Posted by jukebox fuckup Well, I used the example of marijuana, which is relatively harmless, even when compared to alcohol. ...did you know the prison population has increased 200% in 16 years due to drug offenses? (http://www.jstor.org/pss/1147683). ...remember Love Canal? The Hooker Chemical Company, which was responsible for illegally dumping chemicals there and causing generations of birth defects, leukemia, and other horrible diseases, was never held accountable in the court of law for their misconduct. They were not even fined, and the site was later cleaned up at the government's expense. Since the "War on Drugs" has started, the prison population has increased eightfold. There are 2 million currently in federal prison. According to the Bureau of Justice statistics, the severely mentally ill are heavily overrepresented in prisons (16%), where they have one licensed psychologist per 2,000 inmates. The severely mentally ill do not belong in prisons where they have almost no hope of receiving quality treatment. In the state of PA, it costs roughly $30,000/year to incarcerate somebody. There is no evidence proving that mass incarceration reduced crime. If anything, many researchers have evidence stating that mass incarceration of non-violent offenders causes more crime than it prevents. African Americans make up 12% of the population, but represent nearly 50% of the prison population, yet there is much convincing evidence that Caucasians are engaged in more drug use than African Americans ( http://www.ncbi.nl...ticles/PMC2377408/). My professor just conducted a study and found that the darker the shade of skin, the harsher the sentence administered by the judge. People go to prison... unless if they can afford to hire a private attorney. The system is designed to benefit the wealthier segment of society (ie. the CEOs of Hooker Chemical Company that were responsible for the premature death, pain, and suffering of hundreds of people) at the risk of screwing over the "lesser evils" (ie. nonviolent drug offenders) The criminal justice system is very flawed.

I couldn't agree more, the criminal justice system is very flawed. I was just surprised that you condone drug use to an extent however you want the mass public to be drugged to prevent pregnancy. You trust an individual in a society to choose if a substance is okay to put into their bodies, even if that substance causes terrible problems to all of society. On the flipside, you don't trust people to decide for themselves if they should conceive a child. You feel that for the greater good, our water supply should contain birth control drugs. Maybe your argument would make more sense if you were against drug use, against alcohol, against smoking, against anything else that could cause harm to ourselves or others.

Mental health and prisons are a very said subject, we are failing those people by locking them up.

I'm not a big fan of long term incarceration either, I believe in short sentences of hard labor, reduce the revolving door problems significantly.

Posted by jukebox fuckup Do you know what the term "eugenics" means? No offense, but you totally used it incorrectly. "Main Entry: eu·gen·ics Pronunciation: \yü-ˈje-niks\ Function: noun plural but singular in construction Date: 1883 : a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed" (from merriman Webster).

I'm not going to bother reading your longwinded posts past this point. Your stance on selective breeding that you described for us previously pretty much epitomizes eugenics.

Posted by willskith I'm not going to bother reading your longwinded posts past this point. Your stance on selective breeding that you described for us previously pretty much epitomizes eugenics.

...telling people that reproducing at a young age is detrimental because it leads to lifelong disadvantages is not eugenics.


You should look up terms before you use them, because clearly you do not understand what "eugenics" means.

I did not say anything about race, breed, or genetics.

Posted by Nvr2loud I couldn't agree more, the criminal justice system is very flawed. I was just surprised that you condone drug use to an extent however you want the mass public to be drugged to prevent pregnancy. You trust an individual in a society to choose if a substance is okay to put into their bodies, even if that substance causes terrible problems to all of society. On the flipside, you don't trust people to decide for themselves if they should conceive a child. You feel that for the greater good, our water supply should contain birth control drugs. Maybe your argument would make more sense if you were against drug use, against alcohol, against smoking, against anything else that could cause harm to ourselves or others. Mental health and prisons are a very said subject, we are failing those people by locking them up. I'm not a big fan of long term incarceration either, I believe in short sentences of hard labor, reduce the revolving door problems significantly.

I intended to reference lifelong, irreversible disadvantages rather than temporary impairment (ie. the type of temporary impairment you have from a drink). Also, I do not put birth control in the same category as illicit drugs.

I do not think the technology exists to put an effective amount of birth control in the water, so my point was very hypothetical. Given that it is hypothetical, I am going to be the jerk that says that if the technology exists, there would be no negative effects on the body

There is some evidence that fluoride can cause DNA damage in brain cells & that it can impair learning and memory, and that is a chemical commonly found in drinking water. I am not sure of the threshold or how much the benefits outweight costs. At any rate, substances with the potential to damage are already being consumed.

Trusting people to make the decision to reproduce is difficult when some parents abuse, neglect, rape, or kill their children. Sometimes a female has an unplanned pregnancy and is pressured to have a child. Conversely, sometimes a female has an unplanned pregnancy and wants to have the child, meanwhile her partner or family does not want her to. The hypothetical ideal of birth control in the water eliminates unwanted and/or unplanned pregnancies and would probably reduce the abortion rate.

Posted by jukebox fuckup ...telling people that reproducing at a young age is detrimental because it leads to lifelong disadvantages is not eugenics. You should look up terms before you use them, because clearly you do not understand what "eugenics" means. I did not say anything about race, breed, or genetics.

You stated that you believe our government should be able to dictate who is fit to procreate. Selective breeding. Eugenics in a nutshell.

Posted by jukebox fuckup Take a test to prove you are a competent human being and prove that you are economically/emotionally stable.

