Mutant laws - where to draw the line?
One thing i've started thinking about recently is "mutants are dangerous". because yeah, they can be. (Yes, it should probably be all superhumans....)
Not in the "they're going to take over the world! Replace us! We need to eliminate them!" way but in the "uncontrolled powers" way like with "J" who killed his whole town without realizing it.
So, where is it reasonable to draw the line on scanning people for the mutant gene?
On the one hand it is an intrusion into peoples privacy but on the other hand once they have actually manifested it may be too late.
If the price of not knowing is an entire town dying, aren't humans justified in wanting to know who the mutants are? Not justified in killing them, but in wanting to know and try to contain the destruction?
Assuming a universe that is at least somewhat more reasonable than the Marvel universe where the mutants would just be de-powered or killed if they lost anonymity.
If there was one mutant with a power that wiped out a city accidentally, is it reasonable to assume there will not be another?
9 comments · 100% upvoted · other discussions
This is where I feel like the mutant metaphor breaks down somewhat. Because mutants actually are a threat to humanity in a sense, due to the issues you bring up.
I think in the real world, it would be absolutely viable to at least scan for mutations and then, I dunno, assuming you had no way to figuring out what the mutation was ahead of time, have them spend the year or two where powers most frequently manifest in a place where they can be watched closely.