jag3421

I would rather have a world where we strive to create the best of us, rather than rolling the dice with perpetuating hereditary diseases and leaving our future to blind luck.

To answer your question : If I were born with a horrific disease that has a significant chance to pass that down to the next generation, it would be my responsibility to not pass that down to the next generation. I would understand.

There are always superior people and inferior people depending on a multitude of variables : time, genetics, intelligence, environment, training, etc. Ignoring genetics as an essential pillar of this is irresponsible.

Contraceptives prevent "the wrong people" from breeding, and is a form of Eugenics. Where is the resulting genocide?

The tribe. It could be enforced at the local level, and/or elevated to a higher level. Also that artist was correct, it's just taboo to admit it.

Your argument is riddled with strawmen. Eugenics is clearly helpful if you have a strategy selected (breeding for intelligence, strength, etc) and is witnessed in horse breeding, dog breeding, etc, and why top dollar is paid for the offspring of prize winning horses when they are studded out. You should instead attempt to make a compelling argument how it does not apply to humans. That would be worth reading, instead of strawman arguments.

If we can create stronger horses through selective mating, why do you believe that would not carry over to intelligence if applied to humans? Why would it not be worth having stronger, healther, and more intelligent humans?

This is not a good forum to discuss such topics, as your account will be shadowbanned, post(s) removed, or simply banned. Hackernews and its moderators are not interested in truth, but agendas, and are willing to disregard science/evolution to persist in their beliefs.