Genetic Engineering and Ethics

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

Because someone in a remote African village will totally have access too it.

Someone in a remote African village doesn't have access to a computer, but you're still using one.

My computer is not inherited over generations and what I do online now does not have any effect on if my kids will be crazy mutants.

[Yoite]

Because someone in a remote African village will totally have access too it.

Someone in a remote African village doesn't have access to a computer, but you're still using one.

And a car, and air conditioning, and a bed, and TV, and a phone, and a fridge, and an oven, and health insurance, and justice.

[Shaggai]

The only real problem I can see with it is terrorists. Developing the technology to easily modify the genes of organisms will probably lead to some insane person manufacturing airborne Ebola or some such. Perhaps we would be able to deal with it; I'm not debating that. I'm also not saying that the risk outweighs the reward. We just need to take caution and acknowledge that the risk exists.

[Geilinor]

Someone in a remote African village doesn't have access to a computer, but you're still using one.

My computer is not inherited over generations and what I do online now does not have any effect on if my kids will be crazy mutants.

Genetic engineering will not make your kids crazy mutants. That's the first thing you think of? Mutants? Not curing cancer or something?

[Straughn]

This got interesting quickly.

[Blasveck]

The only real problem I can see with it is terrorists. Developing the technology to easily modify the genes of organisms will probably lead to some insane person manufacturing airborne Ebola or some such. Perhaps we would be able to deal with it; I'm not debating that. I'm also not saying that the risk outweighs the reward. We just need to take caution and acknowledge that the risk exists.

Fun fact: Biological weapons of mass destruction are already feasible.

[Allentyr]

Someone in a remote African village doesn't have access to a computer, but you're still using one.

My computer is not inherited over generations and what I do online now does not have any effect on if my kids will be crazy mutants.

A small risk of producing mutants is far exceeded by possibly eradicating all genetic weakness like AIDS.

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

My computer is not inherited over generations and what I do online now does not have any effect on if my kids will be crazy mutants.

Genetic engineering will not make your kids crazy mutants. That's the first thing you think of? Mutants? Not curing cancer or something?

We have no idea what could happen. The destiny of our evolution is not ours to decide. No, it's not because I'm religious I had this belief when I was an atheist. Nature should run it's course.

[Yoite]

Someone in a remote African village doesn't have access to a computer, but you're still using one.

My computer is not inherited over generations and what I do online now does not have any effect on if my kids will be crazy mutants.

Yes, but the pollution you create with all of your other conveniences will affect your children for generations to come, will it not?

Everything that humanity achieves has a lasting impact, whether for good or ill, and moving forward is something that we cannot help to do regardless of taboo. Think of the ancient philosophers, Socrates, Aristotle, Galileo, etc. Where would we be if they hadn't risked their lives in the pursuit of new knowledge?

[Shaggai]

The only real problem I can see with it is terrorists. Developing the technology to easily modify the genes of organisms will probably lead to some insane person manufacturing airborne Ebola or some such. Perhaps we would be able to deal with it; I'm not debating that. I'm also not saying that the risk outweighs the reward. We just need to take caution and acknowledge that the risk exists.

Fun fact: Biological weapons of mass destruction are already feasible.

Sure. But not to just anyone, and they're significantly less effective than they would be if a terrorist genetically engineered them for destruction.

[Geilinor]

Genetic engineering will not make your kids crazy mutants. That's the first thing you think of? Mutants? Not curing cancer or something?

We have no idea what could happen. The destiny of our evolution is not ours to decide. No, it's not because I'm religious I had this belief when I was an atheist. Nature should run it's course.

We prevent nature from running its course every time a person goes to the doctor.

[Yoite]

Genetic engineering will not make your kids crazy mutants. That's the first thing you think of? Mutants? Not curing cancer or something?

We have no idea what could happen. The destiny of our evolution is not ours to decide. No, it's not because I'm religious I had this belief when I was an atheist. Nature should run it's course.

It is the nature of humanity to shape our fate, regardless of the naysayers and their perceived consequences.

[Conscentia]

Genetic engineering is most certainly ethical - in-fact, it is the obligation of doctors to find means to apply this tool. To not use it would be to violate the principle of "do no harm" through negligence.

[Straughn]

The only real problem I can see with it is terrorists. Developing the technology to easily modify the genes of organisms will probably lead to some insane person manufacturing airborne Ebola or some such. Perhaps we would be able to deal with it; I'm not debating that. I'm also not saying that the risk outweighs the reward. We just need to take caution and acknowledge that the risk exists.

Fun fact: Biological weapons of mass destruction are already feasible.

Not only feasible.
See : Plum Island.

[Straughn]

We have no idea what could happen. The destiny of our evolution is not ours to decide. No, it's not because I'm religious I had this belief when I was an atheist. Nature should run it's course.

We prevent nature from running its course every time a person goes to the doctor.

WOOHOO ... with the exception of self-preservation, which is also arguably natural.

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

By the way, I support that drugs that aren't inherited to children.

[Straughn]

By the way, I support that drugs that aren't inherited to children.

...quo?
do you mean "giving" in place of "that" before "drugs"?

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

By the way, I support that drugs that aren't inherited to children.

...quo?
do you mean "giving" in place of "that" before "drugs"?

I don't know.

Sentences confuse me.

[Yoite]

By the way, I support that drugs that aren't inherited to children.

You support drugging children?

Watt?

Are you saying that the use of drugs isn't something passed along genetically? If so, think about the recent effects of the overuse of common drugs which is leading to their ineffectiveness against every day illnesses.

[Straughn]

...quo?
do you mean "giving" in place of "that" before "drugs"?

I don't know.

Sentences confuse me.

Hieroglyphics and/or interpretive dance are the coin of the realm.
.gif

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

I don't know.

Sentences confuse me.

Hieroglyphics and/or interpretive dance are the coin of the realm.
.gif

sure why not

By the way, I support that drugs that aren't inherited to children.

You support drugging children?

Watt?

Are you saying that the use of drugs isn't something passed along genetically? If so, think about the recent effects of the overuse of common drugs which is leading to their ineffectiveness against every day illnesses.

No I meant little children not pregnant soon-to-be mommies

[Sociobiology]

Genetic engineering will not make your kids crazy mutants. That's the first thing you think of? Mutants? Not curing cancer or something?

We have no idea what could happen. The destiny of our evolution is not ours to decide. No, it's not because I'm religious I had this belief when I was an atheist. Nature should run it's course.

so you shit in a field and eat your meat raw?

[Sociobiology]

We already genetically modify our crops and (if you call it genetic engineering) we selectively breed our livestock.

If the effects are purely beneficial, what would the harm be if said technology was available to everyone?

Because someone in a remote African village will totally have access too it.

actually making modified crops available to developing places is how China and India stopped having yearly famines, we could easily help africa in the same way if people would stop blocking attempts at aid with disinformation.

[Volnotova]

My only problem would be adding genes that did not exist before the advent of genetic engineering to human beings. That's my arbitrary line, and I'm sticking to it.

Why though?

Also, does this mean you oppose creating human-animal chimeras or are simply opposed to "adding" stuff that does not yet exist in nature?

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

We have no idea what could happen. The destiny of our evolution is not ours to decide. No, it's not because I'm religious I had this belief when I was an atheist. Nature should run it's course.

so you shit in a field and eat your meat raw?

WTF! HOW DID YOU KNOW?!