Debate. Debate. Debate.

disgusting

mehhhhhhhhh. It's kinda boring in my opinion.

Seattle! (heart eyes)

(bump)

wowee…..

Let me think on this.

That sounds kinda messed up in my opinion…

Actually, let me re-phrase that:

That’s extremely messed up, what the blep…

what the fuck, it’s a baby.

what the fuck, it’s a baby.

Exactly.

this isn’t the fucking hunger games, it’s not survival of the fittest. ?!!! who even said that

That is all kinds of messed up…

Darwin… and technically is is survival of the fittest

From a scientific standpoint it does make sense. You only want to pass on the strongest genes so that the species survives.
But
It's babies.
I mean if it's merciful to let them die instead of suffer a horrible life of pain then yes, I would agree that letting them go would be a good choice. But that is the only criteria. Not 'because they have weak genes'.

weird subject.

very.

why…i mean…m

I think the only argument against it is: They're babies. We don't kill babies. Especially when we have the technology to cure most (if not all) issues that a newborn would come into contact with.

But like I said scientifically it makes sense, so I can't really argue against it. A strong gene pool creates a strong race

I just can’t see how that’s considered reasonable… That’s like ending overpopulation by nuking random cities, or ending racism by killing off all but one race… Like, it’s a good cause I guess, but it’s not a good solution at all