@gamerunknown (gamerunknown) posted a new topic, subject "The blue dot: a moral dilemma.". It read:

   I'm going to address this in the form of a hypothetical to remove some of the real world implications (and I mean no offence by reducing significant aspects of people's personality to a blue dot that can be easily corrected) of the actual topic I had in mind. The way this topic is constructed should be sufficient to guess the intended topic, but I request that responses are framed in the hypothetical form.
    
    Say there's a particular genetic variation which causes some individuals to develop a blue dot on their rump. Historically, said individuals were subjugated and accused of all kinds of moral turpitude. In the enlightened countries, opprobrium gave way to tolerance and eventually compassion from most on behalf of their beleaguered compatriots. In other countries, the strife continued.
    
    Would it be moral to search for a permanent cure to the blue dot in one of the enlightened countries, knowing that it'd be a concession to ignorance and spite? Would it be moral to _not_ search for the cure, knowing that the cure could save the lives of the oppressed? Would antagonism to former “blue dots” continue heedless of the cure?

Then @running_coach (running coach) said

    Sounds like the Star-bellied Sneetches

Then @Bryan_Ekers (Bryan Ekers) said

    Is blue dot heritable, or does it just appear in the population at random?

After which, @Maastricht (Maastricht) added

    Interesting question. An simillar issue is ethnic names. Lots of Jewish people in the US changed their typical Jewish names into more mainstream ones. Those names were often forced upon them by earlier antisemitic governments anyway.  
    Many Oriental immigrants do the same. And change their name from Han Xiaqu to Mary Wong, or even Mary Smith. Others keep their ethnic name or even assume one.
    
    So, when given the choice, some people take that chance, while others don't. But it is good that the US offers the possibility of name change.

So @Saint_Cad (Saint Cad) replied

    I noticed that the OP talks about “curing” the blue dot so would the analogy (if it even makes a difference) of an illness/disability or skin color?
    
    Also, Bryan had a good question that needs to be addressed. Is it a genetic abnormality that is not an inhereted one? In other words, if I'm a blue dot, what are the chances that my children will be blue dots? Is the cure genetical so that if I cure my blue-dottedness then my children will not be blue dots or does it only affect me?

So @John_DiFool (John DiFool) replied

    Wouldn't the disability lie in the minds of the oppressors, and not in the oppressees, so that if any curing is to be done it should be in the psyches of the former? [If you are going to be doing any “curing” at all that is.]

@TriPolar (TriPolar) replied

    TheDahm tripletshad blue dots tattooed on their butts when they were born so they could be told apart. There's nothing that needs to be cured in those girls.

After which, @solosam (solosam) added

    OP is clearly using the blue dot hypothetical to avoid discussing mankind's emerging Mutant powers.
    
    That said, I could see a huge market for techniques to remove or conceal the offending dot. No doubt people would try to find a “cure,” if only so they could cash in.
    
    Because you stated the dot is genetic and viewed as a sign of moral weakness, it is something that is inherent to the individual. Removing the dot might make it easier for a person to go undiscovered, but would not diminish the stigma of being one of the “dot people.”

@panache45 (panache45) replied

    I support any measure that includes examining each other's asses. But I'll give you my blue dot when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

To which @wonky (wonky) replied

    Didn't we just do this one, regarding the homosexuality pill? I can't find it, so I might be crazy.
    
    Hell, I would probably be crazy even if I could find it.

So @Dr.Strangelove (Dr. Strangelove) replied

    It's pretty obvious what you have in mind, but to me it seems like your metaphor is better applied to left-handedness than that other thing. Left-handedness historically was looked upon as, well, sinister, and children often received physical abuse for using their left hand. There is, like your blue dot, no great difference in personality or behavior; it's traditional belief systems that caused the conflict.
    
    Searching for a cure seems wasteful but not really a moral question. I'm left-handed but it's not exactly a deep part of me; were I to visit some remote locale that still viewed us as possessed by the devil, I might be willing to take a pill that switched me to right-handedness. It's just not a big deal, and whether it should be researched or not seems a more a function of economics than anything else.
    
    As for that other thing–well, there are deep differences in personality, among other things. It's not clear that it's right to “fix” these people at all, even if it will help them in the short term. Society should just get over itself.

Then @Trinopus (Trinopus) said

    Why? Why waste time and resources on a “cure” for left-handedness, or black skin, or being gay, or having red hair, or having freckles, or being tall, or being short, or…
    
    Why not spend the resources addressing variations of human genetic expression that actually are harmful? How about a “cure” (if that is even the right word) for obesity, or depression, or skin cancer, or that sort of thing?
    
    The “blue dot” effect is a social artifact, and it changes. Today's blue dot may be tomorrow's royal birthmark. It wasn't that long ago that left-handedness was the sign of the devil, and schoolkids were physically beaten for it. Today? We don't even notice it; I'll be you have quite a few more left-handed school-mates or co-workers than you realize.
    
    A cure? I'd rather see a cure for physique-based bigotry. (And, of course, that cure does exist: it's called enlightened tolerance.)

@Ethilrist (Ethilrist) replied

    If it ain't broke, don't put a cast on it. If the only reason people felt the urge to oppress Blue Dotters is that they had blue dots, you can't cure those oppressors by removing the dots. On the other hand, if BDs had a proven history of stealing bicycles or setting fire to small bushes, it might be simpler and more economic to cure them rather than inventing better bike locks or fireproof bushes, but there would still be people out there who would be perfectly willing to oppress the “cured” because the USED to have blue dots on their butts.
    
    In other words, if you want to cure people because other people just don't like them, you're trying to cure the wrong people. The BDs aren't the ones who have the problem.

After which, @Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension (Attack from the 3rd dimension) added

    Trinopus:
    
    > The “blue dot” effect is a social artifact, and it changes. Today's blue dot may be tomorrow's royal birthmark. It wasn't that long ago that left-handedness was the sign of the devil, and schoolkids were physically beaten for it. Today? We don't even notice it; I'll be you have quite a few more left-handed school-mates or co-workers than you realize.
    
    I notice it. They're sinister.

To which @panache45 (panache45) replied

    gamerunknown:
    
    > Would it be moral to search for a permanent cure to the blue dot in one of the enlightened countries, knowing that it'd be a concession to ignorance and spite? Would it be moral to _not_ search for the cure, knowing that the cure could save the lives of the oppressed? Would antagonism to former “blue dots” continue heedless of the cure?
    
    Instead of focusing on “curing” the blue-dot people, why not direct your efforts toward eradicating the “ignorance and spite”?


{'source': 'discourse', 'url': 'https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-blue-dot-a-moral-dilemma/638924', 'title': 'The blue dot: a moral dilemma.', 'views': 2675, 'has_accepted_answer': False, 'word_count': 1327, 'like_count': 0, 'reply_count': 14, 'participant_count': 14, 'posts': 15, 'tags': '', 'author': '@gamerunknown (gamerunknown)', 'participants': '@gamerunknown (gamerunknown), @running_coach (running coach), @Bryan_Ekers (Bryan Ekers), @Maastricht (Maastricht), @Saint_Cad (Saint Cad), @John_DiFool (John DiFool), @TriPolar (TriPolar), @solosam (solosam), @panache45 (panache45), @wonky (wonky), @Dr.Strangelove (Dr. Strangelove), @Trinopus (Trinopus), @Ethilrist (Ethilrist), @Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension (Attack from the 3rd dimension)', 'image_url': [None], 'created_at': '2012-10-26T13:02:38.000Z', 'last_posted_at': '2012-10-27T11:26:04.000Z'}