EUGENICS: PRO or CON ?

Your trying to trrat this like another DAvid "mind fart", delivered in a brief bumper sticker of "insight". if you remove entire generations who carry the alleles for Tay Sachs or Sickling, you would, by nature, have removed Miles DAvis and Itzach Perlman from the gene pool already. This is really a slippery slope that discussing on a chat line by we who have neither experience nor ideas of what and how the processes would be meted out or administered, what would be the directive of "genetic improvement" (would we remove single alleles ?) how would you read future conditions because a fetus carries an allele for, say, diabetes or pancreatic cancer.
Life is merely a minor remission from disease.

How would you select the desired progeny for say, talent or intelligence, would all reproduction no longer involve sex and would, instead be insertion of gene splices? WIth sexual diversity determining genetic outcomes, and the outcomes almost limitless, Id like to know how this would NOT involve genetic engineering in a govt or at lest some kind of institutional lab. DO YOU?

It's one thing not to forget about something, but it's another to obsessively pursue a subject-
this is about the third thread you've posted on eugenics or other
ancillary facets of the subject.

I know there's another thread authored by you on which
I answered con to this same question.

I'm going to answer that I am against eugenics again because
I think it's important that thinking people continue to reject the idea of this concept.

And not to be unkind David, but it makes me wonder if you suffer from feelings of lack of control...
why are you so interested in not only controlling your own life,
but essentially creating a society in which even the very
existence of other people is controlled and to your liking?

I, for one, don't want to live in a vanilla, blond haired and blue-eyed world where everyone
'bred' is assured of their superior brains and beauty and genetic heritage. How boring!

And for someone who considers himself to be libertarian - how hypocritical.

Are your libertarian views only extended to yourself?

It's so interesting to me that you live in one of the most diverse boroughs
of one of the most diverse cities in the world (by choice you say)

yet you're constantly advocating for a planned, genetic homogenous uniformity in people.

I've asked you this before, but I'll ask you again - why don't you
just move thirty or forty miles up I95 to Connecticut?
It sound like Greenwich would suit you just fine.

Your post (falsely) implies that I 'd said that future eugencic improvements had to conform to MY taste.

No. Your post implies that I had a LOCK on future breeding n that
it coud proceed only acccording to my designated pattern.
Eugenics puts the power of choice in the hands of the future parents.
Maybe thay 'll program him to get a 3rd set of teeth.
The future is unlimited.
I did not indicate limitations. I am not a king, to enforce my will.
I did not even think of that; it was your idea.

I dunno. I 've never been there. Maybe I 'll check. Thanx for the advice.

I 'd like government, ideally, to stay out of it except for financial subsidies.

I don't think you'd like it. Ethel Kennedy's family has a house there.

And I know I couldn't have created with my own imagination or design children
more beautiful than the ones I see created through pure random chance all around me every where I go every day.

...Life is merely a minor remission from disease....