• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Procreation of the hereditarily disabled (1 Viewer)

Should procreation between people with major hereditary diseases be frowned upon?

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 66.7%
  • No

    Votes: 9 23.1%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 4 10.3%

  • Total voters
    39

Nebuchanezzar

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
I'll do my bit for the gene pool and not pass on my horrendously mutated genes.

kthx.
if you want to do a favour for the gene pool you ought to do a bomb into it: there'll be no genes left in dat pool

haha, oh mang i'm just kidding though:haha:
 

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Free market babies. if the market wants retards then the parents will produce retards. we've no right to intervene in the reproductive free market. this also presents another chapter in the case of "the infinite series against abortion"
So, youre saying we should leave abortions to the invisible hand, and not irrational intervention?
 

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
So, youre saying we should leave abortions to the invisible hand, and not irrational intervention?
/this has been a concurrent series on elegant dinner conversation
 

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Youre so wise
Like a gay Buddha
 

Nebuchanezzar

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
i liked you better when you were a mod banning me for no reason and then unbanning me after i presented weak cases against my bannage
 

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Son, I am tired and very cranky. Having my judgement questioned in my own courtroom is NOT something I am prepared to tolerate

one more word outta you nd i'll hol you in contempt
 

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,719
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
I wanted a poll :(:(:(

answer yes or no or undecided in your posts plz

EDIT: somebody seriously needs to fix this 'two minutes after post' polling rule
What poll question would you like?
 

katie tully

ashleey luvs roosters
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
5,213
Location
My wrist is limp
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Hereditary (either totally debilitating or mortal) diseases are difficult burdens to bear. If you had a condition, say cystic fibrosis or huntington's disease, that had a high chance of passing on genetically to your children or grand-children, would you subject, nay, sentence your offspring to that kind of existence?

Should procreation between people with major hereditary diseases (that is, autosomal dominant diseases, where only one parent with the condition is necessary to affect a child, and there is a 50% chance a child will inherit the gene) be, if not regulated, frowned upon by society?

Discuss.
No. Maybe.

I'd have to see a list of proposed diseases that should be regulated.
Huntington's Disease is autosomal dominant, and I don't think people with Huntington's should be banned from breeding. Other diseases such as Muscular Dystrophy are AD and there is no chance of the affected patient having sex anyway.
There are several motor neuron diseases that do not become symptomatic until mid life. Do I think these people should have regulations which stipulate whether they can breed? No.

I find it a bit narrow minded to infer that all people with genetic diseases have poor quality of life and that a genetic disease is something that should be 'bred' out by lack of breeding.

CBF reading any of the other responses yet.

EDIT: Read them. You guys are fucking fucked up. OMG IT'S DISEASED, TO THE PITCHFORKS FOLKS.
 

katie tully

ashleey luvs roosters
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
5,213
Location
My wrist is limp
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
I'd like to see a list of autosomal dominant diseases that should warrant regulation. I'll propose a list of such that should be left the fuck alone.

And this is why I support euthanasia! Who are we to say that a person with a chance of developing Huntington's Disease symptoms at 35 should not be born because to be born is cruel. Let them decide at adulthood whether their life was in vain or whether they're happy to have had 35 years (which is longer than the average age for adults in many African countries. But I agree with banning Africans from having babies, those guys are just retarded)
 

KFunk

Psychic refugee
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
3,323
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Mods: May I recommend that we merge this thread with the one on biofuels?
 

moll.

Learn to science.
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,545
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Isn't it a statistical certainty that the genetically recessive diseases will eventually be eradicated as it is?
For instance, if a couple both have the recessive gene for the disease, there is only a 75% chance that the child will end up with at least one of the same gene. Multiplied by many generations, this will eventually lead to a shrinking of the population who carry the gene.
 

rant

&&&&&&&&
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
200
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Recessive diseases will probably be eradicated eventually, but the dominant ones need only an unaffected single carrier.

I can't really give a list of 'major diseases' barring Category:Genetic disorders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or something. I can give examples of what I think should be frowned upon:

*Diseases which are fatal and reduce one's life expectancy drastically (e.g. Cystic Fibrosis, Huntington's etc.) are the ones I'm most against, imagine your child knowing the age that they would die- around their thirties too-it would be fucking heartbreaking.

*Diseases which disable significantly (I can't really judge what's significant or not, but serious cases of Marfan Syndrome and Spinal Muscular Dystrophy are some examples) disallowing one from having the choice to live a healthy, average life. they don't have to be fatal but they might as well be

Other gene defects can cause seizures, or blindness, or two nubs to appear on the bottom of your elbow; most hereditary diseases are not deadly and do not reduce one's quality of life, there's no need to abort, no need to attach a stigma, these individuals are capable of fulfilled, joyful existences. Breed away~!!

EDIT: read katietully's post(s), I agree, who are we to say that the individual's life was in vain? but then again, what if it was? what if it was torture for them to go on?

who becomes responsible for the pain they've suffered? surely it's their parents? I see no one else that could be at fault
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top