Would you genetically modify your child?

Post by **eHoward** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:42 am

Just trying to stir stuff up.

Unsafe At Any Speed · Post by **Unsafe At Any Speed** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:21 am

Yeah. What good are kids if they can't make you money or get you a beer out of the fridge?

The Dark Side of Will · Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:35 pm

Gentically modify... how exactly?
Correct Down's syndrome?
Increase IQ?
Increase athletic prowess?
Grow wings on his back and frickin laser beams on his head?

Post by **eHoward** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:13 pm

That's the slippery slope.

The Dark Side of Will wrote:Gentically modify... how exactly?
Correct Down's syndrome?
Increase IQ?
Increase athletic prowess?
Grow wings on his back and fickin laser beams on his head?

Shaun41178(2) · Post by **Shaun41178(2)** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:16 pm

I would do it. But only so that he/she would be a Serial rapist. And I would bread my kid to have both genitalia so that it could bang itself and then have other serial rapists as kids.

Ahhh Sounds wonderfull dotn' you think?

The Dark Side of Will · Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:32 pm

Don't need genetic engineering to produce a hermaphrodite...

psybrdelic · Post by **psybrdelic** » Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:55 pm

All I can say...is hell no.

JohnnyK · Post by **JohnnyK** » Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:56 am

Have told me girlfriend repeatedly and firmly, I will not have a child until I can 'tweek' it.. It will not have bad eyesight like me, or depression, or any other problem I have.. If I could go back in time, I'd stick a condom on my dad.. I dont' want me kid to be like that.. I mean, changing eye colour and hair color would be a bonus, but I'm thinkign more cognitive.. Although I'm sure the aesthetic will come first.. No children until I can be guaranteed they are 'perfect'.

The Dark Side of Will · Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:50 am

Who defines perfect?
We already had one attempt to make "perfect" be blonde hair and blue eyes.

JohnnyK · Post by **JohnnyK** » Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:54 am

The Dark Side of Will wrote:Who defines perfect?
We already had one attempt to make "perfect" be blonde hair and blue eyes.

I'm not hitler man, I mean, free of genetic defects, as previously mentioned.. Depression, near sightedness, etc, etc.. No children until they come out as I planned.. I know the women like 'surprise', but not I.. I want my kid to not have to go through the hassles of genetic problems.. As I said, aesthetic tweaks woudl be second on my list to modify..

The Dark Side of Will · Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:46 pm

But where can you draw the line?
I have a long torso and short legs, which means I was never a fast runner... So should I modify my kid so that he doesn't have to "go through" the trials and tribulations of not being a fast runner?

What about the other extreme... I got picked on in school because I was smarter than everyone else. Should I dumb my kid down so that he doesn't get picked on?

Maybe I should just knock up a bimbo with implants instead of reducing his intelligence via genetic engineering.

Post by **eHoward** » Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:35 pm

Now you're thinking!

The Dark Side of Will wrote:
Maybe I should just knock up a bimbo with implants instead of reducing his intelligence via genetic engineering.

I think what's going to happen is the obvious things that are wrong genetically (flaws and disesases) are going to get fixed first and go to market without much protest. It's the other stuff that everyone says they don't want, but once your neighbor's kid is modified, you're not going to want yours to be at a disadvantage . I think the vast majority of people are going to have work done in the future like it or not.

When you start to think about what's at stake globally, it gets scary.

The Dark Side of Will · Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:11 pm

Well... China may have 1.5 billion people, but America's all about quality.

Anyone ever see Star Trek II and the original Trek episode "Botany Bay"?

Post by **eHoward** » Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:47 pm

no.

The Dark Side of Will wrote:
Anyone ever see Star Trek II and the original Trek episode "Botany Bay"?

The Dark Side of Will · Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:51 pm

Anyone else? :scratch:
Gotta be some trekkies in this crowd.

JohnnyK · Post by **JohnnyK** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 3:15 am

WHere do I draw the line? I suppose it depends whats available (damn 'ethical' people) and what it would need.. I mean, hell, I'd give him a metal skeleton structure if I could, but obviously thats not going to happen.. But to answer the original question, no, I don't see any drawbacks to it.

what are your thoughs on human cloning?

The Dark Side of Will · Thu Apr 28, 2005 7:52 am

The premise behind Star Trek II and the aforementioned episode was that genetic engineering experiments in the early 21st century created a small race of supermen. Since superior ability breeds superior ambition, they tried to take over the world, starting World War III in the process.

Cloning would make identity theft look like throwing a spit wad at someone.

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:52 pm

We have no right to genetically mess with anything and think it would make it better.. That's such an arrogant statement..

Your Fuhrer

Diggity"Vote for me"Biggity

JohnnyK · Post by **JohnnyK** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:55 pm

diggitybiggity wrote:We have no right to genetically mess with anything and think it would make it better.. That's such an arrogant statement..

Your Fuhrer

Diggity"Vote for me"Biggity

How so.. Why do you I get the feeling you just threw out the God card? If it's not up for us to mess with, then who? It's not some sacred power in theuniverse that shouldn't be touched.. It's the genetic code of a few piddly humans on earth, a tiny, tiny planet in an almost infinite universe.. Really, it makes no difference in the grand scheme of things at all.. It will make a substantial difference in the life of said child, though.

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:13 pm

diggitybiggity wrote:We have no right to genetically mess with anything and think it would make it better.. That's such an arrogant statement..

You and millions of others already are and have been for centuries. Corrective eye lenses, grocery stores providing food, modern healthcare, Viagra, etc promote a genetic deficiancy in the gene-pool, thus causing "un-natural" genetic variation.

There is no difference between this and directly modifying the genes IMO. I think its very black and white: Either you support Genetic Engineering or you should not visit the doctor anymore.

Think long term -- thousand years from now (even without direct genetic engineering) we will have produced humans that can no longer live without medical augmentation. Look at all the C-Sections that are being done today, that would have otherwise, ended that bad genetic mutuation long ago of not having a baby "naturally". Soon C-Section will be the norm and natural child birth will be the un-natural rare mutation.

(oh and yes I am an old school trekkie)

Real Fiero Tech