If there were suddenly genetic, scientific, and/or medical "cures" for disabilities like deafness, blindness, or paralysis, do you think hypothetically that they should be made mandatory that parents give these cures to their kids if there were no side affects or adverse affects to taking the "cure," effectively eradicating these things from future generations.
- I would absolutely support the idea of the 'cure' being mandatory53% (41)45% (26)49% (67)Vote
- I would only support an optional 'cure'47% (37)55% (32)51% (69)Vote
Most Helpful Guy
I would support mandatory, because first of all most humans are born with it. And even if they are deaf they still have ears, it's just that something isn't working. And with all the trouble I have had with my eyes, I was born with cataracts which were removed at the age of 16, then I had a laser procedure done, I would totally make it mandatory for eyes.
I also accept that it should be optional to the individual, because there needs to be the option. The thing is that not having these things like hearing sight or whatever naturally, it could be dangerous, and having it will help with safety, learning, and all sorts of things.
If someone came out with a drug that said, correct you homosexuality, or anything like that, they should be ejected from the planet lol1
Most Helpful Girl
Given that parents usually want what's best for the children, I don't think it has to be mandatory. If there are absolutely no adverse affects, most parents will demand it for their children.
But we have to keep in mind that there are these people who think every child is born perfect just as God intended, so they won't demand it, because there's beauty in the disabilities of their children. For their children's sake, I think it should be mandatory.0