[Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Why don't you lay out your vision of how eugenics would work. Use your
own words. If you cut-and-paste someone else's work we'll all know you
don't have a brain in your head and that you're just a wee puppet
Nazi.

Address who would and would not be allowed to procreate and the
mechanism to insure compliance. Also address what this would look like
after a few generations and the benefits it would provide. What will
society look like once this policy has had its effect?

Further, address who would be the ultimate authority on these and
other decisions related to policies on eugenics (such as metrics) and
the punishments they can mete out for noncompliance.

Remember, Bratzi, use your own words. I promise you that the minute I
sense that you're using someone else's words I stop reading.

This is YOUR vision for a better Earth.

[Boon[_2_]]

On May 26, 10:47*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
Why don't you lay out your vision of how eugenics would work. Use your
own words. If you cut-and-paste someone else's work we'll all know you
don't have a brain in your head and that you're just a wee puppet
Nazi.

Address who would and would not be allowed to procreate and the
mechanism to insure compliance. Also address what this would look like
after a few generations and the benefits it would provide. What will
society look like once this policy has had its effect?

Further, address who would be the ultimate authority on these and
other decisions related to policies on eugenics (such as metrics) and
the punishments they can mete out for noncompliance.

Remember, Bratzi, use your own words. I promise you that the minute I
sense that you're using someone else's words I stop reading.

This is YOUR vision for a better Earth.

All you have to do is cut and paste his sentences into a search
engine. I've done it with Bratzi before, and you're right about the
fact that his thoughts are not quite original.

[Bret L]

You know, this is a very serious issue and any mandatory government
program could easily become tyrannical and oppressive.

I would lay down some basic rules, first, that eugenics should
primarily be a social rather than a governmental matter.

Here's an example: Illegitimacy was rare except among the lowest
class of people overall throughout the first two thirds of the 20th
Century. Shame and social approbation, not government fiat, were the
enforcement mechanism. Being pregnant and unmarried was a big no-no.
Most pregnant girls who were single put their infants up for adoption,
it being universally acknowledged that trying to raise a child without
a husband was not only to consign yourself and the child to shame-
widespread and significant shame-but wrong for the child as well. We
see that today as cruel and hypocritical and just backward.....but it
worked. Society WAS better off, all told.

Government's role could be primarily educational and informative, and
also provide incentives for desirable behavior.

Welfare benefits absolutely could and should be keyed to eugenic
measures inasmuch as they are huge money saving measures as well.

Tax breaks should be provided for a variety of actions.

Once one sets down guiding principles, a number of things can be
arrived at for formulating policy..

Personally, I'm fond of a sperm bank program for men who are in the
upper decile in IQ, have no genetic issues and have highly desireable
physical traits. Astronauts-who must combine high IQ, a high drive to
achieve, excellent physical condition and no issues like
colorblindness, diabetes, etc-are a good example as are selected
athletes, scientists, military people (surviving BUD/S has to be a
huge win in genetic filtering!) and other groups. Providing benefits
to quality, successful parents of two or three children of their own
to have one more from this sperm bank would be very cost effective.

Proactively identifying young people who are unlikely to succeed due
to poor intelligence or a propensity to antisocial action and offering
them benefits-ranging from a one time get-out-of-jail pass for certain
offenses to scholarships and stipends for training in fields they can
do, or even makework jobs for people the free market can't use
profitably-to get sterilized is also a possibility. First time welfare
mothers who test low on IQ could be offered two or three children's
worth of AFDC payments for several years if they are fixed. Multiple
fathers of illegitimate children could be offered immunity for jailing
for child support if they consent too.

[Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On May 27, 7:39*pm, Bret L wrote:
*You know, this is a very serious issue and any mandatory government
program could easily become tyrannical and oppressive.

How so?

Has it ever been done, and if so, was it "tyrannical and oppressive"?

*I would lay down some basic rules, first, that eugenics should
primarily be a social rather than a governmental matter.

Perfect. Now there are no repercussions and it's entirely voluntary.

*Society WAS better off, all told.

How?

*Government's role could be primarily educational and informative, and
also provide incentives for desirable behavior.

*Welfare benefits absolutely could and should be keyed to eugenic
measures inasmuch as they are huge money saving measures as well.

*Tax breaks should be provided for a variety of actions.

*Once one sets down guiding principles, a number of things can be
arrived at for formulating policy..

Who decides these "principles"? Can I do it? Can I select for people
that are the opposite of you?

*Personally, I'm fond of a sperm bank program for men who are in the
upper decile in IQ, have no genetic issues and have highly desireable
physical traits. Astronauts-who must combine high IQ, a high drive to
achieve, excellent physical condition and no issues like
colorblindness, diabetes, etc-are a good example as are selected
athletes, scientists, military people (surviving BUD/S has to be a
huge win in genetic filtering!) and other groups. Providing benefits
to quality, successful parents of two or three children of their own
to have one more from this sperm bank would be very cost effective.

And you haven't addressed the social aspects. What happens to society
when everybbody is two standard deviations to the right? Who cleans
2pid's pool?

*Proactively identifying young people who are unlikely to succeed due
to poor intelligence or a propensity to antisocial action and offering
them benefits-ranging from a one time get-out-of-jail pass for certain
offenses to scholarships and stipends for training in fields they can
do, or even makework jobs for people the free market can't use
profitably-to get sterilized is also a possibility. First time welfare
mothers who test low on IQ could be offered two or three children's
worth of AFDC payments for several years if they are fixed. Multiple
fathers of illegitimate children could be offered immunity for jailing
for child support if they consent too.

Again, who determines which "certain offenses" are worthy of "getting
out of jail free"? And what traits would make this person worthy of
all of this free money? And what are the benefits to society? What
does society look like when everybody's perfect?

You're spouting brainless platitudes. Put some meat on the bones of
your Nazi agenda.

[Clyde Slick]

On May 26, 11:47*pm, "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
Why don't you lay out your vision of how eugenics would work. Use your
own words. If you cut-and-paste someone else's work we'll all know you
don't have a brain in your head and that you're just a wee puppet
Nazi.

Address who would and would not be allowed to procreate and the
mechanism to insure compliance. Also address what this would look like
after a few generations and the benefits it would provide. What will
society look like once this policy has had its effect?

Further, address who would be the ultimate authority on these and
other decisions related to policies on eugenics (such as metrics) and
the punishments they can mete out for noncompliance.

Remember, Bratzi, use your own words. I promise you that the minute I
sense that you're using someone else's words I stop reading.

This is YOUR vision for a better Earth.

"Don't ask, don't tell" would have been appropriate here!