Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Genetic engineering wrong?


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

Poll: Is genetic engineering wrong? (1 member(s) have cast votes)

Is genetic engineering wrong?

  1. Yes (3 votes [15.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.79%

  2. No (15 votes [78.95%])

    Percentage of vote: 78.95%

  3. it is wrong on humans only. (1 votes [5.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

  4. it is wrong on Plants/animals only. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 chamilton333

chamilton333

    Thinking

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 18 April 2006 - 09:43 PM

why is genetic engineering considered for the most part unethical?:hihi: i am catholic myself and catholics are against genetic engineering. i, myself, am all for it. genetic engineering humans is wrong, i think, but because god tells us we are the only animals with souls. is genetic engineering plants wrong? animals wrong?

#2 Vagabond -SC2-

Vagabond -SC2-

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 19 April 2006 - 09:23 AM

I guess it would depend on your definition of genetic engineering. On one hand do you consider the use of gene therapy to cure a hereditary disease like hemophilia genetic engineering? As for on plants and animal we have been doing that for centuries if you consider selective breeding/growing and there are some modified crops being grown already.

Now on the other hand if you pick and chose the entire genetic make up of your unborn/conceived child --- well that could lead to the master race.
Have you ever seen the movie GATTCA?

#3 chamilton333

chamilton333

    Thinking

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 19 April 2006 - 09:52 AM

I guess it would depend on your definition of genetic engineering. On one hand do you consider the use of gene therapy to cure a hereditary disease like hemophilia genetic engineering? As for on plants and animal we have been doing that for centuries if you consider selective breeding/growing and there are some modified crops being grown already.

Now on the other hand if you pick and chose the entire genetic make up of your unborn/conceived child --- well that could lead to the master race.
Have you ever seen the movie GATTCA?


No, whats the plot?

#4 InfiniteNow

InfiniteNow

    Suspended

  • Members
  • 9,148 posts

Posted 19 April 2006 - 12:45 PM

Here's what always gets me...

So according to the scriptures, God is this all powerful mofo. So, uhh... if this deity did not want genetic engineering (insert any other hot button issue too), then it wouldn't be possible anyway. :phones:

It's happening. Deal with it. Let's just try to make sure it's used responsibly.

#5 Tarantism

Tarantism

    son et lumire

  • Members
  • 2,133 posts

Posted 19 April 2006 - 08:12 PM

while genetic engeneering is a great advancement in human society, i think that we must resist the idea of playing god, no matter how good it sounds.

#6 Edella

Edella

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 315 posts

Posted 20 April 2006 - 09:08 PM

while genetic engeneering is a great advancement in human society, i think that we must resist the idea of playing god, no matter how good it sounds.


What constitutes playing God?As Vagabond -SC2- noted,for thousands of years farmers and herders have been selectively breeding their plants and animals to produce more useful hybrids.This is in essence Genetic engineering.When do you think it becomes playing God?Was Gregor Mendel playing God?

#7 Southtown

Southtown

    differentiating

  • Members
  • 1,922 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 08:23 AM

Genetic engineering is great, provided we know what we're doing. But we don't. We're just experimenting.

Otherwise, genetic engineering would be a powerful tool in controlling the adverse biological aspects of the rich.

I for one will almost enjoy seeing the above two aspects of GM culminate into a final outcome.

Wise is the Almighty. Hallelu YAH!

#8 Tarantism

Tarantism

    son et lumire

  • Members
  • 2,133 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 10:45 AM

in my opinion it becomes playing god when you begin to use the same techniques as the farmers to selectivley breed humans.:)

#9 Zythryn

Zythryn

    Creating

  • Members
  • 1,539 posts

Posted 22 April 2006 - 09:30 PM

in my opinion it becomes playing god when you begin to use the same techniques as the farmers to selectivley breed humans.;)


We already do and have for thousands of years.
Many (not all) mates are chosen because they have an advantage which others lack. The makes it more likely for those who have a certain trait to pass it along. Beauty is the main trait I am considering here. While the definition of beauty changes, many marry others based on this (especially younger couples).

Just as farmers select seed from the most robust or tasty crops, so do many humans choose partners the same way.

And, how about the idea of eliminating a hereditary disease (as mentioned earlier). Would that be 'playing god'. If so, is creating lenses so those with poor eyesight can see also 'playing god'?
How about the person that engineered the first wheelchair, are they playing god?

Mark

#10 Boerseun

Boerseun

    Phantom Cow of Justice

  • Members
  • 6,041 posts

Posted 23 April 2006 - 01:25 AM

Every successful conception is an act of genetic engineering, seeing as the genetic make-up of the child will be different from both the mother and the father. Granted, the outcome is not determined by either of the parents.

Sex was an invention of nature to speed up evolution as organisms moved into new niches. Humans are one of the results of primitive organisms bonking for millions of years. Nature has now invented genetic engineering, using humans as its agent, to speed up evolution by several orders of magnitude. It is now possible for Nature, via Man, to genetically engineer organisms able to live on Mars, and other planets. We can technically build a lichen-like organism to inhabit Mars and create oxygen there. If we had to wait for Nature to come up with these kind of animals through normal sexual reproduction, we would've waited for millions of years still. Nature also invented rockets via Man to take these seed animals to new planets.

I think its great.

But being a New Technology, the ethical issues still need to be sorted out. It's almost like inventing a knife, and bitching about a knife being unethical, 'cause it can kill someone. Yet people hardly frown upon knives these days.

#11 Tarantism

Tarantism

    son et lumire

  • Members
  • 2,133 posts

Posted 23 April 2006 - 02:22 AM

in a bleak way, yes, the weelchair is an example of technology taht disrupted the natural way of nature, survival of the fittest. people are living that would normally died in nature. no that i think this is a bad thing, but