Political Crossfire Forums

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: Do you think uponthe advent of this engineering the "gay community" will start leaving in droves from the left to the conservatives, many of which would be against genetic engineering as against "God's plan"?

That's an interesting speculation. I would like to see someone that is gay actually answer it.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: I would generally say that it is up to the parent if they want to raise a gay child.

er .. what if some parent doesn't want a gay child? Then what happens? :?

Well, they could always argue that it is nothing but a clump of cells.
That's what they do with unwanted children now.

Demonic Spoon · Joined: 20 Sep 2004 Posts: 6803 Location: Ohio

Quote:
er .. what if some parent doesn't want a gay child? Then what happens? Confused

Abortion/Adoption

connermt · Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 1526 Location: CMH OHIO

John Galt wrote: I suppose eugenics is a loadedword. Now they use other terms ("genetic engineering" and such) but its basically the same thing.

Anyway, what's thepoint of every life form on earth? To live and reproduce. Simply that. I suppose you cangetinto some moral thing about why are we here but basically every lifeform on this planet is doing its bestto have offspring. And the fittest survive.

Along comes us, humans, and we know a thing or two about genetics (this next part hasn't happened, but will happen, within our lifetimes). We play with things and eventually figure out how to make any zygote anything. We can make everyone better faster stronger smarter, whatever you desire for your child. We can remove dabilitating genetic diseases from ever appearing. We've also figured out where the multiple genes are for sexual orientation.

Now, if we're here to carry on the line of humans, wouldn't it make sense to well, "cure" people of their homosexuality before birth? Isn't homosexuality a genetic defect, given the purpose of life on earth? Wouldn't, therefore, not "curing" the child of the dabilitating genetic disorder that makes the child unwilling to form a sexual union with a member of the oppisite sex and thus bringing about a child -- wouldn't that be knowingly allowing the child to grow up to suffer with a defect and be a sin of ommision to allowsuch a thing to happen if it was in one's power to stop it? Isn't that child endangerment to allow harm to come to your child and you do nothing to stop it when it isin your power to do so?

But I digress. With some form of GATTACAesque world, would homosexuality be even less existant than it istoday (i'm talking less than .05%, a bit more than 1% of what it is today). And would it be a good thing? Why or why not? Do you think uponthe advent of this engineering the "gay community" will start leaving in droves from the left to the conservatives, many of which would be against genetic engineering as against "God's plan"?

One rather large assumption made with this is that reproduction is the goal of all life. That would then mean that any person who doesn't reproduce would be useless. And that is not the case. While people are a part of nature regardless if you believe in evolution or creationism, we, as a species, have stepped outside of this strictly 'of nature' model. Technological advances in medicine, travel, genetics (etc) have allowed us to do so.
Genetic engineering people is one next step of this 'technological evolution' unfortunately (which, IMO, is wrong - period).
However, to 'cure' homosexuality would mean it is strictly genetic &, while there is some evidence that homosexuality is partially 'started' during the embryonic developement, it is not 100% genetic.
That, I am sorry to say for you, is the reason why homosexuality can't be erased genetically.
Good try though :clap:

connermt · Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 1526 Location: CMH OHIO

John Galt wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Imagine a society where everyone is great in every respect and equal in every respect. Is this a society that you really want to live in? Eugenics may sound nice to you, but the social consequences are serious and the society will NEVER be the same. Remember: when everyone is brilliant, NO ONE is brilliant. Diversity in moderation makes a society interesting and healthy.

You would rather risk having kids with genetic disorders or kids that could be the stupid kid that gets held back then help them in any way you can? See, I think most people would not take your position, which is my entier point.

