The human species will inevitably branch into outer space and have to stand up to more evolved beings that might or might not have induced artificial evolution as well. This scenario does not allow for hand wringing ethics and bleating about it's not natural. These engineered people will only serve to being humanity to great heights and it is a blessing
Think about the money. If you pick the right traits your baby could be a super star and then he could give you money if you need it and if your a guy remember this happy wife happy life. Plus would you want your kid to go through what you went or are going through.
Most of you who say no are obviously either psychologist, the false science, or uneducated based on your spelling and lack of grammar. You even have autocorrect and you still look like an idiot. Anyways, genetic engineering is a beautiful thing, I already can have blond haired, blue eyed children, but if I could have all of them be that way, then that would be glorious. Your so called "new prejudice" is already out there, with wealth, and the attractiveness inequality already exists, it's just putting more people on the attractive side. Hitler was a madman, but I will die before I let you call him an idiot, he was a genius, the mass murder wasn't a good idea but the man was brilliant and many of hitlers scientists were focused on genetic engineering, probably leading up to designer babies. Also, "playing god," I am a catholic and I believe if God didn't want is to do this he wouldn't have given us the ability to.
As previously stated, designer babies can be excluded from the various genetic diseases, such as Cystic Fibrosis. There are complications, such as the fact that in extreme cases, there may be "genetic discrimination" (See "Gattaca"), where only those with the prefect genes are accepted into the community. Choosing your kid's traits is not "Playing God", it's "advancing the human race another way". Natural selection probably doesn't work well today's world, anyways. Not with people with crippling diseases and other conditions passing on their genes with the help of increasingly more advanced machines. It won't make the babies less unique, as they still have their own mind, and can still do what they each want to do. Kind of hard to main "Dominant species of Earth" status with the average IQ dropping each decade.
If you had a child that had a life threatening disease then you would want to save them, wouldn't you? If the chances of saveing them were slim and this was your only chance, would you do it? I think the answers to these questions would be yes because all you want when you have a child is for them to have the best and do their best in life. That is why is is a good idea, because if you couldn't do this then imagine how many lives and loved ones would be lost.
We want to give our children the best possible chance in life, don't we? That starts by giving them the best possible genes. If we can make our kids super athletic or intelligent, or capable of regenerating limbs and resisting HIV infections, then we should do so.
There's only one limit I'd place on this: you must be changing them because you love them, not changing them so you'll love them.
If I could prevent certain diseases and make sure my child was safe and healthy of course I would. Improving their strength and appearance is only a plus. I only want the best for my child, and engineering would give it the best. When I buy a car, I want it to be engineered to be the best and safest, why not people?
The question does say "in the future" so yes, once we are sure this can be done safely it should be allowed.
The person in column "no" must have either not read the "in the future" part of the question or has a very pessimistic outlook on the future of human scientific discovery such that they expect that "Science does not know enough" is going to remain a true statement throughout the entirety of the future.
By having designer babies, people are able to eliminate many risks accompanied by childbirth, including ALL of the genetically transferred diseases. Along with humans that are more able-bodied and less susceptible to disease, it is required that people take this form some time in the future. Like it or not, it's gonna happen somewhere, and science does know enough.
I support gene therapy to save lives, not to create them. I think it would be wrong to design babies from the start because it would change the path for the human race, perhaps in a good way, but maybe in a bad way. Gene therapy should be used to correct genetic disorders, and prevent and treat disease, but not to create life.
With are medicine improving, why should we erase them. This suggests that people with genetic disorders are inferior. Also, if a parent says that she/he won't be able to cope with a sick child, then what if that healthy child becomes sick in the future. We are intelligent so why are not allowing our intelligence to grow and lean more by taking away the reason for finding out?
Creating a baby in a lab isn't a natural way to make a baby is it? Sure we all would want our children to grow up healthy and have a good future, but resorting to scientists having a fiddle around with our genes isn't the answer. Haven't we already been born with our best possible chances? There is a reason we are here and that is because the strongest sperm made it to the egg. If scientists decide which sperm how do they know it would be the strongest one? They cant possibly test millions at once so why not let nature do its work. Sure there is a chance they are taking away risks of diseases which run in the family, but there will always be risks of other diseases.
Part of what makes humankind unique is all of our differences, and that we are a creation of nature. Already, some people are making choices about what children they will have (such as in regards to gender). This type of future is a slippery slope to get on and can somehow trivialize the lives of people who are differently abled. It also brings back to mind a disturbing mindset from the World War II era, and how only some people were deemed worthy of living.
Because the technology is so new, it is unknown whether genetically modifying the babies will affect the gene pool. This could cause difficulties later on throughout the baby’s family tree.
Parents may use this technology for superficial purposes; such as purposely seeking out a blonde haired, blue eyed baby for appearance concerns only.
Kids should come naturally not by science. Babies are not accessories that you can choose from babies should be the way they are and no different. Also if you do design you babies there can be long term effects with their health status. Like for example sometimes they can end up in wheel
The procedure is not cheap, and not everyone would be able to afford it. Could create prejudice between “Designer” and “non-designer” children. It could cause the “non-designer” children to miss opportunities. And It could create a gap in society. “Designer” babies would most likely be better looking, smarter, etc. This could create “classes” between designer and non-designer babies.
it is like playing good and mother nature kids should come naturally not by sience. babies are not assesories that you can choose from babies should be the way they are and no different.also if you do designe you babies there can be long term effects with there health status.like for example sometimes they can end up in wheel chairs
if it's used to increase intelligence or strength, how would that affect the world? Yes, I believe getting rid of defects from a genetic code is a great thing. If that technology was here today, I could have had a younger brother. However, who would have the option to do so? The poor? The rich? I would hate to have my son/daughter grow up in a world where everyone else in their class was superior to them in every way, just because I couldn't afford the extra add-ons. Or how about when she tries to make friends? The disconnect between people because they are different is enough, why add one more?
Human life should not be tampered with. Even if we did start engineering people to be "better" wouldn't everyone be "better" so no one would be better looking or stronger etc...or we would end up having a caste system. Brave New World anyone? Plus we already save too many people with the discovery of medicine and cures. Let nature take its course the world is already overpopulated.