Do people with low IQs have less rights?

I thought of this question on the "Race and IQ Gap" thread in the Science forum. It seems to me that the whole reason to try to convince people that blacks are less intelligent than whites is to justify taking away their rights. That brings us to the core question. Do people that are less intelligent than the general population deserve less rights than the rest of us? Is it ok to segregate them, control their reproduction and allow them to be discriminated against just because they are less intelligent? If it is ok, then what is stopping those of greater intelligence from setting the bar a little higher so even those of "average" intelligence are included? For those who believe that there is a difference in IQ between the races, would asians be justified to do to whites what the whites are doing to blacks just because whites are less intelligent than them?

Here is my take on all this: No, people with low IQs do not have less rights. There is NEVER a reason for segregation and discrimination. We also should never be controlling anyone's reproduction rights. Once you start doing (*)(*)(*)(*) like that, it is not a far leap to concentration camps and "final solutions".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

 

Of course each human has the same rights.

But it shows various outcomes can be expected from various races, so to attempt to level the results with AA laws is racist.

The other point is where you get most of your immigration from. While average IQ of a race says nothing about the individual it says what you can expect from a 100,000+ and how likely that group will fair in a post industrial workforce. The next point is that there are differences and theres no where near enough information to say races dont exist therefor XYZ race doesnt deserve a homeland where they as an ethnic group can remain in control of their own destiny. The only ones saying people should have less rights are those that support laws like AA. Every race should have that basic human right of a homeland and self determination regardless of IQ. Africans have a very resource rich nation, i completely support their right to use it as they see fit.

 

This will become a legal issue, but not for the reasons you're thinking and not based on the previous thread.

One of the defenses in death penalty sentencing (for those states that have the death penalty) is low IQ. People with IQ's that are typically 70 or below usually don't get the death penalty since we consider them as not being capable of being responsible for their actions or fully aware of what it is they did wrong. This has kept many a retarded and or low IQ person out of the chair, but the corollary of this is that is they are not considered cable of being responsible for their behavior, then why are they allowed to run free rather than being institutionalized?

 

So you agree that people of European descent should go back to their homeland and leave the Native Americans to theirs?

 

Probably the same reason that we allow kids to run free even though they are also not responsible for their actions.

 

I personally would have gone with Reductio ad Hitlerum as the fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

 

The difference is that kids are not generally thought of as a danger to others, just to themselves.

 

Not sure. But, there's something queer about large numbers of people who contribute nothing to society in the way of labor, wealth creation, constructive thought, the arts, business development, academia, tax paying, civic participation or informed voting having as much say in choosing our laws and leaders as those who do.

How can any government or society survive such fools and such foolishness?

 

I think you already know the answer. In the long term it can't. The classical view of democracy is that it eventually degenerated in tyranny for just this reason. I used to think the US would be immune to that but I've changed my mind.

 

Well, in the short term we should urge support for the defunding efforts by Sens. Cruz, Lee, Paul and Rubio et al.

The longer term solution may be spelled out by Mark Levin in hs new, NYT #1 Best Seller, "The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic."

 

This is nothing new. Our government has lasted for over 200 years with stupid people voting and has done ok.

 

We've morphed over the years into something grotesque and ultimately unworkable. Unsustainable.

When people, perhaps those just like you, I don't know, talk about how we have nothing to worry about my immediate reaction is to wonder how much the speaker has done to help strengthen or even maintain this nation of ours. And if the speaker has done little to nothing to contribute to this nation's security, health, prosperity, strength or maintenance how in the hell can he speak authoritatively about whether we will be able to survive this most serious threat to America since WWII?

The answer is, he can't.

In fact, he might even be one of those who most greatly contributes to this country's current symptom of dysfunction.

Bottom line, why should anyone pay attention to you when the evidence coming from Washington, D.C. speaks MUCH LOUDER and much more convincingly than your casual platitudes and palliatives?

 

Yes, liberals and statists have the same rights as I do.

 

Just because the World Trade Center had never been attacked by two airliners in flight and crumbled to the ground before doesn't mean that it can't happen the first time.

Your rationale for somnambulism is unjustified by reason or logic.

 

No government lasts forever. So it is probably best to not put your faith in it.

 

Not to pick a fight but....

We are seventeen TRILLION dollars in debt (largely to China)....

Detroit is almost in ruins....

And the list gets worse from there.

How are we doing OK?

I AM all for equal rights - I fight for them daily.

But come on now.... we (as a nation) are not okay.

 

Define "rights".

 

Actually China owns about 8% of our debt with Japan at 7% they make up half of the foreign held debt so.............

Detroit is in trouble, in part because of bad governance civilly and by stupid leaders of the auto industry. That happens to company towns when the companies become less profitable.

We may not be OKAY in your mind but we aren't as dead as people think.

 

So in your opinion, what is the most serious threat to America since WWII? What I consider a serious threat may not be what you consider a serious threat.

 

I guess I should have said, we have done ok until now.That begs the question then, what has changed?

 

Thanks.... I feel so much better about it now.

 

In my view, the worse is yet to come.

Nothing really changed, we are just now starting to reap what we have sown.

Phil Graham expressed it in the way that made the most sense to me (now 20 years ago) when he said that "some day, there will be more people in the wagon than there will be people who are able to pull it." (paraphrased)

[video=youtube;VDEKmI7qKKQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDEKmI7qKKQ[/video]

[video=youtube;6XNM2Vu7Njw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XNM2Vu7Njw[/video]

[video=youtube;UhPtizGarPk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhPtizGarPk[/video]

[video=youtube;Fhep2QOzM2s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhep2QOzM2s[/video]

 

So you believe that welfare or that Obama is president is contributing to the downfall of America? It is hard to tell from the videos what the real complaint is.

 

I believe the entitlement mentality along with the government officials (like Obummer) who pander to it - is greatest cancer to our society as a whole.