|
From: Spartakus on 14 Mar 2010 21:40 zeez <blinkingblyth...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Spartakus wrote: > > enough <blinkingblyth...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > They had eugenics 'way back in colonial times, huh? > So you think the indians just commited mass suicide? Maybe you'd have better luck with name-calling. > [--lies about Margaret Sang(CITATION NEEDED) Indeed.
From: Day Brown on 20 Mar 2010 12:57
Rod Speed wrote: > No one ever 'considers' anything like that with sperm donors. What the women with the money to afford fertility clinic services now have, is the genealogy record to eliminate psychos and neurotics. They also have the scholastic performance data and enuf biographical info because they've realized socially conscious men sire girls who will grow up to take good care of the their moms. And while they dont have the identity of the sperm donors, they can contact the mothers of those who've already used a given line to see how the kids have turned out. There are thus family 'reunions' now of half siblings. I've seen the video in a 60 Minutes segment; they are all tow heads, all performing well above average, and the older ones are now in college under full scholarship. Whether I like this or not, this is what is going on, the upscale women have the money and the right to these corporate services. They dont giva damn what your opinion is. At some point the taxpayers may realize that if they are going to support kids on welfare anyway, they'd do gonzo better to subsidize fertility clinic services for all women in the name of equal opportunity. Which would no doubt leave you and me out of the gene pool. But that dont bother me. The nations which promote fertility clinic services will see far lower crime and psychopathology rates, no genetic disease, and much more investment as the global financial community sees the promise in the next generation of corporate staffing. |