Is eugenics good or bad?

Is eugenics good or bad?
Should we kill the weak?
If so, to what degree? All handicapped? Gays? Blacks? Or just the vegetables?

It's a shame to see human evolution come to a halt nowadays. So it's good. People with the best genes should be encouraged to procreate.

that's totally not how evolution works retard

I say we start with OP and work out the details later.

No point in killing them. Just implement a system of incentives for the genetically fit to breed more.

This, so this.

>what is selective breeding

Eugenics is the cure for the cancer of our society. Sterilisation of the weak and the handicapped ppl would be great. Jews niggers gypsies and other non useful scum should be executed

I don't know if a eugenics program is the way to go, but I definitely think some sort of license to be a parent is in order.

Regardless of genesm dumbfuck people shouldn't be having kids.

You realize if eugenics were ever put in place, people on Sup Forums, Sup Forums, and especially /r9k/ would be the first ones up against the wall, right? You don't really think that YOU are a superior genetic specimen, do you?

Cool. You die first.

natural selection

How about instead of killing the weak we just genetically engineer everyone to be sterile by default- gotta take a pill to be fertile that day

And how the first kind of banana we made is basically extinct and the ones we have now are dying off at an alarming rate because they have no genetic diversity and are very vulnerable to a specific type of fungus.

But aside from that, yeah.

It's also sterile, which makes fixing the problem hard.
What with CRISPR and stuff being worked on, things like that probably won't be much of an issue in the near future.

well yeah, but it was fun while it lasted.
but, in all seriousness, that is a definite problem with selectively breeding to the extremes of having insufficient genetic diversity. Or in other words, we can kill the gypsies or the jews but not both. (jk, I don't want to kill either.)

It's bad, because we have retards like you and

who think they know anything about genes and evolution.

Being able to care for our "weak" allows us to carry useful genes into the future, even if it's bundled with something defective like ALS.

We don't need to kill anyone or have selective breeding programs because we are just a hairs breath away from being able to design whatever human being we want.

Listening to people like you would have us burn our entire stock and library, all because you saw some torn pages or a shitty book cover.

not evolution

This. The future of humanity is having a massive library of genes and being able to filter out the harmless ones, not selectively breeding until the gene pool is too shallow to sustain. This is why Sup Forumstards are idiots. They know JUST enough about topics to think they know what they're talking about, but lack a proper understanding of the subject to be able to actually have an informed opinion.

No because industrial pollution has become so bad that its undermining the gene pool. Those who would be fit are relegated to unfit because their grandma was contaminated with a pesticide that altered her childern. Those alterations were were expressed in her grandchildren/great-grandchildren. See epigenetics.

Well also, another question to ask is, what is fit now? Like, most people would probably say a guy in good physical shape, muscular, handsome, healthy. But in our world, do those things really matter anymore? What do you need muscles for? Even our "warriors" don't really need big muscles because we have guns. Handsome people aren't the most desirable as partners anymore, it's people who have power, status, and money.

This is the thing that makes things tricky. Traditionally desirable physical attributes aren't really all that relevant in our society due to our technology.

The problem is, which genes are useful, useless, harmful or harmless is extremely difficult to know and majorly dependent on environmental factors. I could dig what you're saying but there's a huge amount of factors that play into knowing which genes are good for which purposes.

Take sickle cell anemia for instance. At first it seems like a clear deficiency that should be removed from the gene pool, but someone with sickle cell mates with someone without it, you get sickle cell trait which is not only harmless but actually useful as it provides immunity to malaria.

We wouldn't understand all this unless we had let sickle cell anemics interbreed with healthy individuals. Had a eugenics program been in place we probably would never have known this, and if some super-malaria arose at some point in the hypothetical future that knowledge would have been the difference between survival and extinction.

The eugenic is a bad thing because if you think your strong it's because there are weak people. If you think your beautiful it's because there are ugly people. There's always a person smarter, funnier, more beautiful, stronger or anything else than you and it's the same thing at the opposite. You're smarter than someone.
There's no dark without light.

Why is eugenics always about killing with you people? Eugenics is a legitimate form of human advancement and it can work perfectly well with just sterilisation, and can even work to some extent with no sterilisation and only proliferation.

Great post!

nah some of those people still have great minds that can be applied to many problems humans are facing.

veggies can go tho.

If eugenic was working, we all should be already dead

Even a eugenics program based on sterilization rather than killing can still run into issues such as brings up.

unless you're planning a race of musclebound subhumans, just sterilize the tards.

I sometimes wonder about the evolution of humans these days, I work my ass off and have a decent life with my wife, we don't have kids, but one day would like 1 or 2. Yet you get heaps of fucking bogans having 5 or 6 kids and living on the dole. So essentally, the dumb cunts are out breeding us, and my kids will need to work to support the 5 kids 5 kids.

+1

Exactly what i m thinking, not a lot of people would remain around here.

Implying "degenerates" wouldn't continue to fuck like rabbits and have childrens.

I was of the same advice months ago but you just can't stop people when it comes about FUCKING.

Also it would only end into some children black market.

So parent licensing is finally a bad idea.

Eugenics is bad. Ans there isnt anything weak.
There are just humans that are not
adapt.
See Stephen Hawkings, he hase gen problems, but he still contributes to society.
You just have to find a place someone is usefull or can live up to his skills.

And we have dogs with diseases and other illnesses.

>It's a shame to see human evolution come to a halt nowadays.
Yeah, you're wrong.

That dog has been breeded for looks, more than for health, so that's why it's all fucked.

If we stopped breeding dogs for arbritary looks, and bred for health and abilities, it would not be problem

Eugenics tends to be a bad thing, even if you ignore the ethical side of things. Eugenics decreases the gene pool, and makes inbreeding more likely.

Literally this.

Yes, you, faggot that is reading this. If Eugenics was put into place, then you would be executed since you are clearly not a chad or a PhD holder.

depends on what characteristics you're selecting for. right now, humanity is promoting stupidity, and i consider myself to be pretty smart.. so i'm fucked.

or rather, i'm not.

>breeded

No.
Sometimes.
There doesn't have to be a superior, so long as the decent eliminate the inferior.