Genetic Engineering

[Arch0wl_MMS]

Re: Genetic Engineering

Many people believe that things can be labeled with a price, but a human life is priceless.

It's not. I can assure you that there are quite a few people that would lend their own child's life for a lump sum of money, or a number of altruistic people that would sacrifice themselves to help others, among other examples that assist that point.

For example, the movie "Hostel" was based on a Thai organization that would allow Thai citizens to let themselves be shot in the head for $10,000 or so. The citizens were often dirt poor, so members of poor families would sacrifice themselves to improve their family's status.

[Corbin Wells]

Re: Genetic Engineering

If you want to alter the makeup of your child to fit your wants, go right ahead. It's not the baby to say, it's what you want. You're the parent, it's not officially born or old enough yet to make decisions, you mold it any way you desire. That is, if you're looking out for it's best interest. (As in don't get wierd :-p )

[devonin]

Re: Genetic Engineering

If you want to alter the makeup of your child to fit your wants, go right ahead. It's not the baby to say, it's what you want. You're the parent, it's not officially born or old enough yet to make decisions, you mold it any way you desire. That is, if you're looking out for it's best interest. (As in don't get wierd :-p )

And what if you aren't? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the choice is completely yours, or it isn't completely yours. Saying "It is entirley up to you, unless you X, Y, Z" means that it isn't -always- entirely up to you, so you can have a lot more discussion about just what X, Y, Z entails than you seem to want to credit.

[Corbin Wells]

Re: Genetic Engineering

And what if you aren't? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the choice is completely yours, or it isn't completely yours. Saying "It is entirley up to you, unless you X, Y, Z" means that it isn't -always- entirely up to you, so you can have a lot more discussion about just what X, Y, Z entails than you seem to want to credit.

Yeah there was a little flaw with that but I need more time to correct that.

[atalkingcow]

Re: Genetic Engineering

The only problem I have with genetic engeneering is on a purely, -omgthegovernmentisouttogetusholycrap- level. Hooray for me.

I shall elaborate!

Let's say we develope a practical, cost effecient way to genetically engineer human beings to our specifications. (closer than we might think, we already have glow-in-the-dark cats)

What's stopping the government from genetically engineering a bunch of children who are predisposed to following orders no matter what?
Or creating a "Brave New World" situation? (scary as hell, read it!)

And of course, the most horrendous thing that our "Christianity based country" would perform....

The mapping and removal of the homosexual gene. (assuming its entirely genetic.)

I say we should leave this technology where it is, since the potential to harm massively outweighs the potential for good. At least as far as I can see.


And putting it in the hands of parents....I'm not even going to go there, since anything I would say on that subject is completely unprovable, and Idunwannabebannedzorz!

Cow

[devonin]

Re: Genetic Engineering

And as you sit here on a computer, on the internet, communicating with people from all over the world, you can say "If there is any potential to use technology for harm, we should simply never advance the technology" with a straight face?

Man, governments have used the discovery of bronze to make all kinds of weapons, and used them to invade other nations, and kill countless people, we really should have stuck with stone.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Genetic Engineering

But stone would have only prolonged the inevitable wars, because of all the head bashing and repeated bludgeonings that would have gone on.

[devonin]

Re: Genetic Engineering

But stone would have only prolonged the inevitable wars, because of all the head bashing and repeated bludgeonings that would have gone on.

Er...yes. I was trying to point out the absurdity of claiming "Because I can see a consequence that could occur that I don't like, we should simply never do this ever"

Argumentum Ad Consequentiam is a logical fallacy where you claim that X may lead to Y, and Y is something you don't like, thus X is wrong. But not liking something personally doesn't constitute proof that it is wrong or even that it is bad.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Genetic Engineering

Oh, I know. I was just being funny.

[atalkingcow]

Re: Genetic Engineering

Er...yes. I was trying to point out the absurdity of claiming "Because I can see a consequence that could occur that I don't like, we should simply never do this ever"

Argumentum Ad Consequentiam is a logical fallacy where you claim that X may lead to Y, and Y is something you don't like, thus X is wrong. But not liking something personally doesn't constitute proof that it is wrong or even that it is bad.

Alright, you caught my logical fallacy.

However, I don't like genetic engineering on its own.

The main reason being, while we can say that the fetus has no rights, and can be freely modified, that fetus will grow into a human being.

