What exactly would be wrong with designer babies?

[OftenWrong]

On 07/10/2017 at 5:40 PM, Bonam said:

Who cares? Sports is dumb. Especially compared to the potential benefits of a future generation that is free of genetic diseases, has improved immune systems, improved healing abilities, improved cancer resistance and longevity, and perhaps even enhanced intelligence. 

I know there's much potential for benefit, as well as for abuse of the technology. That's the way it always goes with us, ideas are put forward on the premise of the good they can do for humanity, We want the benefits but we can't control the abuse. Once you get into making designer DNA you can do anything, both great and horrific. You can make super-soldiers, people born without empathy. You can make biological machines. Humans have the intellect to create but not the wisdom to handle it. We have made so many huge technological leaps in such a short time, the moral issues that rise up along with them are overwhelming.

[Bonam]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

I know there's much potential for benefit, as well as for abuse of the technology. That's the way it always goes with us, ideas are put forward on the premise of the good they can do for humanity, We want the benefits but we can't control the abuse. Once you get into making designer DNA you can do anything, both great and horrific. You can make super-soldiers, people born without empathy. You can make biological machines. Humans have the intellect to create but not the wisdom to handle it. We have made so many huge technological leaps in such a short time, the moral issues that rise up along with them are overwhelming.

And yet the good almost always outweighs the bad. 

[Jariax]

On 7/29/2017 at 10:39 AM, Argus said:

So scientists in the US did an experiment in gene splicing of an embryo. They wanted to see if they could remove and replace genes which causes diseases. This, apparently scares a lot of people. It's not the fear of getting rid of genetic diseases that bothers them so much as the fear people will have 'designer babies". And I\m thinking, what is a designer baby? Probably tall, beautiful, blonde and blue eyed, with above average intelligence, maybe.

And this is wrong, why?

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health/oregon+scientists+first+human+gene+embryo+editing/13928757/story.html

Essentially, we are in competition against each other. And that includes our children. That's the reason we get our kids into private schools, and start teaching them hockey when they are three years old. 

Now, if a subset of breeders, decide they want perfect children, they they're essentially cheating. And if I want my children to have the same advantages as those perfect children, I'll need to do the same thing - just like athletes and steroids. 

Eventually, we'll have a super race of extra tall people that will dominate everything and natural births will be left for the poor people who can't afford to have a proper child. Plus the fact that our own genetic code will be wiped out, as we move towards common attributes, which is a significant danger as well. 

Anyways, if you haven't seen it yet, go watch Gattaca. 

[GostHacked]

On 8/2/2017 at 11:55 AM, Hydraboss said:

Of course I would.  Rare diseases seem to run in the family so if I could prevent that in my kids, I sure as hell would have tried it.

Would that be similar to the notion of Eugenics?

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Would that be similar to the notion of Eugenics?

It would be very similar, with the only difference being that it would be done on the personal level, with no goals for the species.

[GostHacked]

21 hours ago, bcsapper said:

It would be very similar, with the only difference being that it would be done on the personal level, with no goals for the species.

The goal is already there, to wipe out unwanted conditions.

Now it's being talked about in Canada. This thing will be global in a few short years and you'll have to backtrack on this statement.

Edited October 23, 2017 by GostHacked

[Guest]

3 hours ago, GostHacked said:

The goal is already there, to wipe out unwanted conditions.

Now it's being talked about in Canada. This thing will be global in a few short years and you'll have to backtrack on this statement.

No, I think you misunderstood me.  Eugenics is aimed at the species.  It is forced, or encouraged, according to its proponents.  The subject of the OP is an individual choice.  It will become Eugenics if it is applied, unwanted, by the government.

I agree with the right of the individual to make the choice.

 

[cannuck]

GMO babies is really nothing different from "natural" selection.   For millenia before, mates were chosen by the obvious traits that made a better gene donor, provider, nuturer, etc.   These days, even the most undesirable seem to be able to mate up and procreate in spite of their shortcomings.  Even birth defects, injuries or abnormalities that would otherwise eliminate pro-creation, medicine can intervene and make it possible.  Similarly, science and our intellectual abilities are simply adding one more counterpoint as a tool to return to selecting most desirable traits.  Far more than just a hedonistic thing, the end result would be to raise the bar in the overall gene pool (although, in Africa, tall, blonde and blue eyed might not be considered so).

I already HAVE two tall, blonde, blue-eyed and extremely gifted children, so I guess I don't need to spend the bux to participate.

Edited October 24, 2017 by cannuck

[eyeball]

Wait until eugenics is aimed at generating corporate profit, then it'll be right as rain.

[Thinkinoutsidethebox]

On 07/10/2017 at 3:40 PM, Bonam said:

Who cares? Sports is dumb. 

You got that right... 

If these idiots want to achieve advantage though modification why doesn't the sports industry allow it and create a "super modified" section just like tractor pulls and auto racing. People love contravercy...