I was listening to a debate about this on the radio this past weekend. I *really* disliked that ALL of the experts/government folks said that these methods could be used in the future for "family balancing" purposes. That is, if you had 3 boys, you could choose to have a girl. (don't even get me started on the ethics of public funding for a fourth child).
i disagree with this. it says: everyone would prefer you had been born without cystic fibrosis.
i don't know...i have mixed feelings about this: it does seem wonderful that you could eliminate these horrible diseases like CF but where do you draw the line of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to select for?
I don't think it can really be "informed" especially at this stage of genetic knowledege. Even if genes for, say, bipolar or schizophrenia can be identified, they won't tell the potential parent that the offspring might be an artistic or scientific genius, or if they might be a mumbling street person, or if they might be an artistic genius who kills himself at an early age (Kurt Cobain, Vincent Van Gogh)....simply not enough information is available to make an "informed choice," short of a time machine. And even if there were, how could one make such a choice? "Your child will create great beauty which will bring wonder and awe to thousands of other people, but your child will also suffer horribly throughout life and then kill himself in despair."
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
A forum community dedicated to vegetarian, vegans, and vegetable enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about agriculture, preparation, cooking, recipes, scales, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!