From: hibbert@netcom.com
Date: Wed Aug 22 2001 - 11:10:29 MDT
Lee Corbin, Emlyn, Robert Bradbury and others have been talking in a
relatively calm tone about "eugenics" recently. I just want to point out
that while it may be possible for some people to use this term calmly, it's
an extremely loaded term when used in public. It's loaded enough that it
would really be a good idea to find a better word.
While there are people who object to the idea of selective breeding of
people (which is the same idea as, but a completely different slant than
some people deciding not to have children with certain genetic
characteristics), the real strike against the term is that the Nazis used
it to mean the selective killing of people the government didn't like. At
this point, there's no way to disassociate the term from that meaning.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to use the term today if they hoped
to convince others to listen to them calmly. A few people will be able to
listen calmly, but others will start looking for tar and feathers. Why
would you want to start a conversation around this word?
Chris
---
Chris Hibbert It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but
hibbert@netcom.com not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium.
-- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy.
http://discuss.foresight.org/~hibbert/home.html
Yahoo Instant Message: ag_cth
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:59 MST