My coworkers & I have decided that the world would be a much

[Rainbowreflect]

better place if IQ & fertility were connected.
Say if a person's IQ was below a certain level they would not be able to reproduce.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. As a teacher

I couldn't agree more. :)

[Heidi]

2. That's been tried.

It's called eugenics. Google "carrie buck" . . . or read here: http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay8text.html

[chickenscratching]

3. hey

it's my eugenics buddy! :hi:

[Heidi]

4. Hey, chickenscratching!

Have you read "War Against the Weak"? It's depressing, but true.

www.waragainsttheweak.com

[Rainbowreflect]

8. We did not mean it should be done, we were just saying

that it is too bad nature does not do that. Survival of the smartest, so to speak.

[Heidi]

11. Smart doesn't equal good.

I like being smart, and I like smart people, but I value compassion and honor even more. I'm not beating up on you, but lots of us American liberals lost ancestors due to American eugenics experiments between 1900 and 1955. That's all I'm saying.

[RubyDuby in GA]

6. Three generations of imbeciles is enough?

The Panda's Thumb is a good one!

[Bob3]

5. Danger Will Robinson - Slippery slope there kids

Read Stephen Jay Gould's the Mis measure of Man before you start talking about this kind of eugenic thinking.
A few quick points:
1) IQ tests, aside from cultural problems, at best tell people how well they will do on other IQ tests. Originally intended as a educational tool to diagnose a students weaknesses, it was mutated into it's current state and in the early 1900's used as tool to help limit immigration into the US from the southern and Eastern Europe "Their IQ's are lower! We can't let them in!"
2) It's highly unlikely that Intelligence is one thing - there are things like verbal skills, math skills, logic and the list goes on and on. IQ tests are a pretty blunt tool to measure a brain with.
3) The inheriting of IQ is a pretty shaky idea. So much depends on social conditions that you can't even say what isn't. A kid currently growing up in Iraq say might have the capacity to be the next Einstein but right now she's trying to stay alive and not get blown up. She probably wouldn't test well on a standard test but she knows what the heck land mines look like and what to watch out for when crossing the street in Baghdad.

[maddiejoan]

7. were your coworkers and you --

-- discussing this with the horstwessel playing in the background?

[Heidi]

9. ( ! )

If I'd been drinking coffee when I read that, it would have been all over my monitor by now.

[maddiejoan]

13. darn --I missed!

:rofl:

[Bouncy Ball]

10. It might be ok for nature to do that, but

humans shouldn't deliberately do it. :puke:

[unblock]

12. they ARE connected!

just not the way you might think: stupid people breed more.

statistically, at least, this actually is true. most likely, higher iq => better jobs => more affluence => less breeding.

[Heidi]

14. There's a difference between stupidity and ignorance.

And the standard IQ test, still in use today with some modification, was developed as a tool of early eugenicists. Sorry if that pisses anyone off, but them's the facts.

[Bob3]

15. I would dispute that

Poor people have more children not stupid people.
For example - look at the president - how smart is he? but he only had two. (let's thank god for that)but if stupid people breed more we should be up to our armpits in *'s kids)
For one Poor people don't have the access to more effective and more expensive forms of birth control that the upper crust does.
And other socio-economic forces come into play- the more children the more people in the house hold who could earn money and the more likely one of them will be around to take care of ma and pa when they get older. It has nothing to do with smarts. Hell Smart poor people are treated like criminals in this society.

Last thought: we're never going to be able to do anything about poverty if we can't get away from the "it's their fault they are like this" thinking.