I know you've asked this question before (word for word, I'm pretty sure), and as much as I'd like to quote my previous response (I think I responded to it, but I might have typed it out and not posted it because I couldn't think of a question to ask) I'm way too lazy to go dig it up. As such, the following will absolutely not be as eloquent as my original response.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: I don't like presuming that I can dictate the thoughts and actions of others, but still no. Both scenarios present hazards to the gene pool, and I'm of the belief that any action we can take to reduce the already rampant desecration of the gene pool, largely due to our efforts to combat natural selection, should be taken. And though this forum is probably way too civil for anyone to argue these beliefs with me, I do feel the need to say that my beliefs would be no different were I in one of the positions described.
Same question, because this one is good.