The next objection is based on human autonomy and how enhancement strips the right of that. Our autonomy is based on a personal rule of self that is free from outside opinions or controlling interferences. This idea allows every person to have their own mind set without someone controlling every decision they make. When a child starts to grow up they start to become interested in certain things, whether it is sports or dance or even art. Once the child really becomes their own self they will arbitrate the things they like and dislike. When a child is genetically enhanced, their parents have already chosen which type of things the child will be interested in and will completely strip them of becoming the person they desire to be.
Open future …show more content…
Technically all of the previous points discussed can be considered under the category of genetic discrimination. In this case any type of modification is going against the role of nature. Every path a person goes down is because they were destined to do so, even if it was not the right path, it still helped guide them to where they needed to be. Genetically enhancing genotypes in an unborn child is completely going against nature. Most people will agree in the matter of God brings children into this world as a gift and how everything happens for a reason. As hard as it is to grasp such concepts during times when people have cancer or have a shorter life than expected, it is all a part of nature. If it’s meant to be that every person had some kind of genetic enhancement to improve multiple characteristics, then it would have started in the beginning of time. Discovering this procedure and finding ways to make it safe are just actions of attempting to ‘play God’. People are trying to decide everything about their child and that is not something for them to determine. The idea of genetic discrimination is about parents trying to contribute to every aspect of their child’s life before they are even born, which is something we have no control …show more content…
Steven Pinker, a cognitive scientists and psychologists, wrote an article called The Designer Baby Myth and explains how genetic enhancement is unrealistic. “ Geneticists have failed to find single genes that consistently cause schizophrenia, autism, or manic-depressive disorder, even though there is overwhelming evidence that these conditions are substantially heritable. And if we can’t find a gene for that it’s unlikely to find one for musical talent” (Pinker 816). Researchers have not found accurate ways to determine the genes for autism so it is very unlikely they will be able to distinguish the genes for athleticism. In like manner, all genes are dependent on one another. A positive effect on one gene may cause a negative effect on another creating a result that is not desired. Not only is this procedure nonviable it has absolutely no certainty as to whether it will be effective or
Open future …show more content…
Technically all of the previous points discussed can be considered under the category of genetic discrimination. In this case any type of modification is going against the role of nature. Every path a person goes down is because they were destined to do so, even if it was not the right path, it still helped guide them to where they needed to be. Genetically enhancing genotypes in an unborn child is completely going against nature. Most people will agree in the matter of God brings children into this world as a gift and how everything happens for a reason. As hard as it is to grasp such concepts during times when people have cancer or have a shorter life than expected, it is all a part of nature. If it’s meant to be that every person had some kind of genetic enhancement to improve multiple characteristics, then it would have started in the beginning of time. Discovering this procedure and finding ways to make it safe are just actions of attempting to ‘play God’. People are trying to decide everything about their child and that is not something for them to determine. The idea of genetic discrimination is about parents trying to contribute to every aspect of their child’s life before they are even born, which is something we have no control …show more content…
Steven Pinker, a cognitive scientists and psychologists, wrote an article called The Designer Baby Myth and explains how genetic enhancement is unrealistic. “ Geneticists have failed to find single genes that consistently cause schizophrenia, autism, or manic-depressive disorder, even though there is overwhelming evidence that these conditions are substantially heritable. And if we can’t find a gene for that it’s unlikely to find one for musical talent” (Pinker 816). Researchers have not found accurate ways to determine the genes for autism so it is very unlikely they will be able to distinguish the genes for athleticism. In like manner, all genes are dependent on one another. A positive effect on one gene may cause a negative effect on another creating a result that is not desired. Not only is this procedure nonviable it has absolutely no certainty as to whether it will be effective or