What is wrong with designer babies/genetic engineering?

[DoctorJack]

Although the technology is not yet perfect, and won't be for a generation or so, is it not vital that we do everything we can to make sure that humanity is as healthy, smart and physically fit as possible? Dismissing this technology is holding us back from improving society and curing genetic disease. To argue that it is unnatural and it is playing god is to want to maintain the staus quo. You could say wearing clothes was unnatural, or the using medicine, or flying. In reality, if we embrace this technology and it was made available to everyone we can remove a great deal of suffering and make the world a better place. Humanity has always embraced technology that can improve our lives, so why do we reject this one?This is NOT a racial question! In fact, mixed race children tend to be generally healthier because they avoid many inherited genetic disorders. The idea that one race is superior is false, as all adapted to their environment. Wider gene pools are always better.I absolutely don't want to get into race! In fact I am actively trying to avoid any descent into this subject. Obviously no one is pure in our era.As I stated, when this technology is perfected. If there are risks of horrible disfigurements then it has not been perfected and thus should not be used.Personally I think some sort of genetic engineering is inevitable. If people can be sure to eliminate diseases they will. From there if intelligence or athleticism can be enhanced then the appeal will eventually make it acceptable. What is wrong with making sure children get the best hand in life?I can understand that nature is equal to or less important than nurture. None of us are ruled by our genes, and beauty is quite subjective. Parents often want children to look like themselves so why bother to alter them. I don't see genetic engineering as some sort of grand plan to alter society into some sort of utopia, that's ridiculous. However I don't see anything wrong with giving children every opportunity possible.

[FaZizzle0796]

Removing a disease will just create a different one. Genetic engineering isn't anything that will create GOOD - we have a limit. Beside the cost and "playing God factor," it's opening the door to selfish parents. Deaf parents wanting their child to be deaf because they are.Poor parents wanting their child to be the best athlete.Short parents wanting tall children.We all do what's best for our kids, but trying to decide their genetic make-up isn't that. Ask a parent with a child who has autism or downs - that child is perfect. Hardship? Sure - doesn't mean they would chose any differently. In the same vein, parents don't always know what's best for your child. Genetically engineering a baby to be 6'8 and 250 pounds to be the best athlete isn't going to make that child a better athlete. Engineering a baby to look just like his deceased father or relative won't bring them back. Suffering won't be stopped by genetic engineering - it'll just create holes for new diseases, new ways to suffer. And if you want to get into race, eventually we ALL will be one race. There's no way around it -- very few people are "pure" of any race.

[Candiman]

I agree with using gentic engineering for health purposes only. I can see how it would be benificial to use this for things such as curing gentic mutaions and/or diseasses but I strongly disagree using the technology for physical uses such as better athletic abilities or prettier looks.

[flowerchild88]

well with the comparison of the clothes and medicine: i think u are comparing apples and oranges.

[boogaboogabooga]

If we lived in a more perfect world I would agree with you to a greater extent - but we don't. We didn't during WW2 when the Nazi's wanted a pure race, had great agruments, conducted social experiments against and on races, exterminated what they didn't want etc. you see where I'm going with this? And it's not that I think the Western or 1st world states are Nazi's, I don't. but apart from the 2nd and 3rd world states being in a horrible condition, even the 1st world states have a lot of inequality going on that would need addressed in a compassionate and humane way before I'd even day dream that genetic interference might be worthwhile. Reality is, we're not ethical. We have 1/3 of the US population without medical insurance. the UK has seriously injured it's free health care system. And there is no solution for this being put on the table. So I know - without a shadow of a doubt - what would happen is that the rich who could afford it would be using it to breed perfect heirs while the working class and poor would be segregated to avoid contaminating that precious stock. It's already being done in so many ways. Ultimately it would be a silent genocide by another name. It's as simple and as obvious as that.

[OE]

We do not know what the long term result of genetic manipulation will be. "Improving society" is a subjective term. Who is to decide what is an improvement? Should all people have blond hair and blue eyes? What if those attributes are from the same genetic package as "smart and physically fit as possible?" What if the combination of genes that produce the "desirable" attributes also deliver a tendency toward horrible disfigurement? The proponents of "genetic engineering" are not likely to give you guarantees.

[HotMama2Be2008]

I agree in the ONLY sense that we could eliminate disease, or children being born with physical disabilities. My fear would be the cost of doing such a thing. It would only be the high-class population that would be able to afford to genetically design their children, at least in the beginning... leaving the "normal" children to stand alone, being seen as ugly or outcasts. What would become of them?And genetically altering a child's physical traits would not necessarily alter their way of thinking, which to me requires the most improvement in today's society. Why look at making a child stronger, or blond with blue eyes... when they may still grow up to be a horrible person? What would be the point?And wouldnt this also create an over-population on this planet? In creating these "perfect humans" that are indeed extremely healthy and "built" in the best way possible... wouldnt that result in just too many people crammed on Earth?There is something extrememly unnatural about this. The uniqueness that each individual member of the human race possesses would vanish completely.

[aniski7]

Nothing wrong with genetic engineering at all. In fact I think it can be put to good use for food crops and things like that. Only problem is with designer babies who are so perfect that they will cause the elimination natural selection altogether and hence overpopulation (which already is a problem).

[donte30303076]

Although, sufficient information on the topic has not be presented to formulate an opinion, speculation from what is known may support this positioning.There are some many contributing factors that make a person a person, we cannot presume that science is fully reliable in improving the human condition. Science may seek to improve life with well intentions but fails to accept that science does not and cannot know what life is.

[Layman]

What's wrong with nature?