 |
Scientists have worked on a project entitled the human genome which will allow scientists to see how every gene works and what it does. Now the possibility is looming that you might be able to design your children literally choosing their characteristics.
DO YOU FEEL THAT THIS IS MORALLY RIGHT?
If you could just have them sleep for the first 25 years, that would be fine.
No more morally right than breeding cattle or crops to yield more food, or for other traits.
Yes, I believe you can!
Ask any asian family, how do they teach their children.
:D
How "gattica" things are becoming... I don't think there is much wrong here though.. seems like a good way to prevent many diseases and conditions. As long as they don't start alienating those of us that came around the good ole natural way :D
How is choosing traits for your children based on their genes any less moral than choosing traits for your children based on who you choose for a partner?
If you pick a smart, handsome guy to have a child with, is that really any different than choosing that you want your kid to be smart and handsome?
And how is eliminating the chances of birth defects really a bad thing?
What I personally don't like about it is that people will get ridiculous with it--the way that they get ridiculous with the way they paint their houses or cars or wear outrageous clothing. However... who am I to judge what is beautiful?
It's an interesting question, really.
I believe the genome project is more about curing diseases in existing humans versus dictating which genes to tweak in fetuses.
True, but I could see it getting to what the OP is referring to. I don't think there is anything wrong here, although there is the worry in the back of my head about forming the "perfect race"...
I don't know if you have noticed about mixed-race childern are more intelligent and beautiful?
I am just wondering... why is that?
I don't think that is a global characteristic but it doesn't pertain to the issue the OP is asking.Quote:
Originally Posted by nicespringgirl
Ever read a book called "The Lathe of Heaven", by Ursula Leguin?
It's about a man who dreams, and his dreams come true. He's the only person who realizes it, though, and can remember alternate realities. He's sent to a shrink, who realizes that the guy isn't crazy, he really can do it, and the shrink sets about making the world a better place.
The only thing is... you have to be careful what you wish for. He wished for an end to the population problem, and a plague hit, for example.
One of the wishes that he made was for there to be an end to discrimination based on the way people looked--and he got it: All humans were gray-skinned, the same height, with the same hair color, and the same basic features. It was awful!
Basically, what I'm saying is that we imagine this to be horrible, because we can't really visualize all of the different controversies that it will actually provoke.
Think of it like this--People could name their kids ANYTHING up to about 30 years ago. When people started naming their kids 4Real and Moonboots and Aasopidrjaopgiu (pronounced "Bob"), that's when we stepped in and made laws about it.
Until we can actually DO it, I don't think we can really forsee how it will be misused.
No more so than any other children I know.Quote:
Originally Posted by nicespringgirl
Now, how does that pertain to the original question?
I think the genome project, if used for it's original intent (curing diseases) is for the better of our society. However, I don't think we should be able to choose the hair and eye color, for example, of our children.
Synnen,
Book added to my reading list - thank you!
She has thousands. Trust me. LOL
Virtually every human ailment, except perhaps trauma, has some genetic basis. In the past, doctors took genetics into consideration only in cases like birth defect syndromes and a limited set of illnesses - like cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, and Huntington disease - that are caused by changes in single genes and are inherited according to predictable Mendelian rules.
Common diseases like diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and the major mental illnesses are not inherited in simple ways. But studies comparing disease risk among families show that heredity does influence who develops these conditions. As a result, many doctors are careful to ask patients about their family histories of such illnesses.
Now, with the genome project releasing a torrent of data about human DNA and promoting growing understanding of human genes, the role of genetics in medicine will change profoundly. Genetics will no longer be limited to guiding medical surveillance based on family histories, or classifying the numerous but relatively rare conditions that stem from changes in single genes.
It is true that for many of the most common illnesses, like heart disease, heredity is clearly only one of several factors that contribute to people's overall risk of developing that disease. The most common diseases in developed countries today generally arise from a complex interplay of causes, including diet, lifestyle, and environmental exposures, as well as heredity. Still, a deepening understanding of genetics will illuminate more than people's hereditary risks. Genomics reveals the basic components of cells and, ultimately, helps explain how the molecular components work together. Understanding the molecules of life and how they work will shed light on what goes wrong when diseases develop. Such detailed, fundamental understanding about our bodies will have profound effects on the ways diseases are diagnosed, on the prevention of disease, and on treatments.
Good sources of the genome project found here genome.gov | National Human Genome Research Institute
Mine too... sounds great!Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I think its far more morally right than playing Russian Roulette by irresponsibly leaving things up to blind chance. If indeed we are certain that we have the ability to minimize hereditary risk then it becomes your moral obligation to do so.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:16 PM. |