/int/ - International

She's well enough to decide to have a kid and give birth, it even seems she can take care of herself and her kid, so probably will he/she be able in the future. I don't see the problem, seems like it's entirely her decision and her kid to blame her when the time comes. A better question is why you think you, or society, get to impose what standards of living other people should gave, like, a lot of Bernds are pretty unhappy or downright depressed, should they gassed cause they are suffering? Or why it even worries you that much, could you be thinking of their suffering to avoid thinking of your own?

>>6290 Genetic engineering is coming in 5 minutes anyway. The chinese are already doing it.

>>6292 Genetic engineering has been around for 50 years, 30 commercially, have you heard of a super crop that yields the same with half the water? A bacteria that eats plastic used in massive recycling? Cattle that just produces top sirloin? All of that is theoretically possible, all of those examples have GMO versions, but the advantages are modest, human genome was decoded 20 years ago, most of genetic diseases still have no clear genetic makers to look for. Turns out genetic engineering is really complicated

get well soon hun

>>6291 cause he pays for it, and the freak would die without. the powers to be do on to others through taxes and laws, and cattle like you defend their system

>>6295 Yeah, that's all supposition, he only said it's a genetic disease, but from the wording (not saying she accidentally was knocked up, or that she lives with her mom) it seems to me we're talking about an independent adult. Funny you call others cattle while you're advocating giving the "powers to be" [sic] power to treat individuals as such, what makes you think you're such an specimen that you won't be next on the "do not reproduce" list? Lawl

>>6300 im not advocating eugenics, i mean this system of anarcho tyranny where the state takes all the money and tells you what to do, but yet theres this false logic of freedom. the germling is enslaved by the people vacuuming resources but you make it sound like he's the aggressor trying to dictate to others

>>6308 So you prefer a state that decides who gets to do benis in bagina? Or a state that sends goons to your house and cuts off your no balls because some bureaucrat signed a form that officially made you genetically inferior?

>>6308 1. Again, he complained about suffering, not being robbed of resources, there's no reason to think that is happening here, except you being so far up your own ass that you only see your own shit everywhere 2. You complain so much about the state but you were in fact advocating for eugenics, specifically for the state to stop some people from reproducing, so the state stops giving them resources, as if the state would give them back even if the sick woman was on disability, you're extremely naive. I admit, however, that I don't have your deep distrust and resentment towards the general idea of a state, however self defeating your ideas to face it might be, cause I don't think, like you seem to think, that the people running it are better than me, maybe you're just projecting on them what you think of yourself 3. It was really hard to make sense of what you tried to say, you don't know the meaning of basic words, like anarchy, get your ideas in order and buy a dictionary

>>6309 Of course not, he just wants that to happen to other people, you know, people he doesn't like. Of course the state he reviles that much would never do something like that to him, if it had the power

>>6311 I see, it's only tyranny if you pay taxes, not when the government cuts off someone's balls. Isn't that the plot of The Handmaid's Tale? Not that I read it but maybe I should before saying things like this. Is it an enjoyable read?

>>6290 >>6291 >>6295 The simplest solution would be to just refuse all gibs and free medical care from such people. If you have genetic defects or diseases and want to breed then it's on you to take care of them. You don't have the right to put the burden on everyone else to pay for expensive medical care for your defective children you chose to have.

>>6313 >from such people Then the tyranny lies in deciding who belongs to "such people". Imagine Bernd paying for health insurance for years and when he's diagnosed with cancer in his 50s, the bureaucrat decides that Bernd had a genetic predisposition, so fuck him, no gibs. The only solution would be to get rid of all social welfare programs in order to prevent someone genetically inferior from ever benefitting. We call that tossing the baby out with the bathwater. Dismantling a good system just because a small percentage of the people who benefit from it, don't "deserve" it for having bad genes.

>>6314 It's just to easy to manipulate some people, a politician just have to insinuate the possibility a system might be abused (in this case by receiving medical care they need, apparently, which is the intended purpose the system) and suddenly it's all they can think about, no matter if a politician is embezzling mllions or the military is refusing to tell how billions were expent, less fortunate people can't be getting more than the bare minimum, to ensure that they will dismantle anything that works, give any power the government needs to spy on people and as much funds and bureaucrats they need to get those gibmedats to jail

Poor people should be banned from giving birth for the same reasons(and many other reasons).

>>6314 Health insurance isn't gibs. If Bernd has paid for the insurance with his own money then he is entitled to whatever the insurance contract applies to. And there's nothing hard about it. If you have any KNOWN genetic disease then you're not eligible for any gibs or free medical treatment for it. You are free to work and pay for it yourself. Suggesting that you'd have to scrap the entire system to prevent any chance of anyone accidentally getting gibs they weren't entitled to is just retarded.

>>6317 >If you have any KNOWN genetic disease then you're not eligible for any gibs or free medical treatment for it. So, no medical treatment for your cancer due to a genetic predisposition. Got it. Also, if you or your kid gets that cancer at age 16, you won't have paid a single centime. No medical treatment for children with cancer? Try running for parliament on this topic and tell us how it works out.

>>6290 >Why do we as a society allow people like my neighbor to continue to bring endless suffering into the world? Because the Loosh must flow.