You seem to be implying that kids with genetic disorders or 'stupid kids' are worth less than a 'normal' kid. That is a very sick & disturbing idea. There are many people that (although I beleive every life is worth something, I will come down to your thinking here) were seen as 'stupid' or having genetic problems, & are currently functioning very well in society. And of course there are those who aren't technically bright &/or have genetic issues & are having a less than great life. But who are we to decide the fate of these people before they can decide their own fate?
I see genetic engineering not much better than abortion. If you don't want the kid or don't like what it MIGHT become, kill it. Let's take it to the next step & changes its genetice before it's born. This is nothing more than playing God & I would think/HOPE the religious groups in this country would be 100% against it.

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

connermt wrote: John Galt wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Imagine a society where everyone is great in every respect and equal in every respect. Is this a society that you really want to live in? Eugenics may sound nice to you, but the social consequences are serious and the society will NEVER be the same. Remember: when everyone is brilliant, NO ONE is brilliant. Diversity in moderation makes a society interesting and healthy.

You would rather risk having kids with genetic disorders or kids that could be the stupid kid that gets held back then help them in any way you can? See, I think most people would not take your position, which is my entier point.

You seem to be implying that kids with genetic disorders or 'stupid kids' are worth less than a 'normal' kid. That is a very sick & disturbing idea. There are many people that (although I beleive every life is worth something, I will come down to your thinking here) were seen as 'stupid' or having genetic problems, & are currently functioning very well in society. And of course there are those who aren't technically bright &/or have genetic issues & are having a less than great life. But who are we to decide the fate of these people before they can decide their own fate?
I see genetic engineering not much better than abortion. If you don't want the kid or don't like what it MIGHT become, kill it. Let's take it to the next step & changes its genetice before it's born. This is nothing more than playing God & I would think/HOPE the religious groups in this country would be 100% against it.

What's wrong with genetic modification? I mean what would be wrong with curing someone of a genetic disease before they are born, one that would kill them, for example?

connermt · Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 1526 Location: CMH OHIO

Reason wrote: connermt wrote: John Galt wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Imagine a society where everyone is great in every respect and equal in every respect. Is this a society that you really want to live in? Eugenics may sound nice to you, but the social consequences are serious and the society will NEVER be the same. Remember: when everyone is brilliant, NO ONE is brilliant. Diversity in moderation makes a society interesting and healthy.

You would rather risk having kids with genetic disorders or kids that could be the stupid kid that gets held back then help them in any way you can? See, I think most people would not take your position, which is my entier point.

You seem to be implying that kids with genetic disorders or 'stupid kids' are worth less than a 'normal' kid. That is a very sick & disturbing idea. There are many people that (although I beleive every life is worth something, I will come down to your thinking here) were seen as 'stupid' or having genetic problems, & are currently functioning very well in society. And of course there are those who aren't technically bright &/or have genetic issues & are having a less than great life. But who are we to decide the fate of these people before they can decide their own fate?
I see genetic engineering not much better than abortion. If you don't want the kid or don't like what it MIGHT become, kill it. Let's take it to the next step & changes its genetice before it's born. This is nothing more than playing God & I would think/HOPE the religious groups in this country would be 100% against it.

What's wrong with genetic modification? I mean what would be wrong with curing someone of a genetic disease before they are born, one that would kill them, for example?
My opinion:
People make the best, most well intended thing bad eventually. While I can agree that curing someone from a disease genetically could be a good thing, someone at some point will take it too far & start molding people into what that one person thinks is correct. There is more to a person than just genetics & I don't think we know enough about that to start genetically manipulating people. There are many people that doctors have said only have "X" months to live because of disease "Y", but are still living full lives years after the doctos said they should be dead. We don't know enough to say this unborn baby will have disease "Y" & not live a full live so we must cure it or kill it. We just don't know. Additionally, just because we think we know a person will not be able to live a life with a disease, I don't think we have the right to make that decision for an unborn person. Lastly, we need to determine what a disease is. Is diabeties a disease? Is being male a disease? Is being gay a disease? Is having blonde hair a disease? These questions might sound stupid now, but the more we learn, the more we push the boundaries. Eventually, we will be making people to our specifications like we do cars & that will take away from humanity as a whole & give certain people power over others.
Genetic manipulation will start out with good intentions, but it won't stay that way because of the people.
Didn't Hitler want a perfect race? Wasn't that frowned upon then? I see genetic manipulation as nothing more than a modern day hitler-like ideal.

