Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

Ok, this is for a research paper in English. If your answer is that it depends, please explain.

It's unnatural and just too scary. I don't want scientists messing with the building blocks of human life, or doctors.

--------------------

FFXI (Siren server)
Tauu the Windurstian Tarutaru!
White Mage & Paladin

I agree with i90 it is scary and unnatural. Why do doctors nowadays feel like they can play God with people. Screw health insurance I need doctor insurance so they don't add a third limb to me while I am getting shoulder surgery.

--------------------

War is for the participants a test of character; it makes bad men worse and good men better. - Joshua Chamberlain

U sir R a n00b >:-( - Cactuar

I agree w/i90. I also think that I would not want to be a child (or that child's parent for that matter) ends up having severe health problems later in life because some scientist decided to play god. I think research in this area is a good thing, especially for organ replication, but we are not ready to mess with a child's DNA.

--------------------

"Hit hard, hit first, hit often."

--Adm. William "Bull" Halsey, USN

This may sound cruel, and I may change my mind if and when I have children, BUT...

I don't believe that a fetus is really a child.

If it's less then 3 months in the womb, despite what science says about a child's development, to me it's still basically cells in a woman that are forming into something. Now, if doctors are messing with it just to, that's different, but if something good can come from it...well, I'm not against that.

Yes, I'm pro-choice on abortion >_>

--------------------

I had an old signature. Now I've changed it.

Quote (Elena99 @ 29th January 2004 21:13)

This may sound cruel, and I may change my mind if and when I have children, BUT...

I don't believe that a fetus is really a child.

If it's less then 3 months in the womb, despite what science says about a child's development, to me it's still basically cells in a woman that are forming into something. Now, if doctors are messing with it just to, that's different, but if something good can come from it...well, I'm not against that.

This isn't stem cell research, this is Genetic Engineering. That's changing how your child is intended to turn out. This is the first step in producing "perfect" human beings in factories, turning all us natural born humans into second-class citizens, since they would be just plain better than us.

--------------------

"I had to write four novels before they let me write comic books."
-Brad Meltzer

DP: Despite that, I don't see it as a bad thing. Maybe I didn't word it correctly.

If the doctors are going in to improve, and discover things (like how to correct being born blind, deaf, how to help crackbabies, etc), then this would be great. Imagine how many lives would be saved or improved.

They're not going in there to, say, give someone a third arm. That sort of thing is not as common as the media would have you think.

What I don't think is good is taking a baby that already is born and experimenting/messing with the DNA. Unless it's necessary (baby's going to die otherwise, etc)

--------------------

I had an old signature. Now I've changed it.

It's ok for me to unborn children still in a womb or born even to rid of blindness and obvious handicaps, but that's it.

I also think we should genetically "grow" or develop cells, maybe even fetuses or farther, to test diseases and effects of things on.

edit: I'm one of two that voted yes. Haha.

This post has been edited by FraudulentTommah on 30th January 2004 02:57

Human life is precious and holy, and I would hate to see scientists try to play God.
I would even more so say that it depends on the circumstance. I would say that, say, there were no more females left alive after some bizzare goings on, it would be OK to clone a few into the world, just to keep the human race alive. OK, I know that is an extreme stretch, so my answer is "NO", emphasis on "NO".
Although I acciedentally voted the circumstance thing...

--------------------

Wow. 1,000 posts.

I miss you all now that I'm in boarding school! ;_;

I'm with Elena. I'm for genetic assistance and stem-cell research. This mainly is because I don't believe life begins until birth. That's just my personal religious belief (I don't want to get into an argument about religion, so let's just leave it at that.) But if we can find a way to cure diseases or help out unborn babies, I'm all for it.

--------------------

Hip-Hop QOTW:

"Yeah, where I'ma start it at, look I'ma part of that
Downtown Philly where it's realer than a heart attack
It wasn't really that ill until the start of crack
Now it's a body caught every night on the Almanac"

"Game Theory"
The Roots

I'm all for it.