>>6310 i replied to YOU not op when you asked what right society had by telling you it is simply a fact if something is publicly funded its opened up to input and terms. if you just want to talk about eugenics and rights, i think thats quite a hardline stance that any form of regulation is infringing on rights. does driver's licenses and commercial licensing infringe on the right to drive a car? or just prevent other people from getting crashed into, miamed, or killed? i think its misplaced sentimentality that leads to zero regulation on being a parent, that in turn leads to child abuse, child obesity, etc, that it would tyranny to even just make people take a class and certify mental capacity. also people reliant on government aid do indeed have their 'reproductive rights' open to debate by those funding them

>>6322 >also people reliant on government aid do indeed have their 'reproductive rights' open to debate by those funding them Not in any country I'm aware of, but your whole comment screams "I'm arguing in bad faith". Drivers licenses? Seriously?

>>6290 > Why do we as a society allow people like my neighbor to continue to bring endless suffering into the world? So companies can make money. See “Industrial Society and its Future”

>>6322 I specifically said she supports herself, also publicly funded or not society has not any right, they could retire the funding, but, again, there isn't evidence of any, other than medical attention, which is not specified to be expensive or more that her work is worth. So you're answering to something no one said. I'm not against the regulation, you're the dumbass who is against the government asking for more regulation. I asked why is anyone's business if they're (again, I clarified) not even paying for it, and in any case they could just not pay, not force an abortion as OP said. If it's more efficient to just pay for everyone is another discussion. And your license example is exactly why we need the regulation, that you're so against, but then, not so much, if you drive and don't know how chances are high you'll negativity affect society

>>6291 > a lot of Bernds are pretty unhappy or downright depressed, should they gassed cause they are suffering I absolutely advocate for assisted suicide. I was ready to kill myself at age 18 and looking back it would have absolutely been the correct decision. So much suffering would have been prevented. Sadly the German politicians responsible for implementing assisted suicide - our highest court decided they have to make it possible years ago - keep denying this right to the people because of Christianity.

>>6388 Now, forbidding people to have children is not the same as ASSISTING someone with anything, you see the difference? But we have a vote to exterminate Bernds, I guess

>>6392 Not all Bernds are suffering.

>>6394 And not all that are suffering want to die, see how that applies to the lady and the baby who are "suffering" according to OP?

>>6290 >Why do we as a society allow people like my neighbor to continue to bring endless suffering into the world? By your logic, the best solution to "end suffering" would be to eradicate all life on earth. But I'm glad at least you're transparent and forward about the fact that you agree wholeheartedly with nazies. As in, you believe the state should decide who you get in bed with, if you ever do, and when. Oh, the science is better now? Ok, it still has a lot of issues and there's plenty of mysteries; medicine specially: every few years a study comes out that basically turns on it's head the entire body of knowledge we have about a particular disease... and doctors as individuals are retards who you can't expect to be up to date with those discoveries, and don't even want to anyway. Hell, couple years ago a literal expert on a disease contracted the same and was famously murdered by his doctors because he wouldn't stay put while they administered the wrong treatments. They weren't acting with knowledge or with the best interests of the patient or society in mind, they were offended the patient wasn't following the role of submissive animal that worships it's caretakers.

>>6397 > Hell, couple years ago a literal expert on a disease contracted the same and was famously murdered by his doctors Bernd has no idea what case you're talking about. "Famously" no longer means anything, the world is so divided into (subcultures) and bubbles now, Bernd regularly stumbles across people who have had tens and even hundreds of millions of fans and followers for many years, yet Bernd has never heard anything about them.

>>6398 The case was famous. It just didn't reach your particular sphere of attention. What you're saying is that I didn't say anything wrong, right? I think I gave enough information that, if you look it up, you'll find it. It's ok to be uninformed about some topics and just admit you don't care... Like people talk about the latest pop stars, world-class football players, or actors of major blockbusters; I can just admit I have no idea who they are rather than try to blame the other person for not being familiar with my interests. But this also serves to tell apart who wants to stay on topic and who will jump to the farthest tangent at the smallest opportunity. Anyway https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/health/weve-lost-control-said-clinicians-28946515 This article is from April last year. You should look up older and newer reports to see how the newspapers slowly try to shift the narrative by omitting and obfuscating details in order to try to absolve the doctors from blame. An article from the same source from july, as well as ones from a similar date to this one in the Daily Mail and Mirror, cleverly mention the particular injection that ultimately caused his death in such way that it seems as one of many procedures that occurred in the months leading to his death. Other articles try to shift the blame on understaffing, or try to downplay the negligence by leaning into the wife's testimony as possibly biased, even though the doctors so far seem to have refused to give their own detailed accounts of the events or directly refuse any specific accusation. >>6394 Everything that's alive has the potential to suffer, and the nature of mortality means that everything that lives will, eventually, suffer. Pigeons mourn the death of a caretaker, dogs and cats develop abandonment issues from being rehomed, crocodiles will reach old age and feel their hunting and fighting prowess diminish as they get expelled from their territory by a younger male; everything falls ill at some point... Yet only an infimal fraction of beings prefer death, but that's up to each individual to decide, not you. So is the decision to end your life, or to perpetrate it; by reproduction, for example.

a friend of bernd has the absolutely worst shit genetics i ever heard of he has gout AND rheumatism, both conditions get considerably worse when he eats the wrong stuff, but the overlap of allowed foods between them is very small and leaves him with red beans and fish, iirc, and most of the foods that would be beneficial for one condition worsen the other. He cant drink alcohol and has constant pain in his fingers and elbows. He also has bad eyesight and literally his whole family died of cancer before they became 60. His parents are both already dead, but he really is kinda mad at them that they thought they had to reproduce.