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

Quote: someone at some point will take it too far & start molding people into what that one person thinks is correct.

Why is that too far? No-one is suggesting forcing you to do that to your children.

Quote: I don't think we have the right to make that decision for an unborn person.

We have the right o decide if they're created or not, so why not genetic manipulation before they're conscious?

Quote: Didn't Hitler want a perfect race? Wasn't that frowned upon then? I see genetic manipulation as nothing more than a modern day hitler-like ideal.

You are making a terrible analogy. Hitler used force, killed many, and made people's lives worse. Allowing genetics modification is allowing parents to make their child's life better.

connermt · Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 1526 Location: CMH OHIO

Reason wrote: Quote: someone at some point will take it too far & start molding people into what that one person thinks is correct.

Why is that too far? No-one is suggesting forcing you to do that to your children.

Quote: I don't think we have the right to make that decision for an unborn person.

We have the right o decide if they're created or not, so why not genetic manipulation before they're conscious?

Quote: Didn't Hitler want a perfect race? Wasn't that frowned upon then? I see genetic manipulation as nothing more than a modern day hitler-like ideal.

You are making a terrible analogy. Hitler used force, killed many, and made people's lives worse. Allowing genetics modification is allowing parents to make their child's life better.

Quote: Why is that too far? No-one is suggesting forcing you to do that to your children. I am speaking more to the fact that a group of people start making/molding people into what THEY think is perfect. That may not be what others think is perfect.

Quote: We have the right o decide if they're created or not, so why not genetic manipulation before they're conscious? Genetic manipulation is something much more advance than a conscious decision to try to create a baby. A 13 years old can create a baby, but they have little to no understanding of genetics.

Quote: You are making a terrible analogy. Hitler used force, killed many, and made people's lives worse. Allowing genetics modification is allowing parents to make their child's life better. Maybe not the best analogy that could have been made - agreed. Killing aside, he still had an idea of the perfect race & was trying in his own way to further that cause.

My point is that people think they know a lot about certain things. But the more we find out, the more there is to learn. We just don't know enough about what a person is to start messing with a person's genetics.
There is much more to a person than just genes & amino acids.

Gene manipulation may start out innocent enough, but it will esculate to 'mass production' & it will be pricey (in more ways than one). What happens if you can only afford to get your child certain 'upgrades' but that still isn't enough to make him competitive because others with more $ have given their kids 'better upgrades'. This type of thing will happen eventually - designer kids

connermt · Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 1526 Location: CMH OHIO

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Do you think uponthe advent of this engineering the "gay community" will start leaving in droves from the left to the conservatives, many of which would be against genetic engineering as against "God's plan"?

That's an interesting speculation. I would like to see someone that is gay actually answer it.
If I understand the question correctly, I doubt many would do this. I think there is more to a gay person being a democrat/liberal than just the gay marriage issue. Just as I hope there is more to being a republican/conservative that the gay issue.

ToonArmyIsComing · Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 5888 Location: Ontario

Reason wrote: What's wrong with genetic modification? I mean what would be wrong with curing someone of a genetic disease before they are born, one that would kill them, for example?

I am concerned about what is defined as a "genetic disorder" needing to be corrected. Obvious example is a heart condition or something like cancer, but beyond that, what modifications are we talking about? :-|

I think no one realizes how something like genetic modification (when and if it becomes advanced) can have profound effects on society.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: Obvious example is a heart condition or something like cancer, but beyond that, what modifications are we talking about?

Do you think people with heart conditions or cancer are viable candidates for sterilization?

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

connermt wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Do you think uponthe advent of this engineering the "gay community" will start leaving in droves from the left to the conservatives, many of which would be against genetic engineering as against "God's plan"?

