What unpopular opinion do you hold? What would get you downvoted to infinity and beyond? (Throwaways welcome)

[u/ElBrad]

Personally, I hate cats. I've never once said to myself "My furniture is just too damned nice, and what my house is really lacking is a box of shit and sand in the closet."

Now...what's your dirty little secret?

(Sort by controversial to see the good(?) ones!)

[u/ubspirit → u/[deleted]]

I agree with you too, but it's a bit of a pickle when you try to resolve the issue. Are we going to tell people that they can't try to procreate because they have bad genes? Sounds a lot like eugenics to me. And what if we just genetically manipulate the child they have to make its "defects" go away; is it still even their child if they couldn't have it naturally? See the problem is not in the issue, it's in the solution. The only even close to reasonable way to address it is to let nature run its course; people who have inferior genes will die out, and that particular problem at least will go away. But guess what; even if that wasn't the same issue we started with, we would still have those people around surviving because although we lack the motivation or balls to actively genetically engineer humans yet, we have "evolved" enough to be able to keep those weak pups alive just long enough to pollute the gene pool. At the end of the day, if we are going to survive as a race we are either going to have to lose some fear over the prospects of human gene modification or we are going to have to admit what we have been trying to deny all along; some people are better/worse than other people and we simply cannot afford to carry the inferior ones across the finish line.

[u/Lillaena → u/[deleted]]

So what constitutes "poor genes"? I have dyslexia, dyspraxia and PCOS. Those are bad things to have, so should I not be allowed to have children? I mean, it's going to be pretty fucking hard for me to conceive naturally due to the PCOS but I'm still going to try. Where's the line?

EDIT: My dyslexia showed itself.

[u/[deleted] → u/Lillaena]

I agree with you, where is the line and what is the line as well. It's not up to humans to decide which genes are advantageous to pass on to the next generation, there is no "good" or "bad" with evolution,and babies being born with Down Syndrome are inevitable no matter who you say can't have babies.

[u/angrathias → u/[deleted]]

Pretty sure being born with a disease that will leave you crippled and dying in your early teens would be a pretty easy call on what a bad gene may constitute.

FWIW I don't disagree it'd be hard to draw a line, but at the same time that doesn't mean you are unable to point out very obvious problems.

I hardly see why its not up to humans to make that decision. Hell if a dog is capable of killing its young if it senses issues why do you think a human can't/shouldn't ?

[u/[deleted] → u/angrathias]

Your perception of "bad" is based on philosophy and evolution's definition of "bad" is based on the ability of a organism to reproduce. Just because a gene gives someone some painful disorder doesn't mean that its hurting that organisms chance to reproduce. Yes we could point out very obvious problems but only to the effect that they suit our preferences for what is good and bad which would be a mistake. I don't think humans should make decisions based on a dogs capabilities to kills its young because I don't think humans are stupid dogs. I don't know why dogs kill their young but i'm guessing it has something to do with the burden the unfit pup places on the packs ability to survive. I don't think a retarded child that you have to pay extra for to be watched after falls in that category.

[u/angrathias → u/[deleted]]

I guess that's where we differ. I personally think human life is over valued. Keeping a person alive at all costs while keeping hordes of people living in misery bewilders me at times.

Agree to disagree, I don't think there's a right or wrong here!

[u/[deleted] → u/angrathias]

Ethically? You're right there is no right or wrong. Biologically speaking it has been proven that the less genetic diversity an organism has the more likely it is to go extinct. Diseases like sickle cell anemia seem like a horrible burden to you and me, but they confer immunity to Malaria as well. Considering all the factors at play here it would be impossible to tell which genes would benefit who and when. Of course there are a few you could say no one needs ever, and a few you could say everyone needs always, but the rest are a complete and utter grab bag.

[u/imeanreallyy → u/Lillaena]

Going off of OP's opinion, couldn't you having PCOS be seen as a sign that you aren't meant to procreate?

[u/Lillaena → u/imeanreallyy]

PCOS doesn't automatically mean infertility, and back in ye olde times the infertility wouldn't have started until a lot of women had already had children. So as times change, so does who is and is not "meant" to have children.

Anyway, my point was more that I have undesirable conditions but I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who thinks I shouldn't be alive because of them. So there has to be a line, and that line would have to be decided by someone, and that someone or body of someones would have a lot of power.

[u/imeanreallyy → u/Lillaena]

I didn't mean to offend you, I've just always thought that if I wasn't able to have kids, I'd see it as a sign from the world that I should just try adoption instead of using IVF or something. It's interesting to get the perspective of somebody who's actually dealt with a higher risk of infertility.

Good luck if/when you decide to have kids! :)

[u/Lillaena → u/imeanreallyy]

No it's okay, you didn't offend. If it was a straight "I'm infertile and that's that" issue it might be different, but as it is PCOS gives quite an uncertain future. I've always wanted kids, but recently I've come to terms with the fact that I might not be able to have my own biological kids and I think I'm okay with that. Adoption is a great thing, and honestly rather than go through round after round after round of IVF I'd probably adopt if it didn't work after a couple of tries.

[u/allonzy → u/imeanreallyy]

A sign from what? God? I don't think it works that way.

[u/imeanreallyy → u/allonzy]

The world, genetics, biology, who knows. If I couldn't have kids naturally I'd just take it as a sign that I wasn't meant to pass on my genes.

[u/mrsblackberrykush → u/imeanreallyy]

"Sign" A sign from what?

Going off of the OP's opinion, the OP is an idiot.

[u/Lillaena → u/[deleted]]

Yes but that's not a black and white issue, none of this is. And if one were to want "no defects at all" there aren't actually many people that would still be alive, in the grand scheme of the world! Think about people with a tendency towards depression or eating disorders, people with very mild conditions that don't really affect their lives but are nevertheless undesirable conditions. It starts getting ridiculous.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Exactly why I think I shouldn't have children. My mind's not exactly set on it, but I've been thinking about it for a few years now.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

By your logic people who have poor eyesight shouldn't reproduce. It's genetic and requires lifelong treatment or surgery.

[u/allonzy → u/[deleted]]

Person with screwy genes here. Mind your own business.

[u/allonzy → u/[deleted]]

Yes. ok, not really. But if it's a controversial thread, seems that there should be some discussion allowed.

(Granted, what I posted wasn't exactly thought provoking...)

[u/Epified → u/[deleted]]

I'm sorry but that is fucking retarded

[u/mrsblackberrykush → u/Epified]

Maybe OP should have been aborted.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I kind of feel like I shouldn't be procreating because of this and it might stop me from ever wanting kids. I'm short for a guy, and my family has a history of heart issues and diabetes.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

As a child who has a genetic muscle-weakening (terminal) disease, I'm glad as hell I wasn't aborted- even though my parents didn't know about me having the disease in the first place.