Enterprise: Space Nazi Two-parter

[Antiboyscout]

"usual-anti conservative buzzwords"
Right on que.

[G-Man]

Okay, no one got my joke? Or no one cared? The head Nazi guy is played by the same guy who played Knight Two in <i>Babylon 5's</i> "And the Sky Full of Stars." (Knight One was played by the guy who played Joachim in <i>Wrath of Khan</a>).

[Archon_Wing]

Hah, intercontinental invasions in Civ are definitely the worst.

[TGLS]

Honestly, I get the whole argument about the plausibility of an early death of Lenin causing the Nazis to go west, but this is a timeline where the Nazis pull off a transatlantic Normandy. Plausibility is already out the window. Zangara assassination timelines create the possibility that the US is so isolationist that the Nazis could island hop to Newfoundland (or just take it after forcing a peace on Britain), then build up and invade. The best Nazis in America timeline I saw had Fascists steal the elections and ask for the Nazis to help "restore order".

[Crowley]

The moment the Nazi general at the white house showed up on screen, I had a strong feeling I had seen him before, specifically in a video game. Looking it up, he played Jerec in Dark Forces II. And his eyes are always covered in that role. Weird how the human mind works sometimes.

It's not like Eugenics has really gone away.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/

It just shifted, changed, and tied itself inextricably to abortion, so if you argue against it they can attack you with all the usual anti-conservative buzzwords.
I mean women have a right to abort their child for any reason, right? Even if that reason is, their child is genetically inferior. Who are you to say no, you bigot.

Can you actually call it eugenics when talking about a condition that is not hereditary? (Yes, to be precise, there is an inherited aspect to Down syndrome, but of all affected people, it is in minority, and even those with the inherited factor can have an unaffected child.) I am not saying that just to be dismissive, I am genuinely curious about the proper use of the word.

[Antiboyscout]

"can have an unaffected child"

I don't think you know how genetics work. Just because you can have a normal child doesn't mean your condition is not hereditary or genetic.
Down syndrome is a genetic disorder by definition.

[Crowley]

I don't think you know how genetics work. Just because you can have a normal child doesn't mean your condition is not hereditary or genetic. Down syndrome is a genetic disorder by definition.

Likewise, not all genetic conditions are hereditary. Perhaps in this case it is more proper to use the term "chromosomal" than "genetic". Down syndrome is the result of an error in cell division which causes an extra chromosome duplicate in the cell, which can happen to the reproductive cells in otherwise perfectly normal parents. There are several other unusual chromosomal conditions, such as males having an extra Y chromosome, which is not in any way hereditary.

[Antiboyscout]

Ether way, we are "preventing someone from ever living" (killing) someone for no other reason than they are/will be a cripple.

[J!!]

Hold on there, I think most of us can agree that there is a significant difference between preventing the birth of a hypothetical person, and ending the life of an actual person.

If you went to buy some milk, but someone had just bought the last carton in the store, you wouldn't accuse that guy of 'stealing your milk'.

[GandALF]

Hold on there, I think most of us can agree that there is a significant difference between preventing the birth of a hypothetical person, and ending the life of an actual person.

If you went to buy some milk, but someone had just bought the last carton in the store, you wouldn't accuse that guy of 'stealing your milk'.

Whether or not a fetus counts as a living a person is the core of the entire abortion debate, and this is not the right forum for that.