Designer Babies

Well the Associated Press (AP) released a story yesterday of a story that is scientist have modified a human embryo. Now there are two sides of this one, whether to rid the world of abnormalities or to not play god. For those who do not know, its the process of parents choosing what traits their child will have, it is very closely related to the movie Gattica. Parents are able to choose many features whether they be smart, strong, odd looking whatever their hearts desires.

Now me I am pretty for this, it is a chance to get rid of many diseases that may plague humans from birth, my only concern is that we may make it so that we are able to live to be well into the 100's and that I am not down for because the earth is barely able to support us now. But on the other side of that people are saying that we are playing god and messing up his divine creation, and I don't quite buy into that stuff because if god didn't want us to then he wouldn't have made us smart enough to, thats just a matter of fact. But I do like the idea of getting rid of certain traits that do occur such as elephantitis, and others.

But I would like your guys input on this as well.

Link to story: http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stori...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-05-12-18-25-32

 

I Entirely agree that if god did not want us to do this that he would not have let us, or made us smart enough to do it. I think that this is also a good chance for the parents to have a child that they can be proud of and it will also help the ecnomics technically for the country. If there were smarter and stronger people in the industries than we would be able to up efficiencey and therefor get more money.

that's really all i can say ._.

 

I think that it could be a bad idea. messing with the way babies are supposed to be could result in either autism, ******ation, or the child blaming the parent for the way they are. It may make them better in one way but it could seriously damage their brains or another part of them. like they could have blue eyes and brown hair, but they could come out half boy half girl. Or it may actually increase the chance of siamese twins or (like everyone at my school is saying) it could end up being like I Am Legend (although I highly doubt it)

 

In response to the "playing God" thing, I don't think God intended for us to be able to do what we do. We've grown stronger than He realized we could. That's why we're able to do this, and that's why we shouldn't. It not our place to meddle in God's design.

 

Dont believe in god,so wont get into that.

I say no,just let them be born the way they are,dont alter a single thing.And yeah..Humans are too smart for their own good..>.<

 

We shouldn't be able to meddle in God's design and God would know at the beginning that we would reach stage if he (I use he as it is the traditional pronoun, not as any indication of God's gender) was actually God.

But anyway, I believe that genetic modification before birth is appropriate when there is a medical reason. Many modern conditions and diseases (a disease being incurable, an illness being curable) are caused by genetic defects. This means that they could be eradicated improving the lives of millions.

However, when it is used to produce children with certain hair or eye colours or (which will probably happen the most often) the sex of the child, a line has to be drawn. These are atheistic changes and children will just become another product.

 

Sorry Spitfire but i don't think this is a good idea.Human Beings are meant to have faults and people are meant to correct them or work around them.The way people can work around problems is what makes us human.I understand getting rid of diseases that run in the family but to choose traits and to make them smarter or stronger is not right.Humans are obsolite and thats the way people should stay.We've all got faults and personalities and thats what makes us who we are.If i ever decide to have a child i'm doing it the old fashioned way.Raising a son/daughter who has a unique personality like everyone should be.

 

As I speak of illnesses, I mean that as in mental ******ation and such. Like Autisim, or downsyndrome things like that, but when speaking of cancer and what not, and or HAV, HBV, HCV, Aids/HIV, not those I am actually more to the keep those I realize that they are bad, but I have to say that it is the only way nature is able to control our growth as a population. And I feel that we are taking the planet to its limits.

 

i'm not religious or anything but i would think that if God didn't want us to do that, he wouldn't let that happen? but like i said, i know almost nothing about Christianity and still dont' know what the difference is between a Christian and a Catholic. i personally do agreee with your side though. because designing babies the way we want them to seems to be trying to kill of individuality which is a good thing, it's what makes life interesting.

 

Don't worry! You're not the only one.

I know almost nothing about religion, but that doesn't mean that I agree with this.
They should only do it in emergencies, with the diseases gotten from genetics. You cannot change someone's appearance just because you want your baby to have blue eyes. It will completly change their identity.

 

Im really on the ropes with this thread's questions. On one hand, I would be like, why play god? All we're going to do eventually is create a sephiroth and he'll blow up the world...(thats not what I'm really thinking, but its somewhere along those lines.)

Alternatively, I definately believe EvilMan has a good point.