The minute that fetus is born as a human baby, we have infringed upon it's basic rights, by either predisposing it to a certain lifestyle and removing part of its free will, or by causing some sort of physical modification intentionally.

I dunno though, so i'm going to remove myself from this arguement for the time being, as all of my arguements are entirely hypothetical.

[devonin]

Re: Genetic Engineering

The minute that fetus is born as a human baby, we have infringed upon it's basic rights, by either predisposing it to a certain lifestyle and removing part of its free will, or by causing some sort of physical modification intentionally.

No no this is good. Don't stop posting.

The question this raises then is: To what extent should/could/ought we to grant rights to "potential people"? I mean, a fetus is one thing because all things being equal, we know exactly how and when it is going to develop until eventually it becomes a human we grant rights to, but what about the potential life beyond that?

Ought we to consider the long-term consequences of actions because of how they might effect unborn generations of people? How far ahead? If we can develop a method of genetic engineering that say, gives humans a perfect immune system, but in 20 years everyone will be sterile, ought we to do it? What if it would take 100 years? 1000? 1,000,000? Is there some point where we can say "The long-term consequences are so long term that we don't need to consider them"?

[atalkingcow]

Re: Genetic Engineering

No no this is good. Don't stop posting.

The question this raises then is: To what extent should/could/ought we to grant rights to "potential people"? I mean, a fetus is one thing because all things being equal, we know exactly how and when it is going to develop until eventually it becomes a human we grant rights to, but what about the potential life beyond that?

Ought we to consider the long-term consequences of actions because of how they might effect unborn generations of people? How far ahead? If we can develop a method of genetic engineering that say, gives humans a perfect immune system, but in 20 years everyone will be sterile, ought we to do it? What if it would take 100 years? 1000? 1,000,000? Is there some point where we can say "The long-term consequences are so long term that we don't need to consider them"?

Oh God no!
At no point in time should we decide that "the long-term consequences are so long-term that we don't need to consider them"!

Consequences are consequences, and often times, the longer it takes to arrive, the worse it is.

However, assuming we made the entire planet sterile, we could always resort to mass cloning...but then we might end up like the Asgard.(HOORAY FOR NERDS!)
Personally, I want the human race to avoid genetic engineering as a whole, but that's simply because I don't trust us to know when to draw the line.
Assuming we reached the point where we could pretty much do whatever we wanted to feti (real word?) through engineering, I personally believe we would end up with a "Brave New World" situation.

And as for the rights of a fetus as a future person...

If the general idea is for the fetus to survive to become a human being, then I think you owe the human being that WILL exist (because you are going to let it) the same rights as any other human being who already exists.
In this sense, genetic engineering could be considered willful mutilation.

However, an exception would have to be made in the case of abortion, otherwise, abortion would be murder.

Basically, we're stuck in a moral quandry, and the only solution is to place strict and unyeilding rules/laws on all attempts at genetic engineering.

Another thought that occurs to me as I sit waiting for my mom's car to get fixed...

If we made the alterations in such a fashion that they could be removed later in life by the altered human, then I don't really see a problem.
However, removal would have to be free of charge, so that there are no possible obstructions to the removal.

And of course, gen-en would only be available to the rich, which would only re-enforce our thinly veiled class structure. HyperIntelligent Rich folks immune to all disease...and regular...dumb...poor.....peasants, sick and wallowing in the dirt. Hooray?

I'm out of thoughts, and Hate posting essays, so I'll come back later after someone addresses these.

[FabulousAndy]

Re: Genetic Engineering

i think that the parents are allowed to do whatever they want with the baby/fetus. the sperm and egg belonged to both the mother and father, and the fetus hasnt been born yet so it has no rights, so the baby/fetus belongs entirely to the parents before it is born. so they should be able to do whatever they want with it.

[atalkingcow]

Re: Genetic Engineering

i think that the parents are allowed to do whatever they want with the baby/fetus. the sperm and egg belonged to both the mother and father, and the fetus hasnt been born yet so it has no rights, so the baby/fetus belongs entirely to the parents before it is born. so they should be able to do whatever they want with it.

While this is technically, legally true... The fetus will turn into a Human being, who is owned by him/herself, and the mother no longer has control/ownership over it. The main issue with your statement is that, while the fetus is -currently- the legal property of the mother, it will not always be, so you have to be careful about any permanent changes you make to it.

[FabulousAndy]

Re: Genetic Engineering

what you say is true, but until it IS a human being, it is still owned by the parents, so they should be able to do what they want.