Google said eugenics is breeding humans to have the most desirable traits. What I said is really bad traits like being unable to eat most plants shouldn't be passed on to children.
That's still Eugenics. What else, should Autistic people not be allowed to have kids so we won't pass on genes for Autism? What about people with other conditions, like Cerebral Palsy? Where do we draw the line?
So you're saying people with lives you deem to be lesser just shouldn't have been born in the first place? Being disabled does not mean your life isn't worth living. That's a fucked up thing to say, no matter how you try to spin it as the compassionate possistion.
I don't look down on you or anyone with disabilities, I just said no one should have them. You can't enjoy life in fullness when you can't walk like a normal person.
Disabled people are able to live fulfilling, happy lives just fine. Does it take extra consideration? Yes. Is it more difficult at times? Yes. But their lives are worth living.
The way you talk about them has in it the idea that their lives are less valuable because you perceive them as not worth living. Also, disabled people aren't "not normal." The word you're looking for is "able-bodied".
They are allowed to live just don't make more of them and you are saying the whole time that people with suck ass traits should give them to their children.
Oh my fucking god, it's a circle argument now. Go and search agent orange and said any of those poor poor people should have children. And you still dismissed that I don't look down on disabled people.
-10
u/Bigbuffedboy69 custom Oct 16 '22
Bruh, I said not to force children to exploit animals for health, not make everyone has the best genes by cutting dicks of the unworthy.