Hey Dark Paladin whats so wrong about wanting to make better humans? I noticed you used the word "perfect". Humans will never be "perfect" so I see no reason to worry about that.

A genetically engineered human may be able to do a job better than a normal human, but could it do a job better than a machine? When factory equipment started putting people out of jobs people complained. So I see this as kind of a similar circumstance. People might one day start having genetically engineered children and older people will complain about how they are taking their livelyhood away. It might be harsh but thats how things work. If someone or something can do your job better then you, you might be out of a job.

Now I can also see how this could create a class division (like there isn't one already). The rich get genetic engineering for their kids so their kids are better than normal kids. Again this is just how things work. The haves and the have nots. Not much you can do except complain. I would think what would be more important would be seeing that the "normal" kids and the genetic ones don't starting fighting because of this. No need to spread hatred to the children. They'll have plenty of chances to learn that emotion on their own.

An already stated plus is that genetic problems can be corrected in the earliest stages of development for the child. Looks like nobody really has a prob with this though.

Obviously steps should be taken to ensure that the child, fetus, whatever is not harmed in the process. But sometimes risks need to be taken. If you have a clogged artery in your heart should you not have surgery because the doctor operating on you might slip up and kill you? Or would you rather have the surgery and avoid that possible heart attack? If a defection or problem is detected in the child it could be fixed. If you knew your child was going to be born blind do you think you would want to fix that?

Did I ramble enough? Did I piss anyone off? I like to argue sometimes so I might have said some of that just to get you going.

Also I don't see anything wrong with playing god, basically because that isn't how I see it.

Come on... I'm sure that'll get somebody fired up...You can't resist I'm sucking you in.

--------------------

-- You're Gonna Carry That Weight --

I find this to be very scary. I don't think it should be legal, but I also think that if it would help people with serious prolems then it should be ok. The problem I see with it is the abuse that will undoubtably come from this. If it works then we will start to see huge gaps between people who had it done and the people who didn't. If an athlete is the best in the game people will say, "Oh they've been altered to perform." Same thing peoplewith genius IQs. Probably only the people with money will be the ones who can afford this procedure, which will help cause the economic gap to grow as well. If your an employer who has the option of hiring an individual who is super smart as a result of genetic engineering or the average Joe, who do you think they would choose?

I think it should be illegal to have it done just for the sake of making a better baby, but allowed in special situations.

--------------------

"My impersonation of an ordinary person was flawless." - Neal

"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened." - Dr. Seuss

I'm guessing a few people here haven't read Brave New World.

Moderator Edit

I did, DP. It's a book. He's very convincing and depressing, but it doesn't mean it's going to come true. ^-^

This post has been edited by Elena99 on 31st January 2004 17:49

--------------------

"I had to write four novels before they let me write comic books."
-Brad Meltzer

your talking about stem cell research right
well if you are it depends on the situation

you see stem cell research can help the impaired(any form of being impaired)

for example if someone is missing an arm, you can use stem cells to grow it back

the only problem is however is that it will use the genes of the fetus instead of the person
so you could wind up with a black guy with an albino arm

so the only problem they really have now is trying to get stem cells from that person, not a fetus

*and as hanyou explains there are ways for it to be misused

so it should be under heavy doctor recomendation

all in all it depends on the situation

--------------------

"Have you ever seen a baby do that before?"

Really, it depends. If soemones out to prevent disabilties, whee.
BUT if its to make soemone smarter, stronger, faster, etc... hell no.
Because, a bio-engineered race will lead to bio-engineered soldiers, and then i'll have to stop playign Warhamemr because the Space Marines say its unfair they can get killed by lasguns in game when that doesnt happen in real life...

--------------------

"Only the dead have seen the end of their quotes being misattributed to Plato."
-George Santayana

"The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here..."
-Abraham Lincoln, prior to the discovery of Irony.

