Posted on 03/30/2007 3:48:55 PM PDT by nancyvideo
For a number of years now, a great deal of discussion has taken place among scientists and in the popular media about the genetic engineering of children.
Will it soon be possible, for prices widely affordable at least to the upper-middle class, to guarantee that children have a high IQ, or excellent athletic ability, or be over 6 feet tall, or have blond hair and blue eyes?
Is it right to commodify children in this way, and have parents choosing options as they do with cars?
And wouldn’t it be boring to live in a world someday where almost everyone is extremely intelligent and beautiful? Variety, or even the politically correct term “diversity,” is the spice of life.
(Excerpt) Read more at rightbias.com ...
I ain't asking for much, all I want's a cup holder.
Funny, but this sounds a lot like the 'royal blood' arrogant customs of past times. In fact, hybridizing anything eventually leads to some unhealthy results. If this actually comes to pass, I suspect the rutting peasants will still retain their vigor while the uber-elite will all be beautiful and childless (by genetics or abortion).
What is the disability part?
Utter nonsense. Giving one's kids positive attributes such as a high IQ is a bad thing? How about ensuring that a family history of high blood pressure isn't past down? These people are luddites who would feel right at home with those who attacked Jenner when he first burst on the scene.
children have a high IQ, or excellent athletic ability, or be over 6 feet tall, or have blond hair and blue eyes?
"....and you will be like gods.." Genesis 3.5
Yes, we picked the wrong tree.
There was an article in the WaPo about 2 years ago about a deaf lesbian couple who purposely used semen from a deaf donor so as to produce a deaf child. The article described their absolute joy when they discovered he was 75% deaf in one ear and 95% in the other and were insulted when the doctor suggested they take measures to preserve the little hearing remaining in the one ear. Disgusting.
Ping! You have to click on the article to the link provided so you can see where they mention about deafness.
Science is not the terrible bugaboo many make it out to be. If it can improve the quality of life for our children, we would be remiss in our responsibilities as parents to not take every advantage of what it has to offer.
Would I exercise great caution and due diligence before starting the procedure? Absolutely. And once it proved safe, I would gladly get in line with a prayer of thanks that my children would have advantages I never had..
The desire to be like God is the original sin and eugenics is the ultimate tool. Too bad it don't pan out fer 'em in the end.
Damn if you aren't right on the money - that is EXACTLY what they said. The talked about how they felt their deaf culture was superior to the speaking one and they wanted their kids to be just like them. In fact, they were somewhat disappointed that their second child was a son, instead of a girl, and pointed out that having boys was an unexpected offshoot in in-vitro. For some reason more boys are produced. But yes, they wanted deaf children, and talked about making sure their daugther was set up with lesbian role models and how they would need gay deaf models for their son. Wow! I can't believe how sick that all sounds
But if I wanted a daughter who was brunette like me, that'd be okay?
Woohoo!
Now for the rest of the story:
The article details how deaf parents refuse conchlear implants so their deaf children can hear, and how dwarf parents have their "normal" size babies aborted.
Wrong. It's the desire to BE God - that's what happened to Satan - he thought he could be God. Guess he found out, huh?
Better give the Book a closer read, pard.
Sounds like California today. ;)
I read a small and rather bizarre study with people that went into depth to ask them "If you could have children any way you wanted, what would you want them to be?"
Their first response was what we would normally expect. Wanting their children to be smarter, more athletic, prettier.
However, the researchers followed up their questions, and a strange trend started to emerge. People wanted their children to have more canine and feline attributes.
The reason was that they felt cats and dogs were far more personable than are people, and if their children looked and behaved more like pets, then people would appreciate and love them more. And this, they concluded, would be better for their children than if they were smart, strong, or handsome.
the los angeles skool system has already developed a new illiterate slave class.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.