Read:
competent: smart
economically stable: smart enough to hold a job or born into wealth
emotionally stable: not suffering from mental illness

...what part of the definition of modern eugenics don't you understand?

Posted by hydrotherapy Read: competent: smart economically stable: smart enough to hold a job or born into wealth emotionally stable: not suffering from mental illness ...what part of the definition of modern eugenics don't you understand?

Truth. Just because you're deciding who should breed by non-ethnic standards doesn't mean you're not deciding who should breed by criteria in hopes of improving the human race.

Where else can a post about how much kids piss us off turn into an argument about eugenics?

Bravo, uer... bravo!

Posted by maypost Where else can a post about how much kids piss us off turn into an argument about eugenics? Bravo, uer... bravo!

It started because some were saying people should quit "breeding" altoghter.

There is a group of people who naturally don't breed - homosexuals. If you feel that strongly about it - join them, problem solved.

Posted by hydrotherapy Read: competent: smart economically stable: smart enough to hold a job or born into wealth emotionally stable: not suffering from mental illness ...what part of the definition of modern eugenics don't you understand?

competent = fully matured adult.
economically stable = ...Willy was the one complaining about welfare, not I. Consistent with what I said earlier, I have never heard of a 16 year old being economically stable enough to take care of themselves and somebody else
emotionally stable = ...the Andrea Yates tragedy could of been easy prevented if she listened to her psychiatrist and held up on having another kid.

Brain maturation is not genetic, nor does it have racial barriers.
Intelligence is not entirely genetic. It is highly malleable by the environment
Wealth/the ability to hold a job is not genetic.
Mentally illnesses are not entirely genetic/inherited, either (ie. the diathesis stress model)

Posted by AnAppleSnail Truth. Just because you're deciding who should breed by non-ethnic standards doesn't mean you're not deciding who should breed by criteria in hopes of improving the human race.

...but it has nothing to do with fostering "favorable" genetic traits or removing "defective" ones.

I am genetically the same person I was at 2 years old, 16 years old, and 22 years old. So are you.

I AM GOING TO TWIST MY OWN WORDS TO PROVE YOU ALL WRONG

Posted by Esoterik It started because some were saying people should quit "breeding" altoghter. There is a group of people who naturally don't breed - homosexuals. If you feel that strongly about it - join them, problem solved.

Well in that case...You busy Saturday night?

Overestimating genetic influences on IQ and mental illness is extremely problematic and has always been.


To clarify on the mentally ill, the vast majority of people with a psychiatric diagnosis can function perfectly fine in society. The chronically mentally ill (the minority that got screwed over the most with deinstitutionalization and ended up homeless) are frequently appointed legal guardians. I honestly have no clue what happens to their children in those circumstances.

So lets read between the lines, and not put words in my mouth or draw assumptions here.

Its funny because you actually put words in my mouth and contradicted yourself at the same time!

Posted by jukebox fuckup Take a test to prove you are a competent human being and prove that you are economically/emotionally stable.

Posted by jukebox fuckup economically stable = ...Willy was the one complaining about welfare, not I.

I read this board because you guys make my day.

Posted by jukebox fuckup There is some evidence that fluoride can cause DNA damage in brain cells & that it can impair learning and memory, and that is a chemical commonly found in drinking water. I am not sure of the threshold or how much the benefits outweight costs. At any rate, substances with the potential to damage are already being consumed.

I don't agree that fluoride should be in our drinking water. Only I should decide what goes into my body.

If a person is unable to make a decision about their own health (including a pregnancy) then legal action should be taken to ensure a competent person (power of attorney) is responsible to make decisions for that person. The system you propose would therefore deem everyone unable to make certain health decisions for themselves. I only support a government 'power of attorney' system over society when certain activities or substances (some drugs, smoking) cause harm without any positive benefits. We should not be allowed to do drugs that are known to kill us, but have no other useful purpose. We should be allowed to decide for ourselves if we wish to breed (even if some people just shouldn't breed)

Posted by maypost Well in that case...You busy Saturday night?

DAMN IT! This zing was the perfect ending to this thread but you all just couldn't leave it alone could you!?!?!

Posted by willskith Its funny because you actually put words in my mouth and contradicted yourself at the same time!

I do not think for a moment that welfare is bad. The working poor are out there, and outsourcing/globalization basically left unskilled workers with nowhere to go but the low wage service sector, whereas in the past they would be able to secure manufacturing jobs that were typically unionized with feasible wages. It does not bother me if my taxes pay for the working poor on welfare "for years to come".

Fuck, the starting salary for a certified teacher at the public school in my boyfriend's hometown was just brushing the poverty line at $18,000/year.

There is a difference between the working poor and somebody that refuses to work. The latter is what I was referring to for economic stability.

Posted by jukebox fuckup I do not think for a moment that welfare is bad. The working poor are out there, and outsourcing/globalization basically left unskilled workers with nowhere to go but the low wage service sector, whereas in the past they would be able to secure manufacturing jobs that were typically unionized with feasible wages. It does not bother me if my taxes pay for the working poor on welfare "for years to come". Fuck, the starting salary for a certified teacher at the public school in my boyfriend's hometown was just brushing the poverty line at $18,000/year. There is a difference between the working poor and somebody that refuses to work. The latter is what I was referring to for economic stability.

I agree completely.

Side Note: Our teachers make a very good living here, better then most other professions.