Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lurkette
Would you care to state who those people are that you would like "out of the gene pool"? This is not at all consistent with some of your other statements on reproduction. Speaking as someone who's sitting at the cabana at the moment, but not yet in the gene pool...
|
Maybe I can field this one. When I was a lot younger and just learning about ideas like natural selection and evolution, I figured that natural selection worked with humans for hundreds of thousands of years, but was becoming less prevelant because of medicines and modern empathy (allowing mentally or physically retarded children to live). Looking back, my attitude was infantile and morally reprehensable, but I had that attitude none the less. Later I realzed a few things:
1) Morals are a large part of what seperates us from less intelligent animals. It is an important facet of our humanity, and it something to develope and understand, not something to ignore. Morality is important.
2) If someone is born and survives, that is because the environment allows for it. If a child is born with a disability and survives, that is because he or she lives in a society that can care for a disabled person. Because we, as a socierty, are able to pity and empathize with those who are less fortunate, the reality of living in our environment, and thus natural selection, has changed.
So when Ustwo is (hopefully joking) about keeping people out of the gene pool, he is referring to a way of thinking without the above considerations.