this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1494 points (98.7% liked)

Science Memes

13522 readers
1282 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

On one hand, crispr isn't safe. And life is not something people have a right to create - that tremendous imposition should be met with a responsibility

On the other hand, life is treated as cheap almost everywhere. If we're going to force people to justify their right to exist, why not take a chance on their genetics to improve the species?

I mean, this was risky science, but not reckless. At some point we need to start fixing our genome, or we're just going to poison ourselves to extinction

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

and imagine if we had 5 more hands; we could make 5 more points.

#thefuture

[–] derpgon 1 points 2 days ago

Still wouldn't help people with two braincells

[–] ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And life is not something people have a right to create

Yes they do?

Having children is literally the one thing most of us are equipped to do, and those who cant can adopt; the children of the future are our responsibility to raise. You seem to have a pretty self centered and unrealistic idea around child rearing; people raise children through invasions, unless you want to stop people from fucking somehow you're never going to stop reproduction.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Most of us are equipped for rape and murder, but we don't have a right to it.

[–] ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Thats why we have laws against rape and murder but not against having kids, because that would be eugenics.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

"because that would be eugenics" is not an explanation. You're just asserting that eugenics is bad, which is begging the question -- this is a post about the ethics of eugenics. You can't just come in and say "eugenics is bad because it's eugenics."

Anyway, I don't think anyone is calling China's former One Child Policy eugenics.

[–] ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Thats because the one child policy was coerced by the IVF in order for China to survive during a period of economic isolation, more so the one child policy only applied to han Chinese, and many still choose to have children, it wasn't a ban on having extra children, they where just heavily disincentivized and given access too birth control.

Literally banning who can have sex would be eugenics yes

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't really see a strong difference ultimately between "heavily disincentivizing" and banning. Heavy disincentivization basically means the rule only applies to poor people. If it's eugenics, it's probably still eugenics even when limited to the poor, since most eugenicists would broadly consider wealthy people to likely have good genes.

Anyway, there are times when we should attempt to lower birth rates as a society. In my country it's not needed, since the birth rate is so low.

[–] ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t really see a strong difference ultimately between “heavily disincentivizing” and banning

You dont see the difference between a tax break vs literally jailing people who have kids? Its a pretty big difference!

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 12 hours ago

Yeah, it's a different implementation. One has an escape hatch for the wealthy; the other doesn't.