babies, one thing is certain: the babies should only be genetically modified for medical purposes. In this case, scientists would use CRISPR/Cas9 to take out any DNA in the embryo that coded for a life-threatening or incurable disease (Hernandez 1). Genetically modifying babies for this reason would significantly benefit society. It would enable researchers to eliminate devastating diseases inside a baby before it is even born; this would save infant lives and prevent babies from being born with serious disabilities (Gyngell 1). There are currently 7.9 million children around the globe who suffer from an incurable genetic disease that they were born with, such as cancer, down-syndrome, etc. However, this number could easily be reduced
…show more content…
It would essentially reject God’s creation of man by changing the embryo’s DNA and making the baby “better” (Hayes, “Human,” 35). In 1983, a group of religious leaders even wrote a letter saying that the genetic modification of babies for nonmedical purposes is wrong. They said it would destroy God’s creation and would “represent a fundamental threat to the preservation of the human species” (Hayes, “Human,” 35). Finally, genetically modifying babies for nonmedical purposes would cause conflicts to develop between countries all over the world. Nations would constantly be competing with each to see which of them has the best genetically modified, enhanced citizens (Hayes, “Genetically,” 1). There would be increased pressure within countries to try to create the most intelligent, most athletic, and most attractive citizens. Experts call this a genetic arms race. Thus, it is shown that the genetic modification of babies for nonmedical purposes is a practice that scientists should not perform (Hayes, “Genetically,” …show more content…
Some countries around the world have gotten permission to genetically modify embryos, as long the embryos are not implanted into a woman. In the future, though, researchers might be able to take the shocking “next step” (Cheng 1). They may convince government officials to pass a law allowing them to modify embryos and to implant them into the mother’s womb. This would enable researchers to create live genetically modified babies. This is why people have said that the British experiments, “ ‘…are the first step on a path that scientists have carefully mapped out towards the legalization of [genetically modified] babies’ ” (Cheng 1). To persuade government officials to pass a law, future scientists may try to use technological advances to their advantage. If these scientists are able to make the process of genetically modifying embryos safer, then perhaps government officials will be more inclined to pass a law that would allow the practice to take place in the womb (Sample 1). At the International Summit on Human Gene Editing in December 2015, Chinese, British, and American experts even hinted at this very idea; they said that future scientists might start genetically modifying babies in the womb when technology gets less dangerous. Therefore, scientists’ dreams of making live genetically modified babies could become a shocking
It would essentially reject God’s creation of man by changing the embryo’s DNA and making the baby “better” (Hayes, “Human,” 35). In 1983, a group of religious leaders even wrote a letter saying that the genetic modification of babies for nonmedical purposes is wrong. They said it would destroy God’s creation and would “represent a fundamental threat to the preservation of the human species” (Hayes, “Human,” 35). Finally, genetically modifying babies for nonmedical purposes would cause conflicts to develop between countries all over the world. Nations would constantly be competing with each to see which of them has the best genetically modified, enhanced citizens (Hayes, “Genetically,” 1). There would be increased pressure within countries to try to create the most intelligent, most athletic, and most attractive citizens. Experts call this a genetic arms race. Thus, it is shown that the genetic modification of babies for nonmedical purposes is a practice that scientists should not perform (Hayes, “Genetically,” …show more content…
Some countries around the world have gotten permission to genetically modify embryos, as long the embryos are not implanted into a woman. In the future, though, researchers might be able to take the shocking “next step” (Cheng 1). They may convince government officials to pass a law allowing them to modify embryos and to implant them into the mother’s womb. This would enable researchers to create live genetically modified babies. This is why people have said that the British experiments, “ ‘…are the first step on a path that scientists have carefully mapped out towards the legalization of [genetically modified] babies’ ” (Cheng 1). To persuade government officials to pass a law, future scientists may try to use technological advances to their advantage. If these scientists are able to make the process of genetically modifying embryos safer, then perhaps government officials will be more inclined to pass a law that would allow the practice to take place in the womb (Sample 1). At the International Summit on Human Gene Editing in December 2015, Chinese, British, and American experts even hinted at this very idea; they said that future scientists might start genetically modifying babies in the womb when technology gets less dangerous. Therefore, scientists’ dreams of making live genetically modified babies could become a shocking