Archived: https://archive.md/lzmm1
Archived: https://archive.md/lzmm1
Cults maybe. Most organized religions aren't that selective these days. Mixed race dating is not discouraged, It needs to be since churce is one place that truth should be taught. Those fuckers even say open faggotry is okay. I say keep it in the closet and we're good.
Cults maybe. Most organized religions aren't that selective these days. Mixed race dating is not discouraged, It needs to be since churce is one place that truth should be taught. Those fuckers even say open faggotry is okay. I say keep it in the closet and we're good.
I don't care about race. Give me the best 100 people of every race and I will breed a population far superior to any existing race.
But yes, existing religions aren't selective enough. I am suggesting a theoretical religion. To be honest, I don't think this can be done right now, maybe in the future. This is my current plan(old.reddit.com) which I should post about separately.
I don't care about race. Give me the best 100 people of every race and I will breed a population far superior to any existing race.
But yes, existing religions aren't selective enough. I am suggesting a theoretical religion. To be honest, I don't think this can be done right now, maybe in the future. This is [my current plan](https://old.reddit.com/r/nonmorons/comments/ejscqq/my_plan/) which I should post about separately.
How about just "give me the best 100 people", ignoring race. If you're looking for the best, race really should not be an issue, except it will be with IQ disparity. Unless, you consider NBA players are some of "the best".
How about just "give me the best 100 people", ignoring race. If you're looking for the best, race really should not be an issue, except it will be with IQ disparity. Unless, you consider NBA players are some of "the best".
Absolutely. Give me the best regardless of race. That is the ideal.
Absolutely. Give me the best regardless of race. That is the ideal.
Give me the best 100 people of every race and I will breed a population far superior to any existing race.
You might if you're going off the theory that more genetic diversity is always good. Hybrid vigor, etc.
But then again different racial groups have differing average IQs, and the offspring of different races tend toward the average of the average of each parents' group.
So if you crossed a white (avg IQ 100) and an American black (Avg IQ 80 or so), you're looking at a child with a probable IQ around 90. So admixing is a great deal for the low IQ races, not so much for the average or high IQ racial group partner. (Which is probably why it's resisted by those groups).
It's also worth noting that genetic diversification is not 100% benefit. While you are reducing the likelihood of harmful recessive gene pairings, you are also reducing the likelihood of beneficial co-adaptive gene pairings.
> Give me the best 100 people of every race and I will breed a population far superior to any existing race.
You might if you're going off the theory that more genetic diversity is always good. Hybrid vigor, etc.
But then again different racial groups have differing average IQs, and the offspring of different races tend toward the average of the average of each parents' group.
So if you crossed a white (avg IQ 100) and an American black (Avg IQ 80 or so), you're looking at a child with a probable IQ around 90. So admixing is a great deal for the low IQ races, not so much for the average or high IQ racial group partner. (Which is probably why it's resisted by those groups).
It's also worth noting that genetic diversification is not 100% benefit. While you are reducing the likelihood of harmful recessive gene pairings, you are also reducing the likelihood of beneficial co-adaptive gene pairings.
You don't seem understand what I am saying. I said the BEST of each race. This has nothing to do with genetic diversity and everything to do with seeking quality. The average member of every race is a worthless moron.
I have hired many programmers in my career based on intelligence. The only group that lacks high intelligence is women. I have hired intelligent men of all races.
You don't seem understand what I am saying. I said the BEST of each race. This has nothing to do with genetic diversity and everything to do with seeking quality. The average member of every race is a worthless moron.
I have hired many programmers in my career based on intelligence. The only group that lacks high intelligence is women. I have hired intelligent men of all races.
>>Good religions encourage monogamy
Implying islam encourages monogamy is a stretch. Last time I checked you were into islam, so I guess it qualifies as "good religion" for you
Islam doesn't encourage monogamy
You can marry as much women as you want as long as you can afford it basically
And it's not just all about gene selection in the end, sure it definitely matters, you evidently don't want an army of retards. But having an army of super humans who don't understand why doing evil is wrong isn't that much better. I can eventually turn out to be much worse.
...
>>Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical. But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.
So much potential flaws in this... Where to start...
"Religion", what do you call religion? Putting islam, judaism, christianism, luciferianism, animism and all their respective sub denominations in the same bag? A la LGBTQPZ++?
We can put communism, nazism, fascism, anarchism, imperialism, nationalism, centrism etc in the same bag and call it politics. And then what? It's everything and anything
It's flawed, you start a reasoning on that basis you can only end up with a wrong result at best, garbages in garbages out
...
Polical solution aren't practical? History shows the opposite... Tell me how unpractical a constitutional republic is for a start.
...
A small group of people could form a eugenic religion? They could as well form a political party or a social club, what's the difference? Both are grounded in ideals and theories about how shit should be run
...
Christ is the truth, and the bible was written by men, and salvation isn't in the state. Maybe one could start there. That's already a good start.
If the everything solution was just a one liner we would already have come up with it... Men have spent thousands of years thinking shit through and through, for what exactly? Come up with a system to handle their environment, starting with their fellow men within the goup, handling the group itself, and their relationship with the other groups and other indivduals and the world around them to a larger extent
They tried to come up with alternative solutions, systems, to what is the obvious ideal solution. The ideal solution, is simple in theory, but almost impossible in practice; stop doing evil entirely, try to do good instead everytime you can, everybody is his own cop, and shit will drastically improve
That's the intent with early christianity for instance. But well, since "we" realized not everyone would get on board with the program, "we" had to start to imagine, create, and put in place more coercive systems called governments to compensate...
