Should it be legal to request donors by race for artificial insemination?

[Person Man]

Because it is absurd to propose that a mother should get absolutely no input as to who the father of her child will be or that a woman should be forced to carry a child of a surprise race for 9 months just to teach everyone a lesson about race relations. It is natural for every human being to have some preferences as to what their own child might look like.

And we don't make the sellers of any other products verify that their customers aren't racists or won't use the product for racist things before they sell to them.

Also, you still don't seem to understand what the term "eugenics" means.

It is absurd that you cannot separate the commercial activity from the individual impulse. It is more absurd still that you insist people do not have freedom of reproduction, without the right to catalog shop for gametes. You have no argument, other than an awkward appeal to women's rights, which doesn't even apply.

No, a woman does not have the right to engage in a commercial activity, in which she orders a white baby from a sperm bank, and she has even less right; therefore, to claim that her half-black baby is a burden worthy of damages.

We hand out birth control and abortions to the lower classes, non-refundable tax credits to the middle class, and we let wealthy people like Michael Jackson buy genetically-engineered children from a catalog. Your lack of comprehension is not my lack of understanding.

Yeah but how is it "eugenics" that people can choose how they have children and to look out for them? Eugenics is pretty much the opposite of what you claim it is.

[AggregateDemand]

Yeah but how is it "eugenics" that people can choose how they have children and to look out for them? Eugenics is pretty much the opposite of what you claim it is.

What do you think the purpose of eugenics is?

[SteveRogers]

Yeah but how is it "eugenics" that people can choose how they have children and to look out for them? Eugenics is pretty much the opposite of what you claim it is.

What do you think the purpose of eugenics is?

No, you need to provide a definition of what you think eugenics is. Nobody help him until he gives a definition. You've been harping on the eugenics chord, and I legitimately think you don't know what that word means.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I find it interesting how none of the SJWs arguing against it in the original thread have chimed in and the closest person we have to arguing their side is...AggregateDemand.

[AggregateDemand]

No, you need to provide a definition of what you think eugenics is. Nobody help him until he gives a definition. You've been harping on the eugenics chord, and I legitimately think you don't know what that word means.

We all know the definition of eugenics and its early social context. Unfortunately, we have quite a few people who believe that ignorance is capable of stopping eugenics from morphing into a modern scientific industry. "Reproductive freedom" might be constitution justification for picking a sexual partner, but it's not constitutional justification for racist commercial enterprises.

Two opportunistic, white lesbians are suing a fertility clinic because they've been "burdened" by a black child. If you don't see the writing on the wall, maybe you still think 9-year-olds should be shooting Uzis at gun ranges.

[SteveRogers]

No, you need to provide a definition of what you think eugenics is. Nobody help him until he gives a definition. You've been harping on the eugenics chord, and I legitimately think you don't know what that word means.

We all know the definition of eugenics and its early social context. Unfortunately, we have quite a few people who believe that ignorance is capable of stopping eugenics from morphing into a modern scientific industry. "Reproductive freedom" might be constitution justification for picking a sexual partner, but it's not constitutional justification for racist commercial enterprises.

Two opportunistic, white lesbians are suing a fertility clinic because they've been "burdened" by a black child. If you don't see the writing on the wall, maybe you still think 9-year-olds should be shooting Uzis at gun ranges.

It is becoming increasingly clear that you don't know the definition of eugenics, or a lot of other terms for that matter.

[Bigby]

Is there any rational arguments against this? How can one be for reproductive freedom and also be against this?

Ever heard of tumblr?

[Person Man]

No, you need to provide a definition of what you think eugenics is. Nobody help him until he gives a definition. You've been harping on the eugenics chord, and I legitimately think you don't know what that word means.

We all know the definition of eugenics and its early social context. Unfortunately, we have quite a few people who believe that ignorance is capable of stopping eugenics from morphing into a modern scientific industry. "Reproductive freedom" might be constitution justification for picking a sexual partner, but it's not constitutional justification for racist commercial enterprises.

Two opportunistic, white lesbians are suing a fertility clinic because they've been "burdened" by a black child. If you don't see the writing on the wall, maybe you still think 9-year-olds should be shooting Uzis at gun ranges.

It is becoming increasingly clear that you don't know the definition of eugenics, or a lot of other terms for that matter.

Kids can learn to shoot guns under proper supervision but what the HELL are you talking about AD?