More and more parents really shouldnt be allowed to breed

usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/ … mom-on-lam

people should get licensed to breed to weed out people such as these. IF any weeding is possible even. But for sure some shouldnt be allowed to breed.

[quote=“tommy525”]http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/04/10573169-police-alaska-girl-locked-in-frigid-bedroom-dies-mom-on-lam

people should get licensed to breed to weed out people such as these. IF any weeding is possible even. But for sure some shouldnt be allowed to breed.[/quote]

Yeah. Problem is, evolution managed to arrange things so that even the stupidest people can figure out what fits in where. And somehow stupid people always manage to find each other in order to proceed with said fitting without accidentally strangling themselves with their bubblegum in the process.

Useless fact for the day: After he got rich from inventing the BJT (or the FET, or whatever it was) William Shockley went around paying people that he considered “inferior” (which wasn’t just stupid people) not to breed. Eugenics wasn’t a dirty word at the time, but people like him (and even more notorious ones) managed to make it so. There doesn’t seem any valid way that humans can interfere with the breeding proclivities of their fellow humans without bad stuff happening.

[quote=“tommy525”]http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/04/10573169-police-alaska-girl-locked-in-frigid-bedroom-dies-mom-on-lam

people should get licensed to breed to weed out people such as these. IF any weeding is possible even. But for sure some shouldnt be allowed to breed.[/quote]

As punishment, the mother and her boyfriend should be sent out to the frozen tundra of Alaska with only T-shirt, shorts, and flip-flops. And if they make it back to civilization alive, then they should get sent back to the tundra again without clothes.

And she’s a teacher - an elementary school teacher! That’s almost as shocking as the hideously wicked crime she committed against those two little tots.

[quote=“tommy525”]http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/04/10573169-police-alaska-girl-locked-in-frigid-bedroom-dies-mom-on-lam

people should get licensed to breed to weed out people such as these. IF any weeding is possible even. But for sure some shouldnt be allowed to breed.[/quote]
Unfortunately the only one weeded out was the innocent 3-year-old.
You’d think even an alcoholic would realize that 1. it is normal for infants and toddlers to soil their diapers/beds, and 2. it is too fucking cold out to leave the kids unprotected.

Eugenics got its bad name as a result of WW2, which ended in 1945; by no later than 1948, it was anathema. Shockley didn’t become famous until well after that, and his eugenics advocacy didn’t start until at least the mid-1960s.

It should be noted that, contrary to public perception, Shockley wasn’t being a racist about it – in fact, his concern stemmed in part from the risk to civil rights gains that he felt would be a consequence of the high birth rate among low-intelligence blacks relative to the below-replacement birth rate among high-intelligence blacks.

Sure, but even in the 60’s and 70’s eugenics still had a bit of a cult following. There were certain US states that enforced sterilisation for the ‘feeble-minded’, although I don’t recall if that was pre-WW2? And bear in mind that even as late as the 1970’s, non-whites were still openly spoken of as genetically inferior by otherwise decent people.

Maybe, but he was still a bigot and a rather unpleasant person; and it was that rather than his eugenics “programme” (which was actually fairly harmless) that turned people off to what he was doing. To be honest I agree with Tommy that the world would be a better place if certain people just didn’t have kids, and if others didn’t have so many of them. But it’s not our business to tell them that or to enforce it.