That's an interesting speculation. I would like to see someone that is gay actually answer it.
If I understand the question correctly, I doubt many would do this. I think there is more to a gay person being a democrat/liberal than just the gay marriage issue. Just as I hope there is more to being a republican/conservative that the gay issue.

Well, I certainly do not advocate a eugenics program directed at gays, or anyone else for that matter. These programs are inherently evil and strip citizens of their rights.

Also, I hope you understand the question, because you asked it.

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5597 Location: Fulton, Ks

Reason wrote: Quote: someone at some point will take it too far & start molding people into what that one person thinks is correct.

Why is that too far? No-one is suggesting forcing you to do that to your children.

Quote: I don't think we have the right to make that decision for an unborn person.

We have the right o decide if they're created or not, so why not genetic manipulation before they're conscious?

Quote: Didn't Hitler want a perfect race? Wasn't that frowned upon then? I see genetic manipulation as nothing more than a modern day hitler-like ideal.

You are making a terrible analogy. Hitler used force, killed many, and made people's lives worse. Allowing genetics modification is allowing parents to make their child's life better.
What if someone thought hitler was exactly what they wanted their child to be? Or maybe dahmer, or charles manson.

ToonArmyIsComing · Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 5888 Location: Ontario

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Obvious example is a heart condition or something like cancer, but beyond that, what modifications are we talking about?

Do you think people with heart conditions or cancer are viable candidates for sterilization?

No, I am not talking about sterilization. I was talking about genetic modification prior to their birth.

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

The Underground wrote: What if someone thought hitler was exactly what they wanted their child to be? Or maybe dahmer, or charles manson.

So following your logic we should sterilize criminals, after all they'll certainly have criminal children!?!?!?

connermt wrote: I am speaking more to the fact that a group of people start making/molding people into what THEY think is perfect. That may not be what others think is perfect.

It's THEIR children not other peoples.

connermt wrote: reason wrote: We have the right o decide if they're created or not, so why not genetic manipulation before they're conscious?
Genetic manipulation is something much more advance than a conscious decision to try to create a baby. A 13 years old can create a baby, but they have little to no understanding of genetics.

I'm happy that it's more advanced, what's wrong with being 'advanced'?

connermt wrote: What happens if you can only afford to get your child certain 'upgrades' but that still isn't enough to make him competitive because others with more $ have given their kids 'better upgrades'.

We do not live in a zero-sum world, one man's greatness does not make another worse.

connermt wrote: This type of thing will happen eventually - designer kids

So?

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5597 Location: Fulton, Ks

Reason wrote: The Underground wrote: What if someone thought hitler was exactly what they wanted their child to be? Or maybe dahmer, or charles manson.

So following your logic we should sterilize criminals, after all they'll certainly have criminal children!?!?!?

? maybe i didn't read enough of the thread, I thought we were talking about genetic modification. Criminals don't always have criminal children :? i'm confused.

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

The Underground wrote: Reason wrote: The Underground wrote: What if someone thought hitler was exactly what they wanted their child to be? Or maybe dahmer, or charles manson.

So following your logic we should sterilize criminals, after all they'll certainly have criminal children!?!?!?

? maybe i didn't read enough of the thread, I thought we were talking about genetic modification. Criminals don't always have criminal children :? i'm confused.

Which means that allowing people to use gm is not going to create criminals, only banning them would...

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5597 Location: Fulton, Ks

Reason wrote:
Which means that allowing people to use gm is not going to create criminals, only banning them would...

If someone was smart and patient enough, they could live out their criminalistic fantasies through children, that's all i'm saying.

Robin Hood · Joined: 14 Sep 2005 Posts: 3295

The Underground wrote: Reason wrote:
Which means that allowing people to use gm is not going to create criminals, only banning them would...

If someone was smart and patient enough, they could live out their criminalistic fantasies through children, that's all i'm saying.

Starting with the assumption that parents are bad is not only obviously stupid, but also unlikely to produce positive results.