Genetic manipulation

[Aunty Em]

In certain things I don't believe in meddling with nature... Now if I carried a fatal genetic illness that only affected males (as most of them do) and my partner also carried the same gene, that would be different. In that case I wouldn't want to impose that on a child and would opt to screen for a female foetus, but not for something trivial.

 

[Arris]

well if by some freak accident I do have children, I guess I'd love them enough to not really care which way they swing, they would still be my child, and I'd love them just the same

* Changes his name to "freak accident"

 

[Shadowfax]

lol


mr casanova....

 

[a13antichrist]

In certain things I don't believe in meddling with nature... Now if I carried a fatal genetic illness that only affected males (as most of them do) and my partner also carried the same gene, that would be different. In that case I wouldn't want to impose that on a child and would opt to screen for a female foetus, but not for something trivial.

Look at it this way - what you're doing here is effectively raising your kid's "Quality-of-Life Index". Whether it's eliminating a fault or adding an advantage, you're doing exactly the same thing - reducing the factor of randomness in order to give your kid a better life.

Therefore, if you're ok with editing out non-trivial harmful features, you must also concede others the right to make non-trivial improvements as they see fit. I would have thought that the trivial changes would be less of a problem to accept.

 

[chcr]

Whether it's eliminating a fault or adding an advantage, you're doing exactly the same thing

Hmm, hadn't really thought of it in that light. Hmm...