And yeah, "start over kill them all!", we tried that
You have all your facts wrong, so debate is hopeless.
You have all your facts wrong, so debate is hopeless.
That's not an argument
And to be honest, it's the other way around, I've been so spot on you just called it quit
That's not an argument
And to be honest, it's the other way around, I've been so spot on you just called it quit
Correct, that's not an argument. I don't argue with my neighbor's barking dog, and I don't argue with people who have no grasp of reality. If you would fix some of your factual errors in your comment, then I can respond with an argument.
Correct, that's not an argument. I don't argue with my neighbor's barking dog, and I don't argue with people who have no grasp of reality. If you would fix some of your factual errors in your comment, then I can respond with an argument.
The only exception would be if a religion allows for or encourages dysgenic practices such as marriage between first cousins. My guess is this would be much more harmful to the gene pool than a strict adherence to monogamy would be beneficial.
The only exception would be if a religion allows for or encourages dysgenic practices such as marriage between first cousins. My guess is this would be much more harmful to the gene pool than a strict adherence to monogamy would be beneficial.
Marriage between first cousins has no long-term dysgenic effect. It only has a short-term effect by exposing recessive genes. I don't care about this because this has no negative effect on the overall gene pool.
Marriage between first cousins has no long-term dysgenic effect. It only has a short-term effect by exposing recessive genes. I don't care about this because this has no negative effect on the overall gene pool.
Many people have a built in disgust for this and are intuitively repulsed by the idea, I'm one. This just goes to show that there is a 'cultural instinct' at the root of much of our behavior and that this instinct differs across cultures.
These differences must be preserved for the sake of human biodiversity and we absolutely must separate on cultural lines and shut the borders dividing those cultures, then defend them by force of war.
Many people have a built in disgust for this and are intuitively repulsed by the idea, I'm one. This just goes to show that there is a 'cultural instinct' at the root of much of our behavior and that this instinct differs across cultures.
These differences must be preserved for the sake of human biodiversity and we absolutely must separate on cultural lines and shut the borders dividing those cultures, then defend them by force of war.
This sub is supposed to be about eugenics. My suggestion doesn't require you to marry your cousin, but doesn't prevent it either. So if it disgusts you then just don't do it. But a eugenic religion should focus on what is eugenic, not on what disgusts people.
My suggestion would certainly contribute to human biodiversity by breeding a new group.
This sub is supposed to be about eugenics. My suggestion doesn't require you to marry your cousin, but doesn't prevent it either. So if it disgusts you then just don't do it. But a eugenic religion should focus on what is eugenic, not on what disgusts people.
My suggestion would certainly contribute to human biodiversity by breeding a new group.
Marriage between first cousins ... has no negative effect on the overall gene pool.
Citation needed.
Take a look at this article from PJMedia(pjmedia.com). It seems like the problems extend to the community at large where inbreeding occurs -- not just the inbred children.
Even if you say all of the problems in this community are 100% the children of first cousin marriages and those problems all go away in the second generation, it still has a negative effect on the genepool.
So I would say not every religion is necessarily eugenic.
>Marriage between first cousins ... has no negative effect on the overall gene pool.
Citation needed.
Take a look at this [article from PJMedia](https://pjmedia.com/blog/the-problem-of-inbreeding-in-islam/). It seems like the problems extend to the community at large where inbreeding occurs -- not just the inbred children.
Even if you say all of the problems in this community are 100% the children of first cousin marriages and those problems all go away in the second generation, it still has a negative effect on the genepool.
So I would say not *every* religion is necessarily eugenic.
I give up. If someone asks for a citation to support the statement "1 + 1 = 2" then I just need to end the conversation.
I give up. If someone asks for a citation to support the statement "1 + 1 = 2" then I just need to end the conversation.
Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical.
Not quite. We can't just have a religion and no kind of political arrangement. Even lacking a state is a political arrangement.
But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.
I suppose though a narrow gene pool could be rather unfortunate.
Also, you may want to think about inbreeding a bit more. Thisis satirical, but it still contains good information about the effects of inbreeding and outbreeding. As for your plan, I'll write a review post about it: I feel it deserves a good response because it's an effortpost.
>Religion is the only practical solution. Political solutions are simply not practical.
Not quite. We can't just have a religion and no kind of political arrangement. Even lacking a state is a political arrangement.
>But a small group of people could form a eugenic religion.
I suppose though a narrow gene pool could be rather unfortunate.
Also, you may want to think about inbreeding a bit more. [This](https://poal.co/s/MSM4Poal/87891) is satirical, but it still contains good information about the effects of inbreeding and outbreeding. As for your plan, I'll write a review post about it: I feel it deserves a good response because it's an effortpost.
I am not saying that politics shouldn't exist. I am just saying that politics won't work well for eugenics.
A small eugenic religion would have people joining and leaving, so the gene pool wouldn't be narrow.
I am not saying that politics shouldn't exist. I am just saying that politics won't work well for eugenics.
A small eugenic religion would have people joining and leaving, so the gene pool wouldn't be narrow.
(post is archived)