Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Richard Dawkins on Eugenics

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I have to disagree with many of my fellow Christians who believe the normalization of pedophilia is on its way. If anything, it seems to me like it's being more stigmatized these days. The French writer Gabriel Matzneff, who wrote for decades in open site about having sex with children abroad, is finally being "canceled" in culture at large and facing legal consequences. Part of his excuse was based on nihilistic philosophical defenses then-popular in academia, which apparently no longer fly. Border authorities are no longer looking the other way at people flying to Thailand or Vietnam for child sex tourism, whereas this sort of thing was previously an open secret that nobody did much about. And if society didn't take pedophilia seriously, then why would Catholics have cause to complain that society is too hard on them for the sex abuse scandal?

    French society is one of the most atheistic on earth, and even without objective moral values, they have managed to ostracize Matzneff from their culture.
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
      I have to disagree with many of my fellow Christians who believe the normalization of pedophilia is on its way. If anything, it seems to me like it's being more stigmatized these days. The French writer Gabriel Matzneff, who wrote for decades in open site about having sex with children abroad, is finally being "canceled" in culture at large and facing legal consequences. Part of his excuse was based on nihilistic philosophical defenses then-popular in academia, which apparently no longer fly. Border authorities are no longer looking the other way at people flying to Thailand or Vietnam for child sex tourism, whereas this sort of thing was previously an open secret that nobody did much about. And if society didn't take pedophilia seriously, then why would Catholics have cause to complain that society is too hard on them for the sex abuse scandal?

      French society is one of the most atheistic on earth, and even without objective moral values, they have managed to ostracize Matzneff from their culture.

      Perhaps French society is moving back more towards 'traditional' (i.e. religious sourced) moral values in general, and this is part of that.

      I don't think it's unreasonable for Christians to think that moral trends in this area will follow what we have seen in other areas of sexual morality, a trend from limits and boundaries, to fewer or no limits and boundaries. It may not follow that pattern, but I think it quite reasonable to think that the pattern will persist.
      ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        So Star, if society does start to normalize pedophilia will you reject liberalism and join us conservatives?
        If you also change all your positions to being right on all the other issues.
        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
          I don't think it's unreasonable for Christians to think that moral trends in this area will follow what we have seen in other areas of sexual morality, a trend from limits and boundaries, to fewer or no limits and boundaries. It may not follow that pattern, but I think it quite reasonable to think that the pattern will persist.
          It's not trending to 'no limits and boundaries', it's trending to different criteria for informing limits and boundaries.
          "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
          "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
          "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
            Starlight is being purposely dumb here. You can definitely make the population much taller on average rather quickly by letting only tall people pass on their genes, it's the same with bigger cows or larger corn cobs.
            As I said, I am a scientist who does this for a living with regard to selective breeding of an animal species, and no, you can't easily change the population average 'rather quickly'. It actually happens rather slowly.

            The statistics Rogue cited here about it taking 22 generations to breed out a trait seem rather pessimistic, but are far more on the money than those who think we can just snap our fingers and change something from one generation to the next. To take your example, even if you went 100% draconian and slaughtered all the short people in the world and only let tall people breed to the next generation, you'd still get plenty of short people in the generations being born after than because genetics is complicated and people who are themselves tall can still have short offspring.

            You need several generations to make a worthwhile different in any trait you try to breed for. So it works nicely for plants and animals where there is less than 3 years or so between generations, because we can breed traits into the species in a reasonable time-frame. Because of the long time period between human generations, any breeding of humans would take hundreds of years before it had any significant effects. Well within that time, genetic engineering will have reached a point where we can just alter human genes to be whatever we want them to be, so we won't need to breed for it. If it turns out being tall is good, we can make everyone tall just by giving them a single injection. Or give everyone pink hair, green eyes, golden skin that glows in the dark, and a tail, from that same single injection, if people decide that's what they want. We certainly don't need multi-century coercive totalitarian breeding programs to achieve that, we just need to continue to improve our genetic engineering tools in the lab. Once we've got those tools working well (perhaps in as little as 15 years), we'll pretty much immediately be able to cure almost every genetic disease, which will be rather useful for many people.

            This is one reason why I find white supremacists / people's concern about the wrong races 'out-breeding' others etc somewhat dumb. Imagine in 50-100 years when we know far more about biology and genetics, and let's say for a moment that at that point in the future the scientists prove definitively and scientifically without a shadow of a doubt that white people are genetically superior and that it makes the human race measurably and obviously worse to have all these non-white races out-breeding whites. Then it will be possible to isolate whichever genetic variables are causing this difference, and simply inject them into the non-whites to make them white (or give them the other superior genetic traits if white skin itself isn't one of those). As a result there's pretty much zero point in panicking about any perceived genetic decline of humanity in the present nor in any overzealous focus on which races are or aren't "superior" in any particular way. (People's views on what makes for a 'superior' race have a tendency to be fairly dumb in and of themselves, e.g. a popular view used to be that greater height was the hallmark of a superior race, which most people now would probably roll their eyes at)
            Last edited by Starlight; 02-20-2020, 02:33 AM.
            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Yes, there are different dog breeds. However if you wanted to breed dogs to be twice as big as any dogs that currently exist, it's going to take you quite a long time and quite a lot of generations even if you start with only the biggest breeds of dogs that exist today.

              And no matter which set of dogs you start with and breed together, it's going to be many, many, many, many generations before any of them have wings.
              "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
              "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
              "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                I have to disagree with many of my fellow Christians who believe the normalization of pedophilia is on its way. If anything, it seems to me like it's being more stigmatized these days. The French writer Gabriel Matzneff, who wrote for decades in open site about having sex with children abroad, is finally being "canceled" in culture at large and facing legal consequences. Part of his excuse was based on nihilistic philosophical defenses then-popular in academia, which apparently no longer fly. Border authorities are no longer looking the other way at people flying to Thailand or Vietnam for child sex tourism, whereas this sort of thing was previously an open secret that nobody did much about. And if society didn't take pedophilia seriously, then why would Catholics have cause to complain that society is too hard on them for the sex abuse scandal?

