In these modern times, the main discussion
centered on human genetics involves the ethics of genetic engineering. If we
could improve the human race by adding a few genes here and there, does that
make it ethically right to purposely “improve the human gene pool” and “breed
better people?” (Darnovsky). At the same time, “breeding better people,” sounds
unethical. If we thought of genetic engineering as improving the qualities in
humans, such as disease or disability, then would that make manipulating the
human genome DNA more ethical?
 |
Krautberger, Gernot. "Science Clarified." Genetic Engineering. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2012.
|
Koepsell the associate editor of Free Inquiry and
a professor of philosophy at the State University of New York said, “some
religious critics perceive genetic engineering as ‘playing God’ and object to
it on the grounds that life is sacred and ought not to be altered by human
intention” (Koepsell). I believe there are some circumstances human life
should be allowed alterations: to prevent disease, to prohibit certain family traits that could be detrimental,
or to better the chance of a fetus’ survival. Genetic engineering is a way to
help create stronger beings and what a better way to use the scientific
knowledge we’ve been blessed with than progressing a future child’s life.
There are, however, certain instances when I do not believe genetic engineering is considered fair. For instance, a parent decides they want their child to excel as a basketball star, so they elect for traits dealing with height, strength, and athleticism (Koepsell). This genetically enhanced individual will not have to train as hard as the most motivated, unenhanced person. Their mutated traits will be their super power over society, and the rest of us unenhanced individuals will be competing in a world full of enhanced intelligence, athleticism, and physical attractiveness.
There are, however, certain instances when I do not believe genetic engineering is considered fair. For instance, a parent decides they want their child to excel as a basketball star, so they elect for traits dealing with height, strength, and athleticism (Koepsell). This genetically enhanced individual will not have to train as hard as the most motivated, unenhanced person. Their mutated traits will be their super power over society, and the rest of us unenhanced individuals will be competing in a world full of enhanced intelligence, athleticism, and physical attractiveness.
"Evolution Machine: Genetic Engineering on Fast Forward." Extremum Spiritum. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2012.
Conger, a science writer on the staff of the Stanford
School of Medicine's Office of Communication and Public Affairs, bluntly said,
“why bother trying to improve ourselves, anyway? Aren’t we already at the top
of our game?” Genetic engineering should be used sparingly. To prevent disease
and aide in producing a healthy fetus are ways one can use genetic engineering
to benefit; however genetically enhancing for cosmetic purposes or creating a
“super race” is taking advantage of the system.
 |
| "What is Genetic Engineering??"Mr Covington's Science Wiki. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2012. |
Works Cited
Conger, Krista.
"Parents Should Be Free to Use 'Designer Baby' Technologies." Reproductive
Technologies. Ed. Clay Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007.
Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "As Good As It Gets?" Stanford
Medicine Magazine (Summer 2006). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In
Context. Web. 28 Oct. 2012.
Darnovsky, Marcy. "Humans Have a Right to Be Born Without Genetic Manipulation." Human Genetics. Ed. Noël Merino. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "Human Rights in a Post-Human Future." Rights and Liberties in the Biotech Age: Why We Need a Genetic Bill of Rights. Ed. Sheldon Krimsky and Peter Shorett. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 28 Oct. 2012.
"Evolution Machine: Genetic Engineering on Fast Forward." Extremum Spiritum. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2012.
Darnovsky, Marcy. "Humans Have a Right to Be Born Without Genetic Manipulation." Human Genetics. Ed. Noël Merino. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "Human Rights in a Post-Human Future." Rights and Liberties in the Biotech Age: Why We Need a Genetic Bill of Rights. Ed. Sheldon Krimsky and Peter Shorett. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 28 Oct. 2012.
"Evolution Machine: Genetic Engineering on Fast Forward." Extremum Spiritum. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2012.
Koepsell, David. "Genetic Engineering Is Not Unethical." Genetic
Engineering. Ed. Louise I. Gerdes. San Diego:
Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Ethics
of Genetic Engineering: A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of
Public Policy." Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy, 2007. Gale
Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 28 Oct. 2012.
Krautberger, Gernot. "Science Clarified." Genetic
Engineering. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2012.
"What Is Genetic Engineering??" Mr Covington's Science Wiki. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2012.
Is genetic engineering currently an option? Is it currently a fiscally sound option? Also, is there any research being done about the negative effects of genetic engineering? I know that it is created to prevent disease, but is there the possibility that there could be unpredictable consequences to the child?
ReplyDeleteNo, genetic engineering on humans is not currently an option, but it will be in the very near future. It is currently available for plants, etc. I know there is research being done on the negative effects of genetic engineering. In order for one to be able to genetically engineer human DNA, all the negative and positive side effects must be laid out. You bring up an interesting point. I wonder if a child who's DNA has been genetically altered in the genome stage would be different from other children created naturally. I guess there is no real way to know for certain the unpredictable consequences a child with genetically altered DNA would have.
DeleteI think it would also be interesting if you addressed not only the moral problems of this issue (which you did) but also how this would effect economic class. This process would probably be expensive so those in lower classes wouldn't be able to afford it, creating even more advantages for the rich. How would you prevent an even larger class gap from occuring? Also, like I said in other comments, its not good to seperate text, put pictures on the side and have text wrap around to follow the rule of thirds. Nice post!
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a good point. I wondered this myself too. If the upper rich class were the only ones able to afford the luxury of genetically picking and choosing the DNA of an offspring, it would surely separate them even more from the lower class. Perhaps if genetic engineering were only available for purposes of healing, and not trying to create a super race, it wouldn't be so bad.
DeleteTo add to the emotion of the piece, an real-life example of someone in this issue would be great. A genetic scientist, a parent, or even someone that has been made from these controversial methods. Are they real-life successes or failures from this procedure?
ReplyDeleteThere have been no attempts in genetically altering human DNA from the genome yet. There are still several tests that need to be run and the technology is not quite available, however, it will be available in the future.
DeleteYou mentioned that genetic engineering should be used sparingly, but aren't birth defects and certain diseases actually pretty common? How would you define the fine line between acceptable and unethical? This is a very interesting but controversial topic; how are you going to convince the relgious critics that this isn't "playing God?"
ReplyDeleteGod gave us our brains. He gave us the knowledge we need to accomplish such tasks. God is the one who provided the scientists with the technology to genetically alter DNA. The pros to this process: parents would be able to pick and choose the traits, characteristics, etc in their child, but you are correct, there is still that fine line between what is acceptable and what is unethical. Personally, I see nothing wrong with using the technology that has been given to us. Religious critics who fear we are playing God or changing the destiny of a child will always have an argument. In some ways I agree with those religious critics. I think genetic engineering is acceptable up until the point when people start taking advantage of the system. If people start to form "super races" and pick and choose traits to make the child a super being, then the ethics come into play. Did God really intend for us to take advantage of the technologies and over abuse the power which we have been given. Like any blessing or knowledge, we shouldn't take advantage of it. We should be grateful for it. Now I feel like I'm preaching, but that fine line between acceptable and unethical is definitely hard to decipher.
Delete