Anonymous D replied with this 6 years ago, 1 minute later, 39 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,022,773
@previous (beckyderp !DONgSbOYdw)
Thank you and notice the poll count just increased.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 26 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,022,776
I see why he was friends with Trump:
"Mr. Epstein, who was charged in July with the sexual trafficking of girls as young as 14, was a serial illusionist: He lied about the identities of his clients, his wealth, his financial prowess, his personal achievements. But he managed to use connections and charisma to cultivate valuable relationships with business and political leaders."
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,022,781
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,022,847
> Mr. Dershowitz said he was appalled
Wow. That's heavy. Even Alan Dershowitz thinks your comments aren't defensible.
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 16 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,023,114
Meaning he wanted to have kids.
I've always associated "eugenics" with either sterilizing and/or killing people with perceived undesirable traits, not with people wanting to pass on their own genes by conventional reproduction. In a way, evolution itself is basically a 4 billion year eugenics program if you think about it. Epstein's plan (no indication it was ever realized to any extent) was to impregnate 20 women. The child support payments sound crippling but I guess he's smart enough to get out of legal liability or rich enough not to care.
Still the title comes off as Buzzfeed-level clickbait. There's no evidence at all he wanted to get rid of "undesirable" people or "purify the human race" or anything a reasonable person would describe as "eugenics". Even if he did have 20 or 200 kids, that's barely a drop in the bucket in a nation of 300+ million. I mean that's barely any bigger than the Duggars and no one has yet accused Jim Bob Duggar of "eugenics" or "trying to seed the human race with his DNA" for having 19 kids.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,023,115
Good lord! I don't think he should have been saying that at all!
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,023,119
@previous (I)
I'm beginning to think he's a bad person. @1,023,114 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
Yeah I think Eugenics isn't a great term to describe this.
terri !RwordOooFE joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 38 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,023,135
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
how about jeffgenics?
terri !RwordOooFE double-posted this 6 years ago, 42 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,023,137
Dead !Pool..v42s joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 53 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,023,150
@1,023,114 (Meta !Sober//iZs) @1,023,119 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
But it's eugenics. Just like selectively breeding food and animals is a form of genetic manipulation. Trying to unnaturally influence the DNA mixture in the general population is what eugenics is all about. Not saying that it isn't too small to make a general difference, but it's not too different from Royal families breeding within their own family tree to produce a "more pure" genetic mixture