6 page paper (due in 12 hours)

I. Introduction

A. Thesis: From an initial perspective, eugenics seems like the perfect answer to improving the human race through selective breeding to create humans that display ideal characteristics. In reality, eugenics is more harmful to humans and breeding a more ideal human just based off of the characteristics that are noticeable undermines how complex genetics really is.

B. Background Information:

· Term came from Francis Galton in his Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development (1883).

· Belief that science has the power to solve social problems such as crime, alcoholism, etc.

· Ideology focused on the power of heredity in determining physical, physiological, and mental traits.

II. Body Paragraphs

A. 1st argument: May be eliminating genes that are actually helpful.

· Ex: Sickle cell anemia is most prominent in areas where malaria is contracted the most. This is because those who have sickle cell anemia are more resistant to malaria.

1. Sickle cell anemia: mutated hemoglobin distort red blood cells into a crescent shape at low oxygen levels.

· Ex: Carrying a single copy of the gene for cystic fibrosis protects against tuberculosis.

1. Cystic fibrosis: production of abnormal secretions, leading to mucus buildup that impairs the pancreas, intestine, and respiration.

· There is no way to tell if “bad” or “useless” genes we have now could actually be helpful to humans in the future.

· The diversity in human genes is what allows certain humans to survive different climates, environmental changes, and live off of a certain diet.

B. 2nd argument: Biodiversity of humans will be limited, which then leads to the end of the human race.

· Biodiversity: the variety of life in the world or in a particular habitat or ecosystem.

· Our human race was created on the basis of mutations and evolution to create the many different people we have today.

· There will be an elimination of diversity between us.

· Take any two random humans and they will be very similar genetically, if we continue to take away what makes us diverse, there will eventually be an end to humans.

· If everyone is the same, there is no room for change in the future.

· The gene pool will become too limited and this will leave humans vulnerable to changes in the environment that suits them best. The world and our environment is definitely always changing.

1. Gene pool: the stock of different genes in an interbreeding population.

· There will be more genetic mistakes from the inbreeding of a limited gene pool.

· Ex: dogs have many different health issues due to all of the inbreeding.

C. 3rd argument: There will be extreme discrimination.

· There is no way every person will be for eugenics. There will be people who believe it is better to have natural born children. This will lead to those who are genetically superior to treat those who are natural born as inferior.

· Since it will be costly, only those who are wealthy can afford eugenics and it will cause an even deeper divide between the rich and poor.

· Having a huge divide in society may lead to even worse things such as a war.

D. Oppositional arguments:

· Prevents hereditary diseases.

1. Response: Even though diseases may be able to be eliminated, there is no way to rid of them entirely. Eventually because of the small gene pool and inbreeding there will be more mutations and diseases.

· Controls gender selection.

1. Response: There will be in imbalance in male to female ratio. There are cultures that would much rather have a son than a daughter and if they could choose this ahead of time, there will be a large imbalance.

· Can lead to medical advancements such as prolonging human life.

1. Response: There is no way to tell that eugenics will actually provide medical advancements or that humans will live longer because of it. Especially since there will be less diversity among humans and their genes.

III. Conclusion

A. Restate thesis.

B. Restate points and objections.

C. Conclude purpose and end with a clincher.