                French society is one of the most atheistic on earth, and even without objective moral values, they have managed to ostracize Matzneff from their culture.
                While still embracing and sheltering folks like Roman Polanski

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Starlight View Post

                  The statistics Rogue cited here about it taking 22 generations to breed out a trait seem rather pessimistic, but are far more on the money than those who think we can just snap our fingers and change something from one generation to the next. To take your example, even if you went 100% draconian and slaughtered all the short people in the world and only let tall people breed to the next generation, you'd still get plenty of short people in the generations being born after than because genetics is complicated and people who are themselves tall can still have short offspring.
                  The person who did the calculations was Reginald Punnett, who created the Punnett square, a tool still used by biologists to predict the probability of the genotypes of a particular cross or breeding experiment. That said I find it to be a bit risky to apply mathematical formulas to biology. The former follows strict rules while the latter has been described as being a glorious mess. That and, as we all know, the maths are of da debil.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                    Yes, there are different dog breeds. However if you wanted to breed dogs to be twice as big as any dogs that currently exist, it's going to take you quite a long time and quite a lot of generations even if you start with only the biggest breeds of dogs that exist today.

                    And no matter which set of dogs you start with and breed together, it's going to be many, many, many, many generations before any of them have wings.
                    You'd need more than many, many, many, many generations before any dogs had wings. You'd need straight out genetic manipulation to even have a chance.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      The person who did the calculations was Reginald Punnett, who created the Punnett square, a tool still used by biologists to predict the probability of the genotypes of a particular cross or breeding experiment.
                      Sure, but in 1907 he didn't have the slightest clue as to what the actual genetic causes of 'feeble-mindedness' were and chose to model it as it if were a single recessive gene. Which, of course, it isn't. There seem to be at least 500 genes that affect intelligence. And I'm sure there's plenty more genes where modifications cause mental disorders. So his 1-gene punnet-square model has limited applicability. Modelling the breeding of improving 500+ genes at once is far more complicated.

                      Relatively few interesting traits can be tied back to a single gene. The famous example, used for Punnett-squares, is eye color. But actually, that only holds up for the common European brown-blue variations, and the explanation quickly gets more complex once other eye colors are considered.

                      A trait that is often discussed on these forums, homosexuality in humans, appears to be a result of over a thousand genes interacting. Which kinda answers the question of why it doesn't 'die out' if gay people don't reproduce. All the genes involved in it are widely present among the heterosexual population, and so each generation, as the genes of the parents combine randomly, you'll continue to get gay children born to heterosexual parents and heterosexual children born to gay parents.
                      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                        Sure, but in 1907 he didn't have the slightest clue as to what the actual genetic causes of 'feeble-mindedness' were and chose to model it as it if were a single recessive gene. Which, of course, it isn't. There seem to be at least 500 genes that affect intelligence. And I'm sure there's plenty more genes where modifications cause mental disorders. So his 1-gene punnet-square model has limited applicability. Modelling the breeding of improving 500+ genes at once is far more complicated.

                        Relatively few interesting traits can be tied back to a single gene. The famous example, used for Punnett-squares, is eye color. But actually, that only holds up for the common European brown-blue variations, and the explanation quickly gets more complex once other eye colors are considered.

                        A trait that is often discussed on these forums, homosexuality in humans, appears to be a result of over a thousand genes interacting. Which kinda answers the question of why it doesn't 'die out' if gay people don't reproduce. All the genes involved in it are widely present among the heterosexual population, and so each generation, as the genes of the parents combine randomly, you'll continue to get gay children born to heterosexual parents and heterosexual children born to gay parents.
                        This would suggest that his 22 generation prediction far from being rather pessimistic was overly optimistic.


                        ETA: It was 1917 not 1907 but I think your point still stands.
                        Last edited by rogue06; 02-20-2020, 05:21 AM.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          While still embracing and sheltering folks like Roman Polanski
                          His name is mud in society at large. You seem to be making my point for me.

                          The greater point that I was trying to make that nobody addressed was that Matzneff depended on academic defenses of his sexual proclivities that have now gone out of fashion, and this particular realm of academia seems to be what you all are most afraid of.
                          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            His name is mud in society at large. You seem to be making my point for me.
                            I daresay that for the most part the "public at large" would likely say "Roman Pulled-who"? His peers have never cared as evidenced by the number of awards and nominations he's garnered through the years.

                            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            The greater point that I was trying to make that nobody addressed was that Matzneff depended on academic defenses of his sexual proclivities that have now gone out of fashion, and this particular realm of academia seems to be what you all are most afraid of.
                            I think this might be due far more to a rejection of the sort of nihilistic philosophy that he espoused than a sudden shift back to basic morality.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                              If you also change all your positions to being right on all the other issues.
                              I'm always right.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                                Yes, there are different dog breeds. However if you wanted to breed dogs to be twice as big as any dogs that currently exist, it's going to take you quite a long time and quite a lot of generations even if you start with only the biggest breeds of dogs that exist today.

                                And no matter which set of dogs you start with and breed together, it's going to be many, many, many, many generations before any of them have wings.
                                Wings sure, but I think the amazing diversity between dog breeds show that selective breeding can indeed make large changes over time in a species. It would work for people as well. Nobody said anything about having to accomplish it in a couple of generations.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
                                14 responses
                                74 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
                                6 responses
                                60 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
                                3 responses
                                44 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Working...
                                X