Bobby. wrote on Oct 12
th, 2014 at 11:55am:
Dear PZ547,
there is much correct logic in your approach.
One problem though is the Nazis - who tried this & it started to get out of hand -
first it was the disabled, then union organisers, communists,
then Jews & Gypsies etc.
In the end Hitler thought his own people should die because the
people from the East were stronger.
I suppose it's - where eugenics leads to?
What will eventually happen, most likely, is that some people will refrain from producing more of themselves, as is in fact occurring right now in Italy, Japan and other industrialised nations where the birth rate doesn't meet 'replacement'
This concerns the governments concerned because they claim there 'won't be enough money' to support the elderly
Of course, there would be plenty of money if industrialised nations divested themselves of participation in phony wars for profit for the few. Many people know this and others are waking up each day just as they're aware we don't need lumbering, massive and largely ineffective, corrupt governments - especially when most Western governments are over-paid puppets which kow-tow to those who orchestrate share markets, resources, etc.
As industrialised populations impose their own version of eugenics by the mere act of refusing to produce more cannon-fodder and consumers, governments are retaliating by pulling non-industrialised populations into the West. The large and growing consumer-base must be maintained, is their attitude
Eventually, even the third-worlders who replace the largely extinct Western populations will reach the conclusion they need to curtail their breeding. It will take considerable time if humans have to reduce population growth from street level
A lot of pain and suffering would be avoided if reduced population growth were handled humanely and in organised fashion
When China embarked on the one-child policy, humans being as they are, upset the balance within Chinese society by aborting female foetuses in favour of producing male children. Now even China is claiming its elderly pose a burden and the one-child policy has largely relaxed, reportedly, leaving in its wake too many men, too few women
One step towards a solution (admittedly my own) would be the issuing of a Death Date on birth certificates. It would have many advantages, amongst them being a freeing of resources currently devoted to elderly people who languish in millions of 'care homes' and hospitals
An age could be decided and then when a child was born, his/her birth certificate would show the date of death at, say, age 75. Instead of being a mystery, people would know, life-long, the date upon which they'd die if they hadn't already done via other reasons such as accidents, disease, etc.
Those who know beyond doubt when they would die would probably organise their lives far better than they do now. Children would know when they'd receive an inheritance and would be able to plan accordingly also. Much in society would be restructured, reorganised
If an imposed age of death were combined with a one or two child policy worldwide, population growth could be reduced without too much suffering involved
As to who should be empowered to make the decisions, I would imagine it would have to be 'the authorities', government or perhaps a body created for the purpose which would need to impose the policies from on high, accompanied by penalties for those who rebelled
'We're living longer these days' chants the media on behalf of various agendas and of course, insurance companies. No, we're not. Those who spend time on Ancestry.com and other genealogical sites know very well that many of their forebears lived to a ripe old age
Almost wherever we go, we get so much for our dollar and then we're shown the door, be it a doctor, dentist, beauty salon, therapist, club, amusement park, ferris-wheel, whatever. Why should Life be any different? If the world is unable to support increasing new arrivals at the same time 80-somethings are jamming up medical resources, something has to give
Do those 80-somethings want to be stuck under tubes while friends and family pay duty-visits? In most instances, no. They're tired. They want to get off the ride of Life. But currently, governments are beholden to religious groups who shriek at the mention of euthanasia
Mum or Dad is in a 'home', suffering gross senile decay or other non-recoverable condition. Their families are sick of it too. They can't go on holiday or move interstate, are stuck in limbo, waiting for the inevitable. Mum/Dad doesn't know who they are when they go to visit. What's the point of it all? But it's against the law to euthanase. 'Oh, where will it end if we allow them to terminate the sick and elderly?' people wail, 'It would be state-sanctioned murder. People would be bumping off anyone they didn't like. People would be murdering their parents out of greed. Oh, no. We can't allow it '. A Date of Death stamped on birth certificates would eliminate those concerns and many others
Next for the chop would be those unable to care for themselves. No more state-provided carers around the clock to minister to a body unable to feed itself or get to a toilet. It's a ridiculous waste of resources that we can't afford. If Fate deems that person should live Life on Earth, then Fate will surely find a new and better body for them to return in
Forum
Pages: 1
Eugenics - Do We Really Need More of You? (Read 667 times)
