• @weeeeum
    link
    English
    4
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Theoretically, to produce the happiest and healthiest humans, yes. In practice, NEVER.

    Aside from near inevitable genocide of existing races, that would occur with the excuse of “purification”, there would be further discrimination against the “impure” populace. Immediate class division would occur between those who are genetically modified/improved, and those who were conceived naturally, without any scientific intervention.

    Companies would only be willing to hire the “improved” humans, and the rest of us will be left to rot in slums.
    It would be unrestrained fascism, scientifically endorsed under the guise of “improving humanity”. All calls from the impure and insignificant would be ignored, as they would be perceived as obstructing scientific and humanitarian advancement. I believe it would be amongst the greatest humanitarian catastrophes that could occur.

    I feel bad that this post is being downvoted, as it is a discussion that needs to occur. Eugenics can be perceived as an advancement to human biology, but when considering human behavior, it would be a rebirth of fascism.

    That being said, I would support doctors advising those with genetically linked, debilitating illnesses, not to reproduce. Keyword though, advisement, not mandate.

    • @lath
      link
      32 hours ago

      While eugenics might sound good on paper, they might not work that well in practice. Also on paper it is said that these genetic differences that often show up as disabilities are a natural barrier against super plagues that might wipe us all out in one go.

      Fine tuning ourselves into more perfect, single characteristic beings would actually make us far more vulnerable to extinction.