES...shall we.

hmmmm