If you’ve ever read The Satanic Scriptures, you would see that Magus Gilmore gives his take on eugenics in a rather broad manner. I personally agree with having SOME eugenics if certain people meet certain criteria. This is the criteria. I’ll make this brief.<br />
<br />
First, I believe, with modern technology full DNA profiles must be done of every human that’s born. Anyone with a prominent family history of : Cancer, diabetes, cystic fibrosis and other genetic disorders must be sterilized.<br />
<br />
Then second, I believe that anyone that goes on certain public assistance must be sterilized. People must be sterilized after the first child if they are on welfare for up to 5 years after they have their first child. If they are still on welfare after year 5, then they must be sterilized to prevent anyone from intentionally drawing welfare in perpetuity. I also believe that certain people on public disability must be sterilized. I know a guy that is on SSD for schizophrenia and he should NOT be able to have kids.<br />
<br />
This would save society TRILLIONS.<br />
Sign In
My take on eugenics | Forum
Anna
May 13 '22
Looks like some kind of dystopia. Theoretically, you might be right. Certain people should indeed never have children either because they are irresponsible twats or because they simply can't afford it. In practice, it gets complicated because who should decide who is worthy to reproduce and who isn't? The government? They can fuck up even the most noble or pragmatic ideas. The doctors? Scientists? So-called experts? They've already shown their pseudo-wisdom during the Covid pseudo-pandemic.
I'm highly sceptical about genetic tests. They have too many limitations. I also doubt cancer or diabetes type 2 are hereditary. I know people who got sick though their parents didn't and people whose parents had either cancer or diabetes but they themselves were healthy.
Satanist since more than a decade
May 26 '22
Eugenics is bullshit.
It is entirely dependent on opinion and circumstance.
Believe it will save trillions for "economic purposes" by sterilizing low-class degenerates is a failure to understand the dynamics in cash-flow.
Those "degenerates" are what keeps the economy afloat. Putting a halt to their reproduction will only dry-up your customer base into certain failure.
Are their undesirables in society?
Without doubt. Better to weaponize them for your own gain than to have them weeded out. DNA-profiling is a dumbshit move. Science-based ideology is not the answer you are looking for.
Sabrina
May 26 '22
This is dumb. It's treating the symptoms rather than the cause. A lot of us carry disorders in the form of recessive genes. The only people that should be "sterilized" are people who do not know how to raise kids properly
NUTZ Geraldo Respuesta
May 31 '22
Eugenics is like forcing natural selection. Deliberately, naturally, and by accident.
Cannibis is nothing but eugenics.
"Lets take some Purple Kush and cross it with some Alaskan Thunderfuck and then cross that with Northern Lights."
Nothing but forcing nature like a plumcot.
Or like Island Syndome or whatever its called when island indiginous people naturally start favoring genes that give an average height of 4' 6". That's sort of a natural (selection) eugenics. And onward until their are pymgy cannibals. You could absolutely isolate the genes in people with a lower occurance of cancer and heart disease and selectively breed it out.
You should see what an average Californian looks like as compared to an average Arizonan. The states literaly touch but Californias selective breeding of gorgeous people makes a "10" in the latter about a "5" in the former. Southern Californian's bred a race of a beautiful United Colors of Benetton children. Ethnically diverse future punters, extras, actors, sports stars, rock stars, and trophy wives. Beautiful people having beautiful children, that will have more beautiful children.
It be Hitler's dream if it wasnt the strongest or most beuatiful of EVERY race.
Cannibis is nothing but eugenics.
"Lets take some Purple Kush and cross it with some Alaskan Thunderfuck and then cross that with Northern Lights."
Nothing but forcing nature like a plumcot.
Or like Island Syndome or whatever its called when island indiginous people naturally start favoring genes that give an average height of 4' 6". That's sort of a natural (selection) eugenics. And onward until their are pymgy cannibals. You could absolutely isolate the genes in people with a lower occurance of cancer and heart disease and selectively breed it out.
You should see what an average Californian looks like as compared to an average Arizonan. The states literaly touch but Californias selective breeding of gorgeous people makes a "10" in the latter about a "5" in the former. Southern Californian's bred a race of a beautiful United Colors of Benetton children. Ethnically diverse future punters, extras, actors, sports stars, rock stars, and trophy wives. Beautiful people having beautiful children, that will have more beautiful children.
It be Hitler's dream if it wasnt the strongest or most beuatiful of EVERY race.
This could be a national anthem in a future Republic of California. All hail President Gavin Newsom!
The Forum post is edited by Geraldo Respuesta May 31 '22
donot
Jun 5 '22
This is complete garbage. Some genes prevail over others. If you prevent some genes from the gene pool, even the ones you think as weak, then you distract the whole process.
NUTZ Geraldo Respuesta
Jun 6 '22
What process?
Flood Volcanism is also part of the natural process. It causes anoxia in the oceans and kills all but the extremophiles. The world is nothing but outside influences steering the genetics of the many species.
And eugenics means its definition to me:
the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable.
And we can't play god since when? If it works on everything else.
We do nothing but eugenically engineer our food. Everything but ourselves. Even the Non GMO shit retards think is more environmentally conscious is still controlled. The end result are retard chickens with succulent meat portions and mindless cattle with genetic memory to eat feed or bits of other cow, and yield nothing but USDA prime cuts after they die. You lose the taste of grassfed cattle, but you gain on the bottom line. Doesnt really effect their viability either. And the taste is just a diet thing.
You cant breed the strongest and healthiest race horse without a derby winner sent to stud. Fuck the detrimental genes, hasn't hurt the horses any to emphasize the desirable.
The beautiful thing about genetics is its great at being perpetually fucked with by outside influences, which now includes humans.
I just find it fucking hilarious that the line for people is doing what we do to everything else living to humans. Yay Religion!
The Forum post is edited by Geraldo Respuesta Jun 6 '22
donot
Jun 12 '22
What process? Natural selection. In a way you can say that genetically engineering genes is part of natural selection also. Technology is altering evolution, or technology is merely broadening the path of evolution? And what has already been done by taming and domesticating cattle, horses or sheep? Isn't that a way of altering the path of evolution? So in a way I think it is not about what is desirable, but about what is consumable. It is wrongly perceived that eugenics is about making desirable, it is more about making something consumable.
NUTZ Geraldo Respuesta
Jun 13 '22
Eugenics and genetic engineering are totally different.
Like for example, eugenics would be if we banned people as fucking retarded as you from breeding and increased the over all intelligence of society because of it.
The Forum post is edited by Geraldo Respuesta Jun 13 '22
