The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should genetic engineering be allowed on humans?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
ShadowThe1st has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2018 Category: Technology
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,526 times Debate No: 113510
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Genetic engineering could change the lives of so many people all over the world who may be suffering physically or mentally. There is a new tool named CRISPR, cas9 that has the ability to potentially change genes. CRISPR is only at the beginning of their research, within a few years they could possibly be changing the genes of people with diseases such as blindness, HIV, Huntington's disease etc. Genetic engineering is a beginning of endless possibilities for human life and in the far future people may be designing their babies (improving eye sight, strength, height, changing hair color etc). I personally think that genetic engineering should be focused on helping people with health problems before changing babies appearances or enhancing their abilities. There may be many cons to consider such as, will society be split into two groups? "The genetically designed and the 'Normal' people". This could cause many issues within society but if taken with caution, this could hopefully not be a future issue for our society.
Genetic engineering is a new and exciting subject which I hope leads to great things for our world.


Even if genetic engineering could save many lives, it could cause much more suffering than it could stop. Currently, it is experimental technology, and there must me many more tests before it is allowed to be used on humans. There is no documentation of the dangerous effects it could have on the next generation, the ones that could have genetically engineered fathers and mothers. At this rate, genetic engineering is too experimental to use.
Debate Round No. 1


Genetic engineering is already being used so no, it is not too experimental at the moment. Genome editing has been used in medicine, food and even on animals. Obviously there is a lot more experimenting and research needed before being used on humans. It is a matter that needs to be taken slowly with caution but doesn't mean we should eliminate the option of enhancing human life. When a problem occurs, researchers would work to figure out an answer. Errors will occur a lot while experimenting with genetic engineering but doesn't mean we should not explore it. It could help someone who is suffering with blindness but have a side effect and make them suffer by something new. There are a lot of bad outcomes that may happen but the pros are too good to not try.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by mortdeus 3 years ago
Vaccines are technically a form of genetic engineering in the sense that you are teaching your immunity how to respond. (which is ultimately an evolutionary process [aka accomplished through genetic mutation and natural selection])
Posted by ShadowThe1st 3 years ago
noooooo i forgot
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
If they want them then why not, I see no problem with it. Of coarse some more zealous people are going to be up in arms if it were ever an option.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.