After a 7 hour marathon of utter aggravation playing the Nintendo DS game, Trauma Center, it is revealed that Delphi, a terrorist sect intent on Bio-terrorism in the form of a form of disease called Gangliated Utrophin Immuno Latency Toxin, or G.U.I.L.T., uses a Darwinist thought pattern and arrives at a single conclusion.
Modern Medicine is a disease, just as Polio, Smallpox, and the like are. Our medical knowledge allows people that should have naturally died a longer, fuller life, and therefore interrupts the balance of nature by prolonging human life more than it ever should have been. This keeps the gene pool "impure" and is the justification of enacting Bio-terrorism.
After some thought and discussion about this with friends, I've come to agree with this line of thinking...to a point that is. Although I believe that it is unwise and potentially detrimental to the human race as a whole to keep the sick alive, we are acting on our natural impulse to survive and produce offspring. But I'm also wondering about all of your opinions.
Is bio-terrorism ever the "right thing" to do when if we let our actions hurt the human race in the long run?
Should we allow the terminally ill or seriously sick to reproduce, thereby creating offspring with a greater chance of death or serious illness?
It is fair that our human selfishness will get in the way of our survival as a species?
Discuss. I'm very interested to see anyone opinions on this.
ok - 1. "is bio-terrorism ever the right think to do". Please tell me you're joking. Bioterrorism is totally indescriminate, and thus is not ok, ever 2. "should we allow the terminally ill or sick to reproduce?" The only diseases passed along this way are genetic conditions. Other than that, a sick parent =/= a sick kid 3. "is modern medicine a disease?" This is more subjective, but no, I don't think so. Any advance in human standard of living that does not contradict a basic moral prinicple is a GOOD thing. modern medicine falls under this catagory. 4. "Is is fair that human selfishness will get in the way of our survival as a species?" No, of course it's not. Thats just the contradiciton of being human.
I've similar discussions with people who have mentally or physically handicapped people. Although some of thoughts went along this line, we even went on to talk about things like giving a female teen a hysterectomy because she would never use the parts due to the fact that she is Mentally handicapped and physically handicapped. (Full wheelchair bound)
Some of our friends have kids that are autistic. We spoke about, if they had the opportunity to 'cure' them, (give them a magic pill) would they?
Their answer surprised me.
They said that even though raising their sun is a struggle sometimes and he requires a lot of personal contact and supervision, they don't think that they would ever try to intervene, because if he "suddenly got 'better', Josh would cease to be 'Josh'!"
So much of who he is now, is built around all those little nuances that they would effectively have to 'meet' and learn to love a new person should he 'get better'.
If it weren't for modern medicine I'd be dead right now, twice over, at least. That's ignoring colds and flues I took medicine for. No, wait, three times. Forgot about that fluid in the lungs incident, boy that hurt. Actually, you know, I don't know if that would have killed me if left unattended, but damn was it ever uncomfortable.
Go eat a dick for wanting me dead. I'm also going to go ahead and evoke Godwin's Law, you fucking Nazi.
After of a frustrating night of playing the PC game "Minesweeper," I realized something about modern warfare. We live in a society that's become so desensitized to violence that we now find "entertainment" in the most senseless and depraved acts of warfare: it's "acceptable" and even "fun," for no reason other than the satisfaction of our carnal bloodlust, to do things like populate a field with hidden explosives and make a game out of watching people frantically search around for them, with nothing but environmental clues to go by, until they've either completed our sick challenge, or have become maimed or killed by accidentally tripping one of our "funbombs." And, furthermore, as if one casualty weren't enough to satisfy our insane, adrenaline-fueled addiction, we reapeat this action over and over, even when we have positive, constructive activities we could otherwise be participating in, frighteningly often simply in the name of "boredom." What have we, as a culture, come to?
Is bio-terrorism ever the "right thing" to do when if we let our actions hurt the human race in the long run?
No. Because there's nothing hurting the human race. We're not overrun with the ill, we're not using all of resources to care for the ill, terminal or otherwise.
Should we allow the terminally ill or seriously sick to reproduce, thereby creating offspring with a greater chance of death or serious illness?
Yes. Not every disease is autosomal dominant, not everyone has every trait. You don't pass on every illness. And you're so wrong here. Sickle cell anemia, when in it's "half" form, doesn't hurt the human as much as the full version, and actually protects them from malaria, which kills the "healthy" people without your supposed "illness." So who is more fit?
It is fair that our human selfishness will get in the way of our survival as a species?
No. And this is where you're the most fucking wrong, building on your last idiotic comment. In catastrophic species-ending events, it's not about genetic homogeneity to some spec which you feel is the most fit. For a species to survive, you need as much genetic diversity as possible, in the hope that somewhere along all the heterogeneity a trait arises which protects you or helps you survive the illness.
By your argument we'd all be a monoculture, and all the more fragile as a species. Species diversity and survivability depends on its diversity, and that includes as much random mating as it can manage.
Short version: You're wrong. You're an idiot. And don't talk anymore.
Jesus, well I certainly got opinions. Not to say any of you are wrong, you all pretty much put me in my place. But all I really want to clarify is this:
Go eat a dick for wanting me dead.
I see how you arrived to the conclusion that these are my ideals (a false statement), I assure you, they are not. In no way, shape, or form do I want any human to die when it can be prevented. All I wanted were the opinions of all you here, nothing more.
XD Of course not. We're all doing what comes naturally to us. We survive, and use any means to achieve that goal. It is our nature, and the very point of our lives, to live and procreate. Yes, it *could* hurt us in the long run, this is what I believe. But we have the capacity and the ability to change what needs to be changed and become more than what nature would allow, so to speak.
Do I believe that some people deserve to die? No
Do I believe that some people shouldn't have been born? Yes
Do I believe that we should actively thin the population? No
Do I believe that we should keep on progressing as we are now? Absolutely.
XD! You have NO idea how badly I want to invoke the law.
Even though its neither here or there when you put the topic in perspective, I'll answer your question. No single people/race/whatever in particular, except in one instance. Those who are known to be severely (key term) mentally handicapped, who could serve no viable purpose in society. Those who can not function without serious aid, such to the point where an entire family or community is hindered by it.
And to make this as perfectly crystal clear as I possibly can be, I do NOT condone the killing of said people. They are still a living human being, with every right to live as a "healthy" human does. If a mother knows before a baby is born that they will be like this, however, I support an abortion of said child completely. I am pro-choice, but that is another matter altogether.
