If we are able to pick what kind of kind we will have and what they look like and ect. Then should they have the same rights? Should they be able to be in the olympics if they are modified? Wouldnt that be like steriods? Just some questions to ask yourself.
As a deeply religious man, it makes me shake and shudder to think that there will one day be genetically engineered babies in the world among us. To do such a thing is against the will of our Lord, and will result in us paying for our sins when Satan returns.
I think that it's just not normal, I think that people who think it would be a solution or cure to disorders or imperfections, need to think how it could also backfire. Science is not perfect, and if someone genetically engineers a baby, and something goes wrong they can't just get rid of it, it's a human being, and that child would have to live with the consequences. I think that instead we should focus on medicine, and for people that would have a high risk of having a baby with problems there are other options. Children are not toys that we can experiment with.
If it will invented a totally safe method to cure disease genetically transmitted to avoid uncurable illness like tye-sachs, emophilia, huntington, sickle anemia and others, it should be used, cautiously, with serious restrictions and economically guaranteed regardless of the budget to avoid creating a health disparities between social classes but used. Genetic damages to human genomein the form of random mutations appear continuously from generation to generation . Esono transmitted to their children , causing damage that ripercutono for generations . In prarica without natural selection the genome is damaged spontaneously . To this must be added the air pollution , electronic equipment of the radio waves that permeate the atmosphere. The damages accumulate. The fact that people do children late in life for various reasons amplifies exponentially. A safe method could resolve seniority issues with senile dementia and alzheimer or parkinson and improve overall physical health. Plus it could fix the damage or mutations that cause mental delays or problems of physical and mental development. If it used under strict control not only of the state and with strong limitations could help many people.
No because babies could come ugly or deiform. And something could come wrong.They should live a good live:)b5 vff ff fff fff f f f f gg ?_ 6 0998 e time to return to go back away to return home with credit as follows from experience at least to date to go through as many times for example the bottom of use up front from 1
Babies should not be altered to what they're parents want . They should be able to grow into themselves and not be told what they have to be. They should be able to live life as it was planned,not how theyre parents planned it. Its cruel and unusual . Please stop !
I do not think we should prohibit genetically engineered babies. I say this because doing so would leave a lot of moral questions unanswered. Would non-genetically engineered babies be given as many opportunities as genetically engineered babies? I do not believe we should step into these territories until we fully discuss the possible outcomes of such actions.
Maybe the case can be made to ban some genetic engineering, but it is cruel to prohibit a parent who's about to have a Tay Sachs baby who will die painfully at a young age otherwise from using genetic engineering to prevent that outcome. Genetic engineering for vanity issues is another thing entirely. There are a number of issues but we shouldn't ban all genetic engineering.
If we allow genetic engineering, it could help us along the path to completely get rid of genetic disorders. I don't think parents should nitpick over hair and eye color, but if parents could access technology to ensure their child is not born with health issues that run in the family, society as a whole could reap the benefits to health.
This is the only option for some people. If two people from getting their genome mapped learn that if they conceive a child it has a high probability of inheriting a certain disease, I see no issue with using science to avoid that. I think it's a special cases sort of thing, but something that should not be prohibited.