Genetic Engineering: Yay Or Nay?

[Charli]

If television, movies, games and books are to be believed, nothing good will come of it...

Using that logic, nothing good comes of ANYTHING according to those sources.
Hell a nice trip to the beach with friends and family will inevitably end with disaster! The death of one or two family members and a terminal illness that little bobby joe will never recover from...

To be honest I'm one of those people you hate in this debate, I'm not informed enough to know and support either side of the arguement but... I lean more toward the steady slow progression of learning the ins and outs of genetic manipulation before we do anything drastic.

 

[joshhewer]

all for genetic engineering who are we in the western "1st World" to stop such useful technologies on the basis of ethical reasons when we should consider that the it could be such a useful tool in stopping starvation around the world I'm sure all of our morality over the sanctity of creation would go out the window if we where starving.

...Plus I really what an elephant the size of a pig as a housepet!

 

[Azraellod]

personally i support the idea.

i see no issue modifying nature to suit our purposes... we do that already. this is merely an extension of that.

i am aware of some of the potential risks though (real risks, not science fiction risks), and i do believe that we should be very careful about how we handle the modified product.

 

[Supraliminal]

And you have what proof for this? If anything, if we actually made people more intelligent wouldn't they not tear the earth into pieces? That seems pretty intelligent to me. If people are smart enough to not fuck anything up, then what does it matter that they cut cheese with the beams from their eyes?

Proof? It's called speculation.
And why would Human Gm turn out to be a bad thing? Cause, for starters, it would be the privilege of the rich. We have a giant gap between the poor and the rich already. Gene enchanting would most probably turn that gap into cavity so vast even light couldn't cross it.

It's in the history. When "intelligent" more technologically advansed humans (Europeans), confront "savages" (Indians, aboriginals) terrible things happen.

As a wise man once said. "God creates dinosaur. God destroys dinosaur. God creates man. Man destroys god. Man creates dinosaur..... Dinosaur eats man. Woman inherits the Earth"

splendid one

 

[T-Bone24]

If we genetically engineered people to live longer, that would create severe overpopulation issues, along with the strain on resources, people will become desparate, depressed and penniless. So, to whom it may concern, I am against it.

 

[sramota]

+1 for Griffons
If it CAN be done it SHOULD be tested.
We already made the atom bomb, it can't really go downhill from there.

 

[annoyinglizardvoice]

To stop diseases, yes. For vanity, no.

Amen to that!
The exact boundries between the two would need to be debated, but thats the spirit of what I agree with.

To those who say anything about such practices not being natural, I point out two things:
In terms of what is actually being done to the organism, it is not much different from selectivly breeding, a practice that has been going on for years with both animals and plants, and hardly anyone complains about that.
As the development of our brains is natural, it could be considered that any application of our intellegence and knowledge is at least partically natural.

To anyone who objects on religious grounds, I say that you do not have to be involved in the research or use any benefits it brings, but the fact that you believe does not give you the right to shackle those who do not.

 

[riskroWe]

What a fabulous idea, I wish I could contribute in some major way.
If I ever become wealthy, this is the first thing I'm funding.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

Nay, because the Reapers would come to cap our asses before we get too powerful and overtake galaxy.
OT: Yay, if it is accessible for everyone. Nay if it isn't, because it would be a horrible divider for humanity, and civil wars would most certainly break out. That's my only point against it.

 

[cowbell40]

Only if it's used to cure diseases or to prevent them from happening. Once it starts being used for vanity's sake, I think it becomes unethical to use.

 

[Malkavian]

And you have what proof for this? If anything, if we actually made people more intelligent wouldn't they not tear the earth into pieces? That seems pretty intelligent to me. If people are smart enough to not fuck anything up, then what does it matter that they cut cheese with the beams from their eyes?

Proof? It's called speculation.
And why would Human Gm turn out to be a bad thing? Cause, for starters, it would be the privilege of the rich. We have a giant gap between the poor and the rich already. Gene enchanting would most probably turn that gap into cavity so vast even light couldn't cross it.

It's in the history. When "intelligent" more technologically advansed humans (Europeans), confront "savages" (Indians, aboriginals) terrible things happen.

So in other words, you don't know.
You are correct that there's a good chance that it will be the privilege of the rich. But we have to consider, that this is only likely, based on how the world looks now, and the premise that gm is expensive. We can't do it now, sow who knows what method we will develop? Perhaps it will be so damn easy to manufacture, that you can even go shopping for a "plasmid" in the local supermarket? Or perhaps gm'ing will be govenrment controlled, something you apply for, and if you have ample reason, you are granted a treatment. Or government fundind can be givesn, to support those who cannot afford the treatment, possibly with the reason that non-modded people can't compete with modded people in the jobmarket.

As to whether intelligent people would wage war or not, your example doesn't apply, IMO. Part of the reason why colonies were established, was in order to educate the savages, to "make them as "intelligent"" as us. It's a completely different scenario, and I'd argue that the colonists weren't particularly intelligent. Add to this, that as the world has progressed, and man has acquired more knowledge and intelligence, there has been fewer wars. For an example, the western civilization has better education than africa, and are far better technologically armed. But we're not invading them, are we?

 

[Scobie]

DELETED

 

[DND Judgement]

you misunderstand evolution... it has no set or predetermind path... life was not always going to turn out the way it did... it was merely chance that it happened like this... and that's what religion dislikes about evolution is not the notion that God did not make us this way but that we are merely here by chance...

 

[Koeryn]

I'm up for genetic engineering.

 

[ruff1298]

Definitely a yes to all forms of Genetic Engineering. Humanity just can't advance fast enough naturally anymore, and Nature gave us big brains for the purpose of using those big brains to advance ourselves.

 

[Terrorist_school_drop-out]

Augmenting people's abilities, making them imune to diseases or making all illnesses curable and even making everyone live longer, sounds good to me. Same thing for animals or plants. Plus can you imagine how cool it could be to shoot bees out of you hands!!!!

 

[Soxafloppin]

Hell yes, super soilders and what not!

 

[MrSnugglesworth]

Bioshock has turned me against Genetic Engineering.

 

[Supraliminal]

And you have what proof for this? If anything, if we actually made people more intelligent wouldn't they not tear the earth into pieces? That seems pretty intelligent to me. If people are smart enough to not fuck anything up, then what does it matter that they cut cheese with the beams from their eyes?

Proof? It's called speculation.
And why would Human Gm turn out to be a bad thing? Cause, for starters, it would be the privilege of the rich. We have a giant gap between the poor and the rich already. Gene enchanting would most probably turn that gap into cavity so vast even light couldn't cross it.

It's in the history. When "intelligent" more technologically advansed humans (Europeans), confront "savages" (Indians, aboriginals) terrible things happen.

So in other words, you don't know.
You are correct that there's a good chance that it will be the privilege of the rich. But we have to consider, that this is only likely, based on how the world looks now, and the premise that gm is expensive. We can't do it now, sow who knows what method we will develop? Perhaps it will be so damn easy to manufacture, that you can even go shopping for a "plasmid" in the local supermarket? Or perhaps gm'ing will be govenrment controlled, something you apply for, and if you have ample reason, you are granted a treatment. Or government fundind can be givesn, to support those who cannot afford the treatment, possibly with the reason that non-modded people can't compete with modded people in the jobmarket.

As to whether intelligent people would wage war or not, your example doesn't apply, IMO. Part of the reason why colonies were established, was in order to educate the savages, to "make them as "intelligent"" as us. It's a completely different scenario, and I'd argue that the colonists weren't particularly intelligent. Add to this, that as the world has progressed, and man has acquired more knowledge and intelligence, there has been fewer wars. For an example, the western civilization has better education than africa, and are far better technologically armed. But we're not invading them, are we?

There is nothing in the Africa we would want so badly.
America was colonized because of curiosity (we didn' know what was there), and resources (GOLD).

Yes, the world has progressed. We have the internet for sharing information, people are more conserned about the nature, developing countries and other modern day dilemmas. But there is always the posibility of some mad dictator with nuclear bomb ready out there (you know who I mean (in case, there are two of those guys).

The civilisation we live in is based on competition and survival. Allowing GM in this kind of world is not a good idea, it would get out of hands. Now if this was a different kind of society, where the basic needs would be free. I wouldn't oppose this at all.
But the future is hard to see. These are just opinions. What happens, happens anyway.

 

[Rigs83]

People have been genetic engineering livestock and plant for centuries it's just that now we know exactly what we are doing.
Human curiosity will inevitably lead to someone using the technology to make themselves or others some way different, think radical body modification and physical enhancements for athletes.
The problem arises if it becomes mandatory like in Gattaca [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca].