Is it moral and ethical to start a large scale breading program?
The goal would be to improve the human race through selective breading. Subjects that were healthy, kind, intelligent, motivated and attractive would be paid large amounts of money to have many children. The children would be raised in a healthy family environment. What are some of the pros and cons to this approach?
2009-01-27T01:05:15Z
The difference between what I'm doing and what Hitler did is I would not be killing innocent people. This is not playing God, it is doing what God would want us to do by improving ourselves. A panel experts would be elected to invent the system to measure good traits and would oversee this program. Of course there is no way that it would happen in our current politically and socially immature climate.
2009-01-27T01:08:16Z
I am not so egotistical that I would presume to be one of the individuals selected to breed.
Phoenix Quill2009-01-27T01:40:45Z
Favorite Answer
There is no intrinsic immorality in a Government breeding program, the problem is efficacy.
See, if you truly had someone with a great breath of knowledge and an incorruptible desire to breed a better human, our species could benefit profoundly from such a program.BUT...
This is not really a condition that readily exists in real world political bureaucracies.
See what we have now is 'Free Market' breeding. There are certainly a FEW regulations that help the market run better, BUT the Government is full of idiots that DON'T understand the market, and those that do are often politically motivate to enrich themselves rather than the market at large.
We are currently suffering an economic meltdown caused by our government meddling with the free market.
Actually, I think the idea would work better if you gave people financial incentives NOT to breed. Our primary problem..at least within the next hundred years is not who's breeding, but how many are.
I think it's an idea with good intentions, but to reward people financially for what they do instinctively would create too much of a class disparity.
The kinds of people that would be selected, the healthy, kind, intelligent, motivated and attractive people are usually successful financially in life without having to overcompensate like the rest of us drones. But if we were to selectively take those who's prospective posterity would not be as much of an asset to our future, we could give them a comfortable life in exchange for their volunteering to be sterilized. That would kill two birds with one stone. It would solve the population crisis WITHOUT suffering, and it would yield better a better stock for future generations.
One of the side effects would be that the child-bearers may end up being over-coddled by the non-breeders, and children could end up rather spoiled because of their scarcity. Not to mention we would have to start the economy over again from scratch to finance this sort of incentive..but it's no impossible as long as enough people take assessment on the reality of things and take it seriously.
Healthy, kind, intelligent and attractive people do breed with each other and, guess what, they do it for free! You don't have to pay them to do such things. Heck! Even unattractive people, without great intellects also do such things for free.
The biggest "con" to the approach would be the fact that you probably don't have any money to pay people to breed and there are probably laws against such things --- like invasion of privacy laws or such.
How would you discourage unhealthy, unkind, unintelligent and, perhaps, unattractive, people from breeding with each other. If you paid them money not to breed, they might use the money to become healthier, more educated and even more attractive --- then people might want them to breed with them.
In sum:- Aren't you a little young and underfinanced to be thinking about such things? It is amazing how well that sometimes unattractive and seemingly unintelligent people can survive to breed without any help from smart, attractive and wealthy people, on those occasions when the thin veneer of so-called "civilization" temporarily disappears and certain ladies begin to prefer the safety afforded to them by unthinking individuals with BIG CLUBS (or variations thereof) and little reservations about using them on various sorts of "social engineers". Even in a sophisticated well educated society, there always seem to be persons entirely enthralled by WORLD WIDE WRESTLING and by hairy "outlaws" on motor-cycles.
You have heard of "biker chicks" and "bikers" haven't you? Some of them (the ladies) are quite attractive, while some biker type guys have very high I.Q.s. I am unacquainted, however, with their breeding patterns, since that is none of my business, nor yours. Somehow I think that they might have rather harsh ways of convincing you that their breeding patterns are none of your business either.
That depends on whether or not you are also trying to prevent other people from having children, or are treating them as lower class citizens.
Plus there is a high chance of racism coming out of that, and discrimination towards people of different financial status.
How would you determine intelligence? Many of the highly educated individuals come from wealthy families, but their education does not mean they are more intelligent than someone who couldn't afford college/university.
Or how would you determine kindness? The people considered great philanthropists are also generally wealthy, so they are able to do far more than someone who doesn't earn as much. It's nothing to do with their personality or genes, it's simply different financial circumstances.
I can see how this would start out trying to improve on people, but I don't think it would be capable of fending off racism and discrimination from entering into the selection of subjects.
Obviously, people have been trying to do that for a long time just as farmers have long been doing that with their animals. And, face it, we are animals, great apes. Therefore, i must say, the trouble with your question is just how to get it done? Religions might object, some others, too. How do you propose to get the ball rolling and how shall we decide? What characteristics will be best in the short and long run?