Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/2/2002 12:25:43 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 12:34:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/2/2002 12:43:49 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
Oh great! Now violent anti-social behavior is now a "disease" arising from a genetic disorder. He's not a mass-murderer and rapist - he's a VICTIM of a disease. The MAO connection makes sense, but you just KNOW damn well this will be used by f@cking bleeding-heart/liberal/socialists to further remove responsibility from the subhuman savages that roam our society for their viscious crimes they commit. Edited to add: Not to mention this sets the stage for vastly increasing use of psychoactive drugs in younger and younger children - boys especially. They'll start screening all toddlers and newborns for this "disorder". One blood test to enter kindergarten and the little kids will be put on mind-numbing drugs for life. And of course it will be considered child abuse for parents to object to drugging their 5-year old boys who test positive for the "violence gene".
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 12:35:25 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 1:33:07 AM EDT
I'd like to cure them of their disease. [img]http://www.the-dirtiest.com/images/diner.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 2:24:38 AM EDT
What if the only cure for this "disease" is a frontal lobotomy? Do you think insurance will cover it?
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 5:04:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/2/2002 5:07:12 AM EDT by ARLady]
i hate to break it to y'all, but everything about us is ultimately rooted in our genetic code. [b][size=4]however[/size=4][/b], that being said, i think they're going way too far saying that there's a single gene that dictates the path a person will take with regards to crime. hell, eye color is determined by more than one gene. why would behavior be any different? i'd love to read the actual paper on this; the media always does such a piss poor job of reporting scientific newsbits.
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 8:12:17 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ARLady: i'd love to read the actual paper on this; the media always does such a piss poor job of reporting scientific newsbits.
View Quote
The media do a piss poor job of reporting EVERYTHING.
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 8:29:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/2/2002 8:29:31 AM EDT by Benjamin0001]
i hate to break it to y'all, but everything about us is ultimately rooted in our genetic code. however, that being said, i think they're going way too far saying that there's a single gene that dictates the path a person will take with regards to crime. hell, eye color is determined by more than one gene. why would behavior be any different? i'd love to read the actual paper on this; the media always does such a piss poor job of reporting scientific newsbits.
View Quote
ARLady, I don't think I have ever disagreed with you , but this one will be first. At most in can account for 50% of life, the other 50% is the world itself. And I am not making the , "Victoms of the world we live in speech" which is bullshit to. I am saying that World , ie the planet earth and its physical laws, are probably more important in making a human being what they are, not in a sociopathic POV, but a physiological POV. I am against this kind of stuff because they are going to start legislating on these types of scientific results without having the whole picture, without having a complete model. Just like they did with Environmental Science. The don't have a supercomputer fast and powerful enough to correctly model a system like the weather, but yet they will legislate on incomplete data, often with erroneous results. Its is both bad science and bad understanding and translates into corrupt law. Ben
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 11:22:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: ARLady, I don't think I have ever disagreed with you , but this one will be first. At most in can account for 50% of life, the other 50% is the world itself.
View Quote
so you're saying eye color is determined by environment? okay, i know that's not what you're saying. but i don't think you read my post correctly OR you read too much into it. i never stated that our genetic makeup is the only thing that determines who we are. i said that it was one fo the factors determining who/what we are! i don't doubt for a minute that there's a genetic aspect to criminal behavior. what i do doubt is that a certain gene makes one a criminal. more likely, a certain gene (or genes, actually) makes one more susuceptible to certain emotions, feelings, or behavior patterns that, when mixed with certain environmental stimuli, will result in behaviors that are labeled criminal.
I am against this kind of stuff because they are going to start legislating on these types of scientific results without having the whole picture, without having a complete model. Just like they did with Environmental Science. The don't have a supercomputer fast and powerful enough to correctly model a system like the weather, but yet they will legislate on incomplete data, often with erroneous results. Its is both bad science and bad understanding and translates into corrupt law.
View Quote
i understand your concern, and fully appreciate the rationale. but you place the blame on the science instead of the media, congress, john q. public, and others who aren't well-versed in the science behind these things and therefore necessarily make faulty judgements. you can't blame science becaues some other party misuses the data.
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 11:52:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/2/2002 12:02:51 PM EDT by Benjamin0001]
. but you place the blame on the science instead of the media, congress, john q. public, and others who aren't well-versed in the science behind these things and therefore necessarily make faulty judgements. you can't blame science becaues some other party misuses the data.
View Quote
No but I do place blame on scientists who would go before the house and senate and argue for legislation sponsored by say the EPA when they themselves know that their data is incomplete and most likely erroneous. That is unethical, and morally wrong. Not to mention that it has a eventual negative impact on peoples perception of scientist, and in the long run an impact on their own funding. That not only hurts business and citizens alike, it eventually hurts the scientist themselves. I love science to my very core, I can truly appreciate a man/women who is capable of clear concise and correct insights into the nature of our universe. And for that reason I expect all scientist to aspire to the utmost of their ability to be RIGHT and CONCLUSIVE. I blame the media, for not publishing stories with intellectual rigor. I blame the congress for not having a good enough grasp of science to begin with. This is the same group of guys who tried to legislate that pi be rounded off to merely 3.0, As for John Q. Public: Well , the problem was 10-30 years ago when they were in school. They will learn what we teach them. DUMBUS DOWN DUMBUS DOWN !!! The universal chant of the public school meisters clear across these Great States. A few can still think when they get out. Thank God, because that will have to make the difference.
Link Posted: 8/2/2002 1:33:52 PM EDT
Top Top