Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday January 31 2016, @08:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the that's-a-little-invasive-don't-cha-think dept.

Glyn Moody reports via TechDirt

Kuwait has the dubious honor of being the first nation to require everyone's DNA--including that of visitors to the country. The Kuwait Times has a frighteningly matter-of-fact article about the plan, which is currently being put into operation. Here's how the DNA will be gathered:

Collecting samples from citizens will be done by various mobile centers that will be moved according to a special plan amongst government establishments and bodies to collect samples from citizens in the offices they work in. In addition, fixed centers will be established at the interior ministry and citizen services centers to allow citizens [to] give samples while doing various transactions.

Those who are not citizens of Kuwait will be sampled when they apply for residence permits:

Collection will done on issuing or renewing residency visas through medical examinations done by the health ministry for new residency visas and through the criminal evidence department on renewing them.

As for common-or-garden[-variety] visitors to the country:

Collection will be done at a special center at Kuwait International Airport, where in collaboration with the Civil Aviation Department, airlines, and embassies, visitors will be advised on their rights and duties towards the DNA law.

[...] The DNA will not be used for medical purposes, such as checking for genetic markers of disease, which will avoid issues of whether people should be told about their predisposition to possibly serious illnesses. Nor will the DNA database be used for "lineage or genealogical reasons". That's an important point: a complete nation's DNA would throw up many unexpected paternity and maternity results, which could have massive negative effects on the families concerned. It's precisely those kinds of practical and ethical issues that advocates of wider DNA sampling and testing need to address, but rarely do.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 31 2016, @11:32AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 31 2016, @11:32AM (#297386)

    That's just pro-feminist faggot law.

    Cunt is opposed to men marrying young girls too.

    >In the United States, as late as the 1880s most States set the minimum age at 10-12, (in Delaware it was 7 in 1895).[8] Inspired by the "Maiden Tribute" female reformers in the US initiated their own campaign[9] which petitioned legislators to raise the legal minimum age to at least 16, with the ultimate goal to raise the age to 18. The campaign was successful, with almost all states raising the minimum age to 16-18 years by 1920.

    Dueteronomy has a solution:

    Also: see: Deuteronomy chapter 22 verses 28-29, hebrew allows men to rape girl children and keep them: thus man + girl is obviously fine. Feminists are commanded to be killed as anyone enticing others to follow another ruler/judge/god is to be killed as-per Deuteronomy. It is wonderful when this happens from time to time: celebrate)

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Offtopic=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Offtopic' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 31 2016, @07:39PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 31 2016, @07:39PM (#297497)

    Deuteronomy chapter 22 verses 28-29, hebrew [sic] allows men to rape girl children and keep them: thus man + girl is obviously fine.

    Not really. The text does not use the Hebrew words for "rape." Rather than treat the woman as property (or worse), this passage actually enforces a sense of responsibility: in the modern vernacular, it means that if you seduce an unmarried woman, you're paying the father a penalty, AND marrying her (monogamously) for life.

    It deters you from aggressive and casual sexual conduct and respects the rights of the woman and her family by automatically assuming your extramarital activity constitutes a marriage proposal.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 31 2016, @09:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 31 2016, @09:55PM (#297535)

      That's a joke post, right? If not, there's some serious brain-dead apologist nonsense and misogyny at work here.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 01 2016, @07:08PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 01 2016, @07:08PM (#297857)

        That's a joke post, right? If not, there's some serious brain-dead apologist nonsense and misogyny at work here.

        If you're referring to the reasoned explanation of Deuteronomy, then no, it wasn't a "joke post."

        The alternative (which I assuming is your worldview) is that Judasim (and by extension, I suppose, all mainline religious denominations are inherently misogynistic.)

        I'm sorry you feel that way, but, contrary to whatever you've been reading on the Internet, that is simply not true.