Posted on 05/15/2023 1:43:03 AM PDT by spirited irish
Last week, the birth of the first three-parent baby in the UK was reported in the Guardian.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotandliberty.com ...
If it is a red head, it doesnt have a soul.
Last days ping.
It got really crowded in that egg.
One of the reason God brought flood.
So it is to counter the 25% risk of a baby being born with a fatal genetic illness living their life in pain and dying by the age of 3.
I don’t understand why it is a bad thing.
Are there no laws in UK?
Nature is innocent. It had nothing intentional to do with it.
More like a “2.01 parent baby” and the .01 is Mitochondrial DNA that doesn’t contribute to a person’s traits:
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/three-parent-babies-explained
I don’t get it either. If we were talking about substituting DNA from another species....if we were talking about people undertaking this frivolously....fine. I would understand the opposition. But, if doctors can intervene to prevent horrible birth defects and to prevent genetic diseases by repairing errors in a person’s DNA then I fully support that. Obviously, we need to proceed carefully. Obviously we need to study this closely and see that it does not lead to other long term problems, etc. But I have no problem with medical interventions to save lives.
No boundaries. There is always a good excuse for whatever they do in laboratories. The usual one reported to us in the news is that it will cure Alzheimer or cancer. Who can be opposed to that? and they know it. You know that is a cover for unlimited practices.
After what we’ve witnessed with gain of function research on viruses in the Wuhan Lab, we don’t see the dangers with unrestricted experimentation? How do we know the ultimate goals of the people involved? Where does this stop? What will these experiments pass on to second and third generations? That can’t be tested.
One line in the article caught my attention. “The question then arises in the laboratory as to what to do with female embryos, whether they are more likely to be discarded.”
What about the lives of those embryos? They don’t matter? It is ok to take the life of one in order to improve the life of another?
Perhaps if you had abnormalities that could be passed on like this, the best route is adoption. There are plenty of children that need a family.
Who sets the boundaries?
Did you even read the article? It discusses the cons against it.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
” If we were talking about substituting DNA from another species....”
That’s next, and anyone who thinks it’s not is naive.
Not next! it's already being done as described in the 2017 article, "Human-Pig Hybrid Created in the Lab—Here Are the Facts," and in this 2019 article, "Scientists are making human-monkey hybrids in China." And there's no doubt, it's being done in other labs.
And then there are creatures containing a combination of DNA from humans and slime mold. They make up the ChiComjoe kakistocracy.
“ But I have no problem with medical interventions to save lives.”
- Strictly enforced diet
- Mandatory exercise
- Zero alcohol
- No autos
All potential medical interventions that would save innumerable lives.
Absolutely incorrect.
I know, I just think it’s funny.
We are all made the same.
I thought it was a big-legged woman ain’t got no soul?
They are MANipulating nature.
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.