Do you think people should use genetic engineering to make sure their child has certain physical traits?
Surprised nobody responded. Anyway I think Designer babies is playing god. Any parent who supports this idea, must be strange. I am sure in the future it won't be uncommon to see people with Nike birthmarks or I love Robbie Williams made entirely of glow in the dark warts. I think we have to draw the line somewhere. Something isn't right and one day we will also have hybrids. Who knows?
By "use genetic engineering" I presume you mean on a human zygote. "Use GE" could be interpreted to include GE on other species to create medicine. So far, humans have not used low tech GE to improve their own children. I've never heard anyone say, "I bred with John so our kid will have blue eyes." I don't see why people would use start using modern, high tech GE techniques for their own children. There might be efforts to requiring others to use it ("Let's save the world from inferior childeren"). They will be about as successful as requiring women to abort Downs Syndrome fetuses has been.
While genetic engineering is the future, I kinda like the genetic crapshoot we're currently engaged in. It offers genetic diversity which one day may help save mankind from ourselves Hotwater
Indeed as Crayola says, "Just No!" It is unethical and against every religion on Earth. Even if a kid is sick or has some kind of autism, nobody is perfect. If we start manipulating featuses with various engineering substances, then we are simply being God and that is not what we should start doing. To save mankind from itself, you need to tie his hands.
The "don't play God" argument didn't prevent acceptance of in vitro fertilization, vaccination, or bifocals. (There is one religion that supports GE modification of the human fetus. The religion of Mamon, usualy characterized by the worship of engravings of dead presidents.)
It sure didn't. Once man is decided upon something, he will break down the walls of ethics to get to his personal grail. I bet that in the next decade, we will start having catalogues being distributed to households like betterware of Littlewoods extra for people wanting the perfect child. And the fact is people will start making money off being unethical. Like i said, to save mankind from himself, you must tie his hands.
Well, in the next decade, those kits will be a fraud. How do you suggest that we tie our hands? More particularly, how do we tie the hands of the powerful? Will your method work any better than those that attempted to protect Native Americans from encroaching white settlers? (Like the creation of Oklahoma.) By definition, "powerful" people get what they want.
I guess it depends by designer. If it means choosing sex or intelligence then no, most people have some kind of talent society only works because there are a mix of talents. Nothing good can come from disturbing this. If we are talking about removing disabilities then thats different. If, as an embryo someone had asked me if I wanted to have a disability or not, I think i'd probably have gone for the not.
By however much a person consciously chooses a mate to reproduce with, is in a sense, designing their baby although not through GE. Conscious evolution, over time, can breed traits, in or out. It is no more difficult then breeding dogs, cattle, plants, etc. I think that most people are influenced more by their culture rather than nature, in terms of who is viewed as sexually desirable, which has led to a rise in geneticly unnatural human traits since the begining of civilazation (similar to why a Chihuahua doesn't exist naturally). Some conspiracy theorists say that aliens have been using mind control techniques on humans for eons to breed the traits they want, like humans breeding wolves into dogs.
Actually some deaf people on the TV were saying they wanted their embryos engineered to be deaf - thats wrong !!!! But in principle I cannot see why people cant have traits designed into babies that are considered to be "good" attributes as opposed to handicaps such as deafness or blindness - I think to design a baby with one of its senses missing is entirely wrong ! but apart from that - why should anyone care if a kid is designed using some of einsteins DNA or with blonde hair - so long as the state doesnt start paying for that its ok if some rich people want to do it - I can never see the argument against it ! These people need their heads examined ! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1916812.stm They should have been prosecuted
