Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ginsburg is promoting taxpayer funded abortions for poor women.
I don't see Republicans advocating that.
So yes there is a difference but you are intent on making them one in the same.
But they do not advocate policies which promote poor People not having children, which is Eugenics by the definition used as "rekindling" in this thread.
But they do not advocate policies which promote poor People not having children, which is Eugenics by the definition used as "rekindling" in this thread.
Ok but you are trying to connect it to the Republican party.
It was Ruth Ginsburg's interview that sparked this.
Right-wing and Left-wing aren't all that clear cut.
Eugenics had two broad wings of support in its heyday. The Racial Purists like the Nazis and various American elitist "intellectuals" and the other were the Progressives who believed that society should be directed by Top Men at all levels.
The main difference was that the Racialists admitted they were Totalitarians who believed that only they were fit the rule over the peons whose only value was to serve the state and the ruling class. The Progressive believed the exact same thing, but deluded themselves into believing that they were doing it for the benefit of the peons and that by using them to serve the state and the ruling class that they were somehow making the world a better place.
That is why I think that when authoritarian "liberals" call themselves Progressives I think it is very fitting and somewhat disturbing. They are purposely comparing themselves to the basically soft totalitarians.
NO more disturbing than some of the things I see some Cons suggesting these days. The thing is Americans as a whole reject extremism in all it's forms, so the Far Right and Far Left can suggest anything they wish it but the likelihood that the American People will accept it are slim to none.
I'm conflicted, on one hand I rather like eugenics, on the other I can't stand a centralized authority promulgating it.
There are mild forms of Eugenics programs in Cyprus and Israel, but those are voluntary and focus on screening people who might have a devastating recessive genetic disease so they can prevent passing it on to their children.
There is a difference between that type of Eugenics and sterilizing the "unfit" or even killing off the "unfit".
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger
The more Humanity turns it's back on God, I would think that something like Eugenics will become more appealing. If there is no God, why shouldn't the population be "bred" to fit whatever view whomever is in charge envisions it should be?
Hell, they have the technology already to manipulate DNA so they'll be making humans in test tubes within 30 years. Humans made to order for the rich. There will be super intelligent, super athletic humans born to rich folks, the rest of us will just be the rest of us.
As the technology advances it will become cheaper and if comes down to the point where we can reliably make a human with genius level intelligence and Olympic level athleticism, you can beat at that point it would become cheap enough that at least the middle-class would be able to come up with a baby that would be very impressive by today's standards.
Just like various fertility treatments which are expensive, but still used by the middle-class.
Wait a minute. I hear Republicans on this board, all the time, saying that poor people or, "people who can't care for their children" should keep their legs closed.
Sounds exactly like what she said.
That's asking individuals to be responsible, not for government policies to enforce.
That's the difference between liberty and tyranny.
When government forces me to either pay for your abortion or pay to raise your children, that's tyranny. When I stand up and say so, I'm asked by lefties "so you don't want to help poor children!"
That's asking individuals to be responsible, not for government policies to enforce.
That's the difference between liberty and tyranny.
When government forces me to either pay for your abortion or pay to raise your children, that's tyranny. When I stand up and say so, I'm asked by lefties "so you don't want to help poor children!"
I think we're going to have to cave in to taxpayer funded abortions.
We are importing third world poverty here an these women are coming here with 3-4-5 kids seeking refugee status from spousal abuse.
NO more disturbing than some of the things I see some Cons suggesting these days. The thing is Americans as a whole reject extremism in all it's forms, so the Far Right and Far Left can suggest anything they wish it but the likelihood that the American People will accept it are slim to none.
I am not saying that the average liberal believes it, but the mainstream ideas of the Left and the Right emerge from the fringes and sometimes end up making their way into the mainstream. The Nanny State which is applauded at this point by many "liberals" (if you are Nanny Statists, you don't deserve to call yourself that) was a fringe movement into the early 1990s. Remember how Demolition Man was supposed to be far out satire? It's actually pretty accurate by today's standards. Same thing with the increasingly hysterical Political Correctness faction on the Left. I have read editorials and articles on pretty mainstream liberal leaning publications and websites that take "microaggressions" and "trigger warnings" seriously.
And in the sake of fairness I will also bring up that in the 90s a lot of Republicans were calling for the death penalty to be applied for possession of relatively small amounts of drugs a la Singapore. Some of them wanted people to be executed for amounts of marijuana that are now legal to possess in Washington and Colorado. Also, after 9/11 support for using torture became a mainstream political position (which is f--king terrifying) when it was very much a fringe position prior.
Sometimes good things come from the fringe. Like gay marriage and so on. But let's not act like these positions just come out of the blue. They are often held by a minority and gradually enter the mainstream.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
