Why is eugenics wrong? It was great for the Scandinavians

random mutation, not heritable

What's going on in this picture? Is it just some examples of curved spines amongst children or is there some additional meaning to it?

Maybe that's why he clamoring for it?

Its not accellerating evolution at all, its actually preventing it, evolution created and selects new beneficial traits through mutations. Eugenics is almost always about preventing mutations.

>Every country that has practiced eugenics did it sensibly
Seems to me you don't really know much about the history of eugenics then.

It hurts feelings thats why its not allowed for NONJEWS. The truth is that jews hate smart goyim and they dont want us goy getting smarter so they teach us eugenics is bad for us but obviously its good for them as eugenics is the only reason kikes got smarter than whites.

Only bad mutations tho

It doesn't have to be the state though. We're doing parental eugenics right now by letting people abort their downs syndrome kids.
We could extend that to more common problems, as we identify genes that favour diseases like cancer, or that stunt intelligence. We could leave the choice to parents and they would still do it.

>accelerating evolution
It's what it does though. When selection is toughened, the species genotype shifts more quickly.

What you determine as "bad" mutations may actually end up as positive ones in the future.

No these are bad genes like down symdrome or any genetic disease.

No user, haven't you seen those movies where a special needs kid saves someones life using their tard powers?

Imagine a future disease that only people with a certain genetic disease can recover from. If we breed out this disease, we conceivably would never find a basis for a cure.

It's not that simple to classify genes as completely useful or useless

>It has never been used as a political tool because it would not make any sense. Even if you are a pain in the ass. The government would still want you to reproduce if you are healthy.
Here I was thinking we could talk about positive eugenics by promoting healthy families reproducing rather than realising it’s bait

Sickle cell anaemia is caused by the cells distorting once they release their oxygen
If you’re heterozygous for this trait you body kills off malaria more easily
BOOM YOU DUN NO

Autistic but correct

And if you are homozygous you die young.
I prefer relying on medicine.

this is the stupidest post i've ever seen

that was natural selection.
Same shit happened in old-ish armenian diaspora and christian minority communities in the Middle East.

>evolution created and selects new beneficial traits through mutations

While true, I would argue that with the modern world and it's technologies such as contraceptives, classical evolution theory has little effect on selecting truly beneficial traits.

Beneficial traits for today's world would be something like social skills and high IQ. The first one is kinda dealt through (but very little, as introverts also manage to have kids for the most part) but the second one isn't increasing naturally at all. I don't have the data, but I would say that high IQ might even have less children than low IQ ones, which is actually going backwards.

*high IQ families

We have better methods today.

>It has never been used as a political tool because it would not make any sense
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

>Eugenics is almost always about preventing mutations.

...

Keked

>accelerating evolution

gotta love how the american looney religious cults fucked over an entire generation of pupils in the 00s.

peak soy

>Why is eugenics wrong?
It is provisionally wrong. Just because people who place it above all tend to advocate the violation of property rights.
Non-leftist eugenics is the undeniable future of humanity.

>Also if you don't understand why the state policing who is allowed to marry and reproduce with whom is a taboo, you wouldn't survive an eugenics programm.

>No. You're thinking of [accelerating] cancer.
Actually, that would be treating childhood cancer. Eugenics would actually decrease overall levels of cancer.

In case anyone was wondering, it was a picture of childhood rickets in children.

Eugenics is discouraged because the elite wish to maintain a monopoly on the genes that allows them to be elite.

Would the average basketball player in the NBA be supportive of a breeding program designed to create more tall people? No, he'd insist that anyone could make it into the NBA, they just have to practice hard enough. :^)

Same with the elites in general. They have to uphold the facade of meritocracy and "hard work anyone can make it!".