Still, (yes I'm thinking about this as I write), I feel that humans would be less susceptible to problems. Heres an analogy:
No one likes slow internet. Hell, I can recruit a whole coalition of people who feel as though if it takes 5 minutes to load a web page, then internet is slow. But back when the internet was just being born, things took 30 minutes to load!

similarly, if we give our babies traits and are able to control how they look or how strong/smart/handsome-pretty they'll be, it'll be harder for us to accept a problem with our child. At some point, people will stop thinking about morals when it comes to this. they'll be like, "my child is faulty, get me a new one."
that would mean
A) they hand over their kid into adoption
B) they put it to "sleep" (kill it).

This of course is the absolute worst, but I'm pretty sure im not far off.

like I said, im on the ropes about this. really nice thread though

 

Hmm I would never go as far as to say it is right or wrong at all.

It depends on what the parents want or if they even want to do it. I probably would not do this. The only thing I would MAYBE change is the child's hair and learning capacity. Hair, because I don't want to pass down a curly hair gene, and learning capacity because... well who wouldn't want their kid smart?

Then again, I don't really even think the learning capacity part is necessary, because the entire purpose of "learning" anymore is to discover and make decision of something by one's self or by the help of another.

.... I'm not against it, and I'm not for it either. It's simply another advancement in science that I find intriguing. :3

 

This really reminds me of Gundam Seed. They have people who altered their babies before they were born and people decided to call them a different species because they are different with their design, as in intelligance and looks and all sorts of stuff. Really, I think this could turn into a mayhem because there will be people protesting against it and people going for it. Yes I agree with you Spitfire about the diesases part. Really, no one wants to be told that they are sick.. if it's for your child or yourself. We don't want to be sick at all. I think this could stop it. But I don't really like changing an embryo just for characteristics.. it won't be the actual child that it is.. only the ways of the parents want it to be.

 

I swear, this life that we live in is turning out more and more like the sims, we can know alter parts of our bodies and know "designer babies' is turning out like plastic surgeries before birth

we are too smart for i own good
and Darkwatch, i do agree like an Albino mother would probably not want her own child albino so she could not be blind/whatsoever and i would want my child to be smart too, but i bet this is expensive

 

If this was done enough to an extreme we would probably get something akin to Huxley's Brave New World (if you do not know what that is, read it, it proves quite relevant and outlines points that would equate to possibly a triple-the-length-of-a-normal-Repliku post, aka very long post in reply to this.)

From a medical standpoint however, if they could perfect getting rid of a specific genetic disorder such as autism or defects that, in a normal baby would kill it after or even -before- birth, I would support it. There is more than one way to use alternating genetics, it having pros and cons as well as how direct it is.

If anyone wants to argue how unnatural things are getting, think of modern childbirth, the amount of drugs used as well as the situations put in a hospital setting of childbirth is a far cry from what it -once was-.

And to be honest, (I speak from a less than sensitive and probably completely heartless point of view), but if I could prevent my child from being autistic and was therefore requiring that everyone else had to "ice-foot" it around them, I'd rather alter my kid's genes and have them hate me rather than making them be a possible hazard to others and more importantly to themselves. Then again that could just be me.

But most importantly is that this procedure is -optional-. Also if God didn't want us meddling with our genes he would have made them -less logical- and possibly out of sparkles so our scientific minds couldn't figure it out.

Last Minute Edit: Consider surgery (medical and cosmetic), ANY SURGERY, hell dentistry or even GLASSES, that's altering our bodies. If you're against genetic fiddling and you happen to have, glasses, braces, ever worn a cast, will ever need to get surgery or put under anesthetics, consider THAT and how unnatural it is. Also please discard your clothing, according to the rules of nature you don't need them (for the most part).

 

A longer post than me...rubbish! *snickers*

This is a tough question because there's always the issue of people going too far. I do have to say though that there are benefits to this as well.

If I had the opportunity to not pass on some medical condition that is genetic to my child, heck I would do that in a heart beat. Same goes for some mental conditions that would impair the child from being able to integrate with society and make the child ostracized. If I knew I had a weak heart, I'd want to make it so that the child inherited a good heart. If the child had some condition likely to inherit like Multiple Sclerosis or Fibromyalgia or Parkinson's Disease...I'm so down with this removal of the faulty genes. If a child could end up with autism, schizophrenia or dementia, well I'd be all for removing the chances of that too. Any parent would I hope want the kid to grow up with the best chances possible with what you have to pass on. I don't consider it an act of God because I don't believe in God in the first place, but the point is if I did, we have these smarts for a reason and if our brains can come to good use and make our offspring not suffer as we have had to or be on drugs for mental illness etc, I think it's wonderful.

