If people keep reproducing (as it seems currently there's no limit), shouldn't we be more selective … by Tony Garcia
Answer by Tony Garcia:
Are you aware of Lebensborn e.V. (literally: "Fount of Life"), an SS-initiated, state-supported, registered association in Nazi Germanywhose stated goal was to raise the birth rate of “Aryan” children through extramarital relations of persons classified as "racially pure and healthy?” It was based on the Nazi’s racial hygiene and health ideology (Children Of The Master Race).
Are you aware of the Peoples Republic of China’s one-child policy, ended in October 2015? The population’s preference for male offspring—to continue the family bloodline—resulted in millions of female newborns being aborted, killed or sent orphanges.
There are ethical arguments that allow for efforts to change the inherited genetic makeup of a particular person may be ethically defensible. For example, a couple may opt for genetic technologies or third-party intervention where otherwise it would mean passing on a fatal or debilitating hereditary disease.
However, the abysmal history of murder and sterilization undertaken in the name of racial hygiene and the “improvement” of the human species over the last 100 years is so overpowering that the risk of reoccurrence, sliding down what has proved time and time again to be an extremely slick, slippery slope, should be enough to bring all ethical argument in favor of eugenics to an end.