you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

You miss the idea. I am against conventional eugenics where some bureaucrat selects genes. My idea here is to have simple group membership criteria that will statistically select for better genes. And I would easily be included based on this criteria.

[–]forscher 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As if a bureaucrat like you even could have a glimpse on what we are doing.

We understood war, before you read in on it.

We understood books before you burned them.

You are just a person that tries to force her opinion on others.

[–]wendolynne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Since you don't want bureaucracy involved, you answer is in who you choose to mate with, and who you convince to mate with you. The line between group membership and bureaucracy is fuzzy.