Conversation

(putting your potential libertarianism aside) Would you support a government program that paid a moderate monthly stipend to people who've tested positive for severe genetic illnesses, as long as they don't reproduce?
  • Yes/probably
    46.8%
  • No/unlikely
    53.2%
2,049 votesFinal results
32
12
Replying to
Again- pls consider the implications of these Q’s. Everything in my tweets about methodology applies here to- this is in bad taste and if ur genuinely interested in extreme eugenics opinions - I really suggest not doing it in a public poll - the bias here makes any data worthless
1
1
+ honestly I get that you’re interested in people’s opinions- but is it really worth essentially tormenting the autistic people who feel pretty personally attacked by this? Just throwing that out there. I get the pursuit of truth and knowledge - but is it really worth the grief?
1
1
Replying to
I'm not talking about autism in this poll. One extreme illness I had in mind that I was asking about was one that runs in my family, has killed some of my uncles, that might randomly kill my mom any day, and that I thankfully just tested negative for.
2
Replying to
I didn’t say you were talking about autism - I said you were talking about eugenics which is a subject that hits different for a lot of autistic people. As another person pointed out - whatever particular condition you’re talking about doesn’t really matter
1
1
Replying to
But what about my experience? I absolutely want a world where we can eliminate the genetic diseases that have hurt my family so much. Am I just supposed to shut up about this because other people might somehow interpret this negatively? No, that thought makes me angry
Replying to
There’s a difference between sharing what you think and sharing your experience and opinions- and asking strangers to weigh in on whether or not disabled/ill/genetically different people should have kids. Or exist at all. That kinda stings for a lot of us
1
Replying to
It's really hard to interpret this as a request for me to restrict my speech and questions not because of it directly, but because of associations people make to bad things. This is categorically not a persuasive reason, and agreeing to restrict seems like a dangerous precedent.
2
Show replies
Replying to
Holy shit, I'm amazed you had to pepper that with so many qualifiers. How is that even a controversial opinion? Wtf kind of crowd is following you? I think that you had to frame it that way makes me angry on your behalf.
2
1
Show replies
Replying to
Then talk about YOUR experience. Pls talk about that! Sing it to the roof tops!!! I’m sorry that you feel those conditions have hurt your family so much - but that’s not a reason to think other people who’s identities are linked to their conditions shouldn’t exist