Quote (Rujuken @ 30th January 2004 03:39)

Now I can also see how this could create a class division (like there isn't one already). The rich get genetic engineering for their kids so their kids are better than normal kids. Again this is just how things work. The haves and the have nots. Not much you can do except complain.

You started the get on the right track with that statement, but you ended just saying that you hope the worst wont happen, but it will. The rich will dominate it, and it will breed hate and supremecy and create a perfect excuse to make slaves of anyone who cant afford to pay for it. That and it will be used for military purposes, giving our government no reservations in becoming the empire it so desperately wants to.

This post has been edited by Smash on 2nd February 2004 02:54

Yeah, I meant to end up saying that.

Still I think genetic engineering isn't a bad idea. Its not a bad idea in the sense that I think there is nothing wrong with the actual act of genetic engineering itself. But *sigh* yes it could end up being used as a weapon in a sense. Of course if that was the case I think this would be some kind of secret government project and not being shown on the news.

Also there is only so much genetic engineering can do for you. It may make you naturally atheletic 'er something with more natural muscle mass, but if you sit around smoking weed all day that muscle is still going to deteriorate. I've seen plenty of people who have better genetics than I do, and I've bested plenty of those people simply because I tried harder.

--------------------

-- You're Gonna Carry That Weight --

Quote (Dark Paladin @ 31st January 2004 12:21)

Moderator Edit

I did, DP. It's a book. He's very convincing and depressing, but it doesn't mean it's going to come true. ^-^

Hey, if people can cry 1984 everytime the govt tries to pass a new tax, then I can cry Brave New World when people start to consider manufacturing humans.

And another point - when you start manufacturing human beings in a factory, you are creating them as a commodity to be bought and sold. The US has a Constitutional ammendment against that (13), and the number of countries that don't have similar measures against slavery can be counted on one hand.

--------------------

"I had to write four novels before they let me write comic books."
-Brad Meltzer

Hey, this is getting kind of paranoid... but about the slave thing; laws or no laws there are over 30 million slaves worldwide, existing in about every country you can think of including the US and Canada (National Geographic).

But I digress. I'm with Elena on the fetus thing, but I voted option 3 because of all of the possible problems already mentioned. If it is done then I think there should be tons of legislation to limit it to life saving and mental retardation cases if either is discernable at that stage.

P.S. Funny; I hate bureaucracy (DMV trauma anyone?), but look what I'm asking for: it's just that.

This post has been edited by Ejoty on 2nd February 2004 22:56

--------------------

Get me off this Disciplinary Committee so I can play any FF except for FF8!!!

I'm all for correcting birth deficiencies and the like. No super-babies for me, though.

--------------------

Lou: There's a couple of guys fighting down at the aquarium, Chief.
Wiggum: Do they still sell those frozen bananas?
Lou: I think so.
Wiggum: Let's roll.

if one could create a child with no imperfections exept those intended IE no crainial activity at birth- then the organs could be used to save regullar babies that have problems

--------------------

Failure is not an option. its an art form

Quote (Dark Paladin @ 2nd February 2004 17:31)

And another point - when you start manufacturing human beings in a factory, .

We're not talking about creating a race of clones here, we're talking about making it so that babies aren't born with crack dependencies, and finding cures for diseases such as cancer and AIDS. I know you can argue "slippery slope" logic, but I believe people have the common sense to know how far is too far to go.

--------------------

Hip-Hop QOTW:

"Yeah, where I'ma start it at, look I'ma part of that
Downtown Philly where it's realer than a heart attack
It wasn't really that ill until the start of crack
Now it's a body caught every night on the Almanac"

"Game Theory"
The Roots

In my opinion I see nothing wrong with engineering humans to enhance them as long as you know what your doing, not just some crackheaded-doctor who wants to experiment and whatnot--if they know the least bit about it then engineer away!

P.S. I guess my say doesn't really matter on this topic since I lack in science intellect.

--------------------

"If Satan is the prince of darkness, then that would make me the KING!"

Quote (Gears @ 3rd February 2004 21:09)

Quote (Dark Paladin @ 2nd February 2004 17:31)

And another point - when you start manufacturing human beings in a factory, .

We're not talking about creating a race of clones here, we're talking about making it so that babies aren't born with crack dependencies, and finding cures for diseases such as cancer and AIDS. I know you can argue "slippery slope" logic, but I believe people have the common sense to know how far is too far to go.

right...since crack dependancies are written in the genetic code and all...excellent argument you make -.-

i didn't get to this thread earlier because when i saw "homework help" i got scared

but i think i'll toss in my two cents. i don't think this should ever happen, because it makes a very frightening assumption: that some characteristics and traits are better/(that is, more acceptable, for some) than others. of course, there are religious reasons -- playing God is unnaceptable -- but those are more difficult to justify, since people all have different feelings on the subject. however, when babies are engineered, it's taking away the important quality of life that is uniqueness. in addition, genetic engineering is not cost-effective -- especially not now. so, if it starts, all the rich people will have super-babies, and all the poor people will have "regular" babies. obviously, genetically engineered babies are going to be more desirable than the regular, "defected" babies (defective is the working term here because the other babies will have their genetic defects removed, thus making them "defect-free").

that's the simple part of it, and that puts it all in a practical perspective. pre-birth engineering is morally wrong. my sister has a learning disability. unfortunately, it's a physical one because she feel from a window when she was 3. is that to say she is less valuable as a human? what about babies who are born retarded? they must also be less valuable, since they have these undesirable characteristics that we should have just wiped out of them when they were fetuses.

and furthermore, who is to say a fetus is not alive? is it because they are dependant on something else to survive? so...the old lady hooked up to the respirator is less alive than the old lady shopping in randall's. is it because they are not fully developed? then the toddler is less alive than the post-pubescent track star. etc. a fetus is just another stage of human life that happens to be the most critical developmentally.

Quote (Gears @ 3rd February 2004 21:09)

I know you can argue "slippery slope" logic, but I believe people have the common sense to know how far is too far to go.

"A man would never think to cross the line until he has reached it."

DNA alteration won't affect crack addiction or AIDS (AIDS isn't even passed from parent to child during pregnancy) unless you make them "invincible."
And the deaf prevention idea - since the vast majority of the deaf community was so angered by those implants that could cure their "handicap," how do you think they will feel about this? And being born deaf or blind results from underdevelopment, not error in the DNA.

--------------------

"I had to write four novels before they let me write comic books."
-Brad Meltzer

Goz:

Sorry if you misunderstood. Crackbabies don't have it in their code; they're addicted to crack because their mother did crack while pregnant. Doing any sort of drug while pregnant is very dangerous to the child.

DP:

Being half-deaf myself, I would have loved it if my parents had been able to fix it before I was born. Just because a chunk of the deaf population don't like it, doesn't mean they speak for everyone with handicaps out there.

This post has been edited by Elena99 on 7th February 2004 21:35

--------------------

I had an old signature. Now I've changed it.

Quote (Elena99 @ 7th February 2004 16:33)

DP:

Being half-deaf myself, I would have loved it if my parents had been able to fix it before I was born. Just because a chunk of the deaf population don't like it, doesn't mean they speak for everyone with handicaps out there.

Being deaf is its own sort of culture. Whenever these things come up, most get angry because it's like saying they have a handicap (they don't view it as a handicap) and it's something that needs to be fixed.

Moderator Edit

Still doesn't mean they speak for every person in the group. Anyway, this is offtopic, so let's stop it here. - Elena99

This post has been edited by Elena99 on 7th February 2004 22:30

--------------------

"I had to write four novels before they let me write comic books."
-Brad Meltzer

Alrighty. Thanks to everyone who responded/voted, but alas, My time has come....to comnplete all my data collection, and as such, I will be closing the topic.