Genetic engineering wrong?
#1
Posted 18 April 2006 - 06:07 PM
#2
Posted 19 April 2006 - 05:47 AM
Now on the other hand if you pick and chose the entire genetic make up of your unborn/conceived child --- well that could lead to the master race.
Have you ever seen the movie GATTCA?
#3
Posted 19 April 2006 - 06:16 AM
Vagabond -SC2- said:
Now on the other hand if you pick and chose the entire genetic make up of your unborn/conceived child --- well that could lead to the master race.
Have you ever seen the movie GATTCA?
No, whats the plot?
#4
Posted 19 April 2006 - 09:09 AM
So according to the scriptures, God is this all powerful mofo. So, uhh... if this deity did not want genetic engineering (insert any other hot button issue too), then it wouldn't be possible anyway.
It's happening. Deal with it. Let's just try to make sure it's used responsibly.
"We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and, if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us." - YouTube: Pale Blue Dot
(Photo of Earth, February 1990 - Voyager 1: Distance of Pluto)
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
InfiniteNow
#5
Posted 19 April 2006 - 04:36 PM
:read:
#6
Posted 20 April 2006 - 05:32 PM
(((tartanism))) said:
What constitutes playing God?As Vagabond -SC2- noted,for thousands of years farmers and herders have been selectively breeding their plants and animals to produce more useful hybrids.This is in essence Genetic engineering.When do you think it becomes playing God?Was Gregor Mendel playing God?
#7
Posted 21 April 2006 - 04:47 AM
Otherwise, genetic engineering would be a powerful tool in controlling the adverse biological aspects of the rich.
I for one will almost enjoy seeing the above two aspects of GM culminate into a final outcome.
Wise is the Almighty. Hallelu YAH!
#8
Posted 21 April 2006 - 07:09 AM
:read:
#9
Posted 22 April 2006 - 05:54 PM
(((tartanism))) said:
We already do and have for thousands of years.
Many (not all) mates are chosen because they have an advantage which others lack. The makes it more likely for those who have a certain trait to pass it along. Beauty is the main trait I am considering here. While the definition of beauty changes, many marry others based on this (especially younger couples).
Just as farmers select seed from the most robust or tasty crops, so do many humans choose partners the same way.
And, how about the idea of eliminating a hereditary disease (as mentioned earlier). Would that be 'playing god'. If so, is creating lenses so those with poor eyesight can see also 'playing god'?
How about the person that engineered the first wheelchair, are they playing god?
Mark
#10
Posted 22 April 2006 - 09:49 PM
Sex was an invention of nature to speed up evolution as organisms moved into new niches. Humans are one of the results of primitive organisms bonking for millions of years. Nature has now invented genetic engineering, using humans as its agent, to speed up evolution by several orders of magnitude. It is now possible for Nature, via Man, to genetically engineer organisms able to live on Mars, and other planets. We can technically build a lichen-like organism to inhabit Mars and create oxygen there. If we had to wait for Nature to come up with these kind of animals through normal sexual reproduction, we would've waited for millions of years still. Nature also invented rockets via Man to take these seed animals to new planets.
I think its great.
But being a New Technology, the ethical issues still need to be sorted out. It's almost like inventing a knife, and bitching about a knife being unethical, 'cause it can kill someone. Yet people hardly frown upon knives these days.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Ecce bos taurus justitia
#11
Posted 22 April 2006 - 10:46 PM
:read:
#12
Posted 23 April 2006 - 06:22 AM
(((tartanism))) said:
Just for clarification, when you say "but it is an example" is that 'but it is an example [of playing god]'?
If so, do you wish to restructure your definition of when genetic engineering is ok, and when it shouldn't be done?
Mark
#13
Posted 23 April 2006 - 02:31 PM
:read:
#14
Posted 23 April 2006 - 02:44 PM
I concur with you completely, I think it would be wrong to start creating troops, for example, using cloning techniques. Although that really isn't genetic engineering (although it would require it).
Mark
#15
Posted 24 April 2006 - 11:19 AM

Help
Join now


Promote to Article














