Viktorkrum77 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 With the growing understanding of genetics, it is not to far off that we may be applying genetics to our everyday lives. I'm sure you've heard this before, but have you given it much thought? Within in the near future it may be available, at first to the wealthy, but eventually to the masses, the ability to essentially 'make' your child. Through genetics parents could choose the aspects of their children, and cure inborn diseases. But would you do this? This would no doubt effect the world immensely, competition would be unfair and unjust. But this may also bring the ability to cure deadly diseases. How do you feel about this? Do you consider it morally wrong, or are you all for the application of this into our lives? Me doing staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foolgool Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 First I thought you meant job applications. I think it would be good, in the way that it could stop mental [developmentally delayed]ation and other genetic effects. It could be bad for sports, since parents could super-breed kids to be amazing athletes, or amazing scholars, for that matter. The code in my sig should say 1032 not 0132. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy500fan Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Gattaca. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Geez... making your child not only sounds morally unjust, but think about the ramifications that'll have when everyone seeks to make their child become "perfect" :? . I can see using genetic advances to cure diseases in children, but it's going to be hard finding where the line is. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawrencekill Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Mass cloning of mass murderers. If this knowledge was infiltrated, chaos will ensue very soon. And there's absolutely no point in "making" a child. Everyone will just make the EXACT SAME PERFECT CHILD. Then a virus/bacteria/fungi/germ comes along and kills them all within a year. Oh wait forgot to apply illness thingy. Umm...Side effect from the perfect genes leaves a weak spot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam007 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 As long as it's not for aesthetics or improving beyond the norm, aka only for combating disease, it should be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Mass cloning of mass murderers. Murderers usually become murderers because of their upbringings and environment in general, not their genetics. If this knowledge was infiltrated, chaos will ensue very soon. Possibly- in what ways were you thinking that chaos would ensue? And there's absolutely no point in "making" a child. Ya, like making sure they don't get a horrible disease is immoral. Everyone will just make the EXACT SAME PERFECT CHILD. In the eyes of humans, perfect is relative. And it's not like everyone is going to be able to "make" their child. Unless the goverment somehow found a way and reason to fund it for everyone in the world o_O. Then a virus/bacteria/fungi/germ comes along and kills them all within a year. Oh wait forgot to apply illness thingy. Umm...Side effect from the perfect genes leaves a weak spot? People aren't going to be identical... just with better traits. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam007 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Rebdragon, do you think that's fair though that people would be able to pay for better children? That would create such a divide, possibly even culminating into two species of humans separated by genetics. You have your upper class genetically modified super humans, then you have your natural born humans. The super humans would probably only want to breed with fellow super humans for super children, and they'd leave the lower class even further behind with their super abilities that the lower class couldn't match. The lower class would be discriminated against and everything. Is it fair that only the rich would be able to have better children? With today's common accepted values of morality, the overwhelming opinion is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Oh, that would be cool. But hold that off for the moment because I want cloning, stem-cell research and every other thing that ticks off the far Right first. There's nothing morally wrong with it. We need to move on, people. Cloning and test tube babies are the wave of the future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam007 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Are you being sarcastic or directly responding to my post? I actually am really interested in going into genetic engineering as a career, and have done a lot of research and written papers on it. I do support most genetic engineering. It's just an extremely powerful tool that should be taken very seriously though. We can't rush into it once we're able to. Doing things like altering the aesthetics of how people look not only has various social implications, but who knows what adverse effects we could possibly put in. Natural selection, random mutation, and evolution have always determined what genes people will get. I just don't know how far we should take this new technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Are you being sarcastic or directly responding to my post? I actually am really interested in going into genetic engineering as a career, and have done a lot of research and written papers on it. I do support most genetic engineering. It's just an extremely powerful tool that should be taken very seriously though. We can't rush into it once we're able to. Doing things like altering the aesthetics of how people look not only has various social implications, but who knows what adverse effects we could possibly put in. Natural selection, random mutation, and evolution have always determined what genes people will get. I just don't know how far we should take this new technology. I wasn't responding to your post. And I agree to some extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viktorkrum77 Posted March 1, 2007 Author Share Posted March 1, 2007 Gattaca. Hmm, cool movie, I want to see it lol. But if you're thinking that's where I got this, no, I heard it on the radio. :P Me doing staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Rebdragon, do you think that's fair though that people would be able to pay for better children? That would create such a divide, possibly even culminating into two species of humans separated by genetics. You have your upper class genetically modified super humans, then you have your natural born humans. The super humans would probably only want to breed with fellow super humans for super children, and they'd leave the lower class even further behind with their super abilities that the lower class couldn't match. The lower class would be discriminated against and everything. Is it fair that only the rich would be able to have better children? With today's common accepted values of morality, the overwhelming opinion is no. We have that exact same division here in the US, between the rich and poor. No it isn't fair- life isn't fair, period. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam007 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Rebdragon, do you think that's fair though that people would be able to pay for better children? That would create such a divide, possibly even culminating into two species of humans separated by genetics. You have your upper class genetically modified super humans, then you have your natural born humans. The super humans would probably only want to breed with fellow super humans for super children, and they'd leave the lower class even further behind with their super abilities that the lower class couldn't match. The lower class would be discriminated against and everything. Is it fair that only the rich would be able to have better children? With today's common accepted values of morality, the overwhelming opinion is no. We have that exact same division here in the US, between the rich and poor. No it isn't fair- life isn't fair, period. Yes, there's a division, but that division is signified by wealth. You obviously have no idea what kind of implications separating the human race has. Again. We're talking about separating the human race here. Two different species that eventually could no longer even breed together. Are you not seeing what I'm seeing? Where that could lead to? I'm not arguing that life should be fair to everyone. It shouldn't. But come on. The rich should not be able to turn into a super race above the rest of the world. You might think what I'm talking about couldn't happen, but with genetic engineering, the potential of what can be done is limitless. And with time, people could be able to change themselves in ways we can't even imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barihawk Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Bigtime against. Eugenics (the creation of perfect humans through genetic engineering) is just wrong. While most people may not agree with me, I see it as cheating God. Worse, playing God. What happens if these supermen/women find the rest of us inferior, and try to wipe us off the face of the Earth in the name of Eugenic Supremacy? My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Rebdragon, do you think that's fair though that people would be able to pay for better children? That would create such a divide, possibly even culminating into two species of humans separated by genetics. You have your upper class genetically modified super humans, then you have your natural born humans. The super humans would probably only want to breed with fellow super humans for super children, and they'd leave the lower class even further behind with their super abilities that the lower class couldn't match. The lower class would be discriminated against and everything. Is it fair that only the rich would be able to have better children? With today's common accepted values of morality, the overwhelming opinion is no. Yes, there's a division, but that division is signified by wealth. You obviously have no idea what kind of implications separating the human race has. Again. We're talking about separating the human race here. Two different species that eventually could no longer even breed together. Are you not seeing what I'm seeing? Where that could lead to? I'm not arguing that life should be fair to everyone. It shouldn't. But come on. The rich should not be able to turn into a super race above the rest of the world. You might think what I'm talking about couldn't happen, but with genetic engineering, the potential of what can be done is limitless. And with time, people could be able to change themselves in ways we can't even imagine. Notice your own use of the word "probably"? Like the gap between the rich and poor, the rich generally pair with the rich, poor with the poor. At times they do mix- but it's not like it's a common thing. Anyways, who's to say that they will no longer will be able to breed together? The rich already are a super race above the world. It's mostly our way of life (economically), but physically we get much better nutrition, better sanitation, better medicine, relatively it's the exact same divide. I will admit that if people found ways to turn people into superheros that things would go pretty much downhill.. but a division between the genetically altered and those that are not is no different than the division between todays rich and poor. A wise man once said: Life isn't fair. Deal with it. And can we keep the condescending tones out of debates for just 1 minute? Sorry, it's just really annoying to read a rebuttal that's typed with a strong condescending tone. Bigtime against. Eugenics (the creation of perfect humans through genetic engineering) is just wrong. While most people may not agree with me, I see it as cheating God. Worse, playing God. What happens if these supermen/women find the rest of us inferior, and try to wipe us off the face of the Earth in the name of Eugenic Supremacy? It'd be like Greek and Roman theology... power in the hands of those who can't properly handle it :-w . [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawrencekill Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Mass cloning of mass murderers. 1.Murderers usually become murderers because of their upbringings and environment in general, not their genetics. If this knowledge was infiltrated, chaos will ensue very soon. 2.Possibly- in what ways were you thinking that chaos would ensue? And there's absolutely no point in "making" a child. 3.Ya, like making sure they don't get a horrible disease is immoral. Everyone will just make the EXACT SAME PERFECT CHILD. 4.In the eyes of humans, perfect is relative. And it's not like everyone is going to be able to "make" their child. Unless the goverment somehow found a way and reason to fund it for everyone in the world o_O. Then a virus/bacteria/fungi/germ comes along and kills them all within a year. Oh wait forgot to apply illness thingy. Umm...Side effect from the perfect genes leaves a weak spot? 5.People aren't going to be identical... just with better traits. 1. Some murderers are born so, those are the ones I'm talking about. 2. By above. 3.+4. I'm talking about creating a child with only "such and such" genes and everyone will want their child to be the best at everything, or most will, with non-suicidal and depression and all that stuff. Perfect is relative, but the media and social "perfect" is basically get good grades, get good job and all that. Yeah I found a flaw in 4 too. The rich will stay rich and poor who can't afford to "make" a perfect child will remain poor. How? The rich people just have all these other super smart/whatever people that will keep staying on the top. If the rich people want more positions of power, they just "make" more children to be suitable for that job or just another "perfect" one. 5. Above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 How are people destined to be murderers by their genetics....? I don't get it. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam007 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Rebdragon, do you think that's fair though that people would be able to pay for better children? That would create such a divide, possibly even culminating into two species of humans separated by genetics. You have your upper class genetically modified super humans, then you have your natural born humans. The super humans would probably only want to breed with fellow super humans for super children, and they'd leave the lower class even further behind with their super abilities that the lower class couldn't match. The lower class would be discriminated against and everything. Is it fair that only the rich would be able to have better children? With today's common accepted values of morality, the overwhelming opinion is no. Yes, there's a division, but that division is signified by wealth. You obviously have no idea what kind of implications separating the human race has. Again. We're talking about separating the human race here. Two different species that eventually could no longer even breed together. Are you not seeing what I'm seeing? Where that could lead to? I'm not arguing that life should be fair to everyone. It shouldn't. But come on. The rich should not be able to turn into a super race above the rest of the world. You might think what I'm talking about couldn't happen, but with genetic engineering, the potential of what can be done is limitless. And with time, people could be able to change themselves in ways we can't even imagine. Notice your own use of the word "probably"? Like the gap between the rich and poor, the rich generally pair with the rich, poor with the poor. At times they do mix- but it's not like it's a common thing. Anyways, who's to say that they will no longer will be able to breed together? The rich already are a super race above the world. Ok, I'll say it without using the word probably. The two races would eventually separate so far they would lose physical interest in each other. Sooner or later they would become so different they wouldn't be able to breed. I know you gave your own reasons as to why the rich are a super race, but that's just not true. Status is an issue of nurture, not nature. What's great about the human race is that people are born equal. They might be born into unequal lives, but their genetics are equal. The poor don't need the one thing keeping them on equal footing as everyone else taken away. Claiming that they're genetically inferior is just ridiculous. I'm sorry if I sound condescending on this issue. It's just that you don't seem to know much about the possibilities of this science and don't really care about the bad things that could be done with it. I've done a lot of reading on opposing viewpoints and initially thought it would be cool to be able to design the features of your own baby, but it just wouldn't. That's the kind of thing that catalyzes really bad events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy500fan Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Gattaca. Hmm, cool movie, I want to see it lol. But if you're thinking that's where I got this, no, I heard it on the radio. :P Just giving a good suggestion to watch :wink: . It's exactly what is being discussed in this topic, plus it's a good movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 The "rich and poor" argument is an analogy, a comparison; I'm not talking about their genetics, but the fact that the richs' way of living is superior to the poors', in the same way that genetic engineering would make those manipulated "superior". I feel that we can't go anywhere in this debate if we don't agree on this point though- will genetic engineering definitely create a new race, a complete different species that is incapable of breeding with the current human race? Or will they simply have superior traits, but still be human? I know there will be sterile people out of this, but honestly, will a whole entire new species be formed? It seems like the scientist(s) would have to purposely make it so that the newborn child would not be able to breed with humans, yet breed with every genetically manipulated "human". If altering ones genes guarentees that the new human will be incapable of breeding with current humans, and instead breed with manipulated humans, please say so, because I honestly don't understand the concept. Oh, and of course I care about the bad things that could be done with it. It'd be ignorance not to realize the plethora of possibilites for abusing genetic engineering :-s . And for the record, I'm against designing ones own baby, save remedying fatal diseases. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender2516 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Not every power human posses is good. ~Defender~ If you love me, send me a PM. 8 - Love me2 - Hate me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawrencekill Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 How are people destined to be murderers by their genetics....? I don't get it. Well they are sorta. There's a study done on ABC, or some other TV station, that looks into the "minds" of criminals. Different areas of their brain and more active than others and visa versa. So their genes affect how their body/brain grows and thus... The "rich and poor" argument is an analogy, a comparison; I'm not talking about their genetics, but the fact that the richs' way of living is superior to the poors', in the same way that genetic engineering would make those manipulated "superior". In this case, not only would the rich have a superior way of living to the poor, they will also have superior abilities, intelligence, traits, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 god help us when we reach the point of "Brave New World" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 god help us when we reach the point of "Brave New World" Eh? I'm guessing you are opposing this because of religion/morals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now