If you aren't familiar with Jung and the concept of the collective unconscious you may find interesting reading there. Quoting: WP 840952
It's scary ground to tread on to say the following:
There are certain natural laws which our interest in science violates. One of them is eugenics. That's become a dirty word thanks to political correctness.
If we look at it from a health perspective instead of tying it to racism or nationalism, though, it does make sense.
People. They screw everything up. Heh.
Exactly what "natural" law are you referring to? Seriously, as far as I know, the only thing in science that resembles eugenics are the THEORIES of Natural Selection and Evolution. In my opinion, there is nothing natural about a group of people deciding whose DNA is worthy of this and whose DNA is worthy of that........there is nothing natural about it........In fact, Eugenics is just what you say: People getting in the way.
Okay. Guess you worked your way through to what I was saying.
The concept of Eugenics itself isn't evil. It's the problem of who gets to make the choice.
Eu=good + genos=birth. A well-born child.
Liberalism has, with good intentions, caused us a problem. We are unable from a moral standpoint to determine who must breed with whom, which is a good thing, I agree.
But we have gone so far as to encourage people with not-so-good genetics (genetic disorders) to breed, when in some cases, they are incapable of providing for the emotional and physical needs of the children they produce.
This, after all is the root of child abuse, adults who were improperly raised.
We have also gone so far as extreme measures to ensure that all life survives when it may have been naturally impossible for it to do so without intervention. This creates increased problems when that person reproduces.
It's ironic that all the blessings of modern medicine may be contributing to a degeneration of the gene pool.
One recognizes the grief of infertile people who desire children at the same time wondering if Mother Nature had a reason for that person being infertile.
Here's one example: In my working life I observed repeatedly first hand what happens when you teach developmentally disabled adults that they have a right to "normal" sexual lives.
Is it responsible for two adults with genetically-inherited disorders to reproduce under all circumstances?
(Not talking about love and how nice it is to have a baby, here. Anyone with a heart can sympathize with that. I'm talking about a world which is rapidly reaching maximum capacity and limited resources for those who are not considered "normal.")
I believe it will become crucial for some policy to be implemented, not necessarily out of power and control, but simply common sense and survival.
Who will make the decisions?