Where I do think it is kind of silly to do things is to say change a child's physical characteristics as in you want a baby with blue eyes instead of brown, or maybe you desire a kid with red hair instead of blond. Maybe you want the child to inherit mom's nose or something. This kind of seems like it would produce children just for phenotypes and it takes away from the child to look as he or she would naturally. I'm actually torn on this because I can see where maybe wanting the child to be of a certain height so they aren't dwarves or giants could be helpful, but some people are extremely superficial. They would go ahead and design what is in their image to be the 'model' child and expect gratitude and performance from that kid. Expectations on children will become harder than they are now as some parents really will want more out of it and some may even hold it against their kids if they do not get money back for what they did etc. It could produce a whole new era of problems because of superficial idiots like this.

So, on the phenotype scheme of things (appearance) I am a bit in a debate over what is a legitimate thing versus going too far, but on the genotype way of thinking, to eliminate mental and physical ailments that are genetic...I think that's alright and don't see too many issues with it unless people start going the 'ubermensch' way of things. Last thing we need, even worse than superficial parents, is some group of fanatics designing the 'super race'. Either that or making babies happen that are well, just out there and stuck with the appearance because of eccentric superficial people with money.

Zandyne also did point out something relevant. We do have a lot of techniques we already employ that alter the chances for our offspring. If women went without the vitamins, treatments and all during childbirth, the infant death rate would be much higher than it is. Also, we adjust ourselves constantly to fit in the world and carry on. We have hearing aids, contacts, glasses, nerve damage surgeries, surgeries for weak hearts, drugs of all sorts for physical, mental and neurological treatments, pulling of wisdom teeth, etc. The list goes on and on for all the things 'wrong with us' that we go to get fixed to be able to enjoy life and live without having to be restricted as much as is possible. This is to me, another way to make that happen for kids so they can even grow up better than we did.

 

Another point I thought of is cost. Surely this kind of pre-birth gene therapy will cost quite a lot. If this was put into widespread use we could end up with a two-tier society. The children of parents who are rich enough to have their children born smart and strong and good looking while the other people who don't have enough money to do these things will end up "lesser beings".

Wealth should not come into evolution, but this could end up making it a factor. If only those rich enough for this therapy can get it, then the rest will continue to get sick and die off. Modern day natural selection >_>

 

I read a sci-fi book about this and I never thought it would really happen! If this is true, then we shuold use it. There is the then commandments about evil but there is no rule of being god. Although if they worship him then they are playing as god. That is what I don't want to see.

 

Who ruled it was messing with 'His divine creation'?

If children can be born completly paralyzed, or with mutilated faces, and god chooses to let this happen, I question why we need to follow his rules. Fine, he made us, thanks. But just like a parent who has a child, why should He have complete judgement over us? I think that if He condemns some to live with complete disability, death at birth, ******ation, or other damaging problems, we should not lie down and follow his rules. I think that if to get into heaven I need to sit back and allow others to suffer, I do not want heaven. What sort of ruler allows His followers, His children, to be damaged in such ways? The reason is always 'it was His will.' This is a vague phrase. How do I know that our ability to mess with the gene pool is not His will as well?

We have the ability to change things, to improve the condition of the human race. Why not accept it? The only thing holding us back is 'god's will'. Now, let me ask something, what gives god the right to decide this?

 

wow...go pika power , since most people speaking are not christians....let me share what i think

im a christian, but not because of my religion , but because of what i believe i can say that

this could somehow help, like everyone stated, we would want our children to grow as healthy as possible
and eliminating the bad things about them, but changing the way the child looks?

that im against, i mean,

1.it would cost a lot:only rich people would be "extra"handsome, smarter,ect,. making them the pioneers of the world...., meaning, that success will be manufactured

2.the advantage people would take: think about it, organizations would pay great prizes to get children with different abilities, and deprive them of their "real" life, and humans would become another manufactured product

3.the uproar: people would debate on this...i dont think i need to explain more

4.the human counciousness: would be molded, and shaped into a desired outcome, not made original, would be choosen and molded from the beggining.....that doesnt sound right...

5.talents:they would be a thing of the past, everyone could, sing,write, ect., meaning that careers would be shattered...

all of this adds up to the change, from people to products, and loss of originality, and this originality is actually what makes the world, a good place, a place where everyone can do something, and everyone compliments each other......

and kinda off topic but....it seems that christianinty as been marked as rules regulations, exaggeratted order, and dullness, where did you get that view of christianity from.?........