[timm22]

I think the difference has to do with trying to do something about & in the present, as opposed to trying to do something to change the future. You do the gene manipulation & things don't turn out as you'd hoped, then what?

An interesting point. But to me, that seems to be more of a practical concern rather than a moral one.

Compared to other forms of permanent alteration that will affect the future - eye surgery, for example - what makes genetic engineering uniquely immoral?

[GoLightly]

One deals with what is, while the other deals with that which *may* be. Medicine is as much art as it is science. I can't tell you how many people are told with certainty that a pregnancy in progress isn't as it should be, with recommendation of termination & a perfectly healthy baby is born anyway.

But to me, that seems to be more of a practical concern rather than a moral one.

From a practical standpoint, what do you do with your errors? Where are you going to get your first guinea pigs? Let's say a discovery is made one week after you've done the procedure, that your "fix" creates additional errors, while leaving the original thing you meant to fix unrepaired? Do you throw it in the scrap heap & start over?