Genetically Modified Humans No Thanks Summary

“At what point do children become artifacts designed to someone’s specifications rather than members of a family to be nurtured? (Hayes 245).” In “Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks,” Richard Hayes argues against Ronald M. Green, a professor of Emeritus of Religion and of Ethics and Human Values at Dartmouth College, specifically responding to his essay about using genetic technology to change children’s DNA. Hayes, who holds a Ph.D. in Energy and Resource, which saluted the United States to ban human cloning worldwide, believes it would disrupt human nature and the human future. As he states, “granted, new human technologies have real potential to help prevent or cure many terrible diseases, and I support research directed towards that end. But these same technologies also have potential for real harm” (Hayes 245). Hayes wants not only medical students and scientists to read the article but also the international community and parents interested in having …show more content…
As he points how that Green did not include that forty countries have adapted to new genetic technologies he also lacks where he has stated, “Our desires for good looks, good brains, wealth, and long lives, for ourselves and for our children, are strong and enduring. If the gene-tech entrepreneurs…” (Hayes 247). The statement made by Hayes contradicts what he is arguing towards Green. Technology advancing can change the human and civil rights and, with the use of genetic technology the harm of human future by adjusting communities and societal concerns. Although, Hayes does an incredible job at arguing that technology is not the answer to all the problems, the world is changing and the world is going to be so technology advanced at any point. After having a complete idea of how ridiculously fast technology is moving, it is absurd to think that soon the world is evolving to thinking about being able to change enzymes within a