What would happen to parenthood, or individuality, of the concept of providence in a world in which human beings are, in essence, engineered? What will life be like if we actually possess the power to turn human beings into manufactured objects?

Basically, science is on the verge of permitting us to design our offspring – parents would choose the genes that “define” humanity – hair colour, height, eye colour, longevity, intelligence, even some personality traits. Playing God would be normal as opposed to leaving it up to nature, which is the luck of the draw.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the abolition of ailments such as cystic fibrosis or Tay-Sachs would be substantially helpful. But who decides what’s “average” and what isn’t? Someone who is blind is just as regular as someone who isn’t – but blindness won’t be a sought-after trait, will it? Of course not.

Another argument could be the ridiculous longevity of the genetically modified children. What if everyone lived to be 100? 130? The world would be an incredibly crowded place, and I don’t want to be one of the people trying to clean it up. It would make larger gaps between the rich and poor; it wouldn’t be free. Would the rich be guaranteed a great life, with unnatural intelligence or good looks, whereas the poor have to play the “life-lottery”?

How do you feel about it?

Post edited at 8:44 pm on Feb. 21, 2007 by throwthisaway

---

Yeah, I don't like the idea of it.  
I still don't even know if I like the idea of them taking away diseases, because that is still "playing God", and maybe because that disease got taken away another one might develop.  

---

Where does one draw the line at playing God? Is it playing God to mend a broken bone? Are we trampling in God's garden if we use chemotherapy to treat cancer? Are we pissing in His eye if we use respirators to keep someone alive long enough for them to recover full functionality on their own?

At one point, exactly, do we cross from the allowable into the forbidden land?

Post edited at 8:47 pm on Feb. 21, 2007 by TheOtherHorseman

-------
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

it can go either way.. there's some things i approve and others i dont...

---

Mhmm
i don't see the problem with abolishing blindness etc, but i'm unsure where i stand on the issue, as a whole.

---

Quote: from xxkat at 11:43 pm on Feb. 21, 2007

---

Yeah, I don't like the idea of it.  
I still don't even know if I like the idea of them taking away diseases, because that is still "playing God", and maybe because that disease got taken away another one might develop.  

---

Where does one draw the line at playing God? Is it playing God to mend a broken bone? Are we trampling in God's garden if we use chemotherapy to treat cancer? Are we pissing in His eye if we use respirators to keep someone alive long enough for them to recover full functionality on their own?

At one point, exactly, do we cross from the allowable into the forbidden land?

---

First off, the body heals broken bones, not other people;

chemotherapy doesn't always work because if it always worked, cancer would be easily treatable;

I agree that keeping someone alive on a respirator is kinda "playing God." I wouldn't want to be alive on a respirator.

---

Quote: from xxkat at 11:43 pm on Feb. 21, 2007

---

Yeah, I don't like the idea of it.  
I still don't even know if I like the idea of them taking away diseases, because that is still "playing God", and maybe because that disease got taken away another one might develop.  

---

Where does one draw the line at playing God? Is it playing God to mend a broken bone? Are we trampling in God's garden if we use chemotherapy to treat cancer? Are we pissing in His eye if we use respirators to keep someone alive long enough for them to recover full functionality on their own?

At one point, exactly, do we cross from the allowable into the forbidden land?

---

Yeah but by the point your bone is broken and your getting chemotherapy you have already developed the disease and you've already suffered from it.

---

i don't see how someone can say "it's not the scientists' right to play God" -- how is it your right to decide who and who doesn't "play god"?

---

As a religious person, God>>>>>>>>man, and it's not man's place to do His job. Man should learn their place.