“Do you like food? do you know who also likes food? Dogs. You fucking dog.” This is what you sound like.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @drethelin @adamgurri
the intersection of the set of people who think that eugenics is bad and the set of people who are very careful when picking a spouse / picking a sperm donor / picking an adopted child
0 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @adamgurri @drethelin
not at all ...but it provides an on ramp to consider WHICH of the two values is correct and which is incorrect.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @adamgurri @drethelin
It need not be just one thing. I suggest that people who carefully choose sperm donors, adoptive children, and employees for their startups are making very very smart choices that impact happiness and utility.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @adamgurri @drethelin
Concur! One can be pro eugenics (propogation of good genes) without being pro-abortion (destruction of bad genes). Also, on a tangent: Downs is not hereditary in a simple sense, so aborting Downs kids isn't actually "purifying" the gene pool.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
I suggest that the word eugenics is a bundle of different concepts, with an emotional payload. It can mean: * coercively sterilizing / killing people * allowing people to deselect bad genes * allowing people to select good genes I am against coercion, but have no problem w rest
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.