That isn't a dystopia. It is the only way to stop the degeneration of humanity. Eugenics is ABSOLUTELY required, else we will have ever increasing numbers of ever more retarded people.
How about the kind of eugenics where people only have children with those they are committed to spending their lives with? Anything else is bad for the children. In this case it's a crime against nature as well. Ends don't justify the means, but if they did, a world of genetically modified transhumanoids isn't a persuasive end point.
You don't think it should be a crime to breed humans with apes, experiment on babies' genes to see how they turn out or grow humans in a lab that have no emotions and can be used as cannon fodder? We have a natural disgust of deformed creatures and monkeying around with natural processes for a reason. Subversion of nature is also a slippery slope that we have to put strong guard rails around to prevent the commodification and degeneration of humanity.
We have a natural disgust of deformed creatures and monkeying around with natural processes for a reason.
The former premise is true only because we assume deformity = disease or genetic maladaptation, a judgement which was correct in most circumstances in the ancestral environment.
The latter premise is retarded. One of the earliest things humans did was selectively breed crops and animals for size, yield, and physical characteristics. We don't just not have an aversion, we have a predeliction for tampering with natural processes.
That isn't a dystopia. It is the only way to stop the degeneration of humanity. Eugenics is ABSOLUTELY required, else we will have ever increasing numbers of ever more retarded people.
How about the kind of eugenics where people only have children with those they are committed to spending their lives with? Anything else is bad for the children. In this case it's a crime against nature as well. Ends don't justify the means, but if they did, a world of genetically modified transhumanoids isn't a persuasive end point.
There is no such thing as a crime against nature, especially since nature spends all day trying to kill us.
You don't think it should be a crime to breed humans with apes, experiment on babies' genes to see how they turn out or grow humans in a lab that have no emotions and can be used as cannon fodder? We have a natural disgust of deformed creatures and monkeying around with natural processes for a reason. Subversion of nature is also a slippery slope that we have to put strong guard rails around to prevent the commodification and degeneration of humanity.
The former premise is true only because we assume deformity = disease or genetic maladaptation, a judgement which was correct in most circumstances in the ancestral environment.
The latter premise is retarded. One of the earliest things humans did was selectively breed crops and animals for size, yield, and physical characteristics. We don't just not have an aversion, we have a predeliction for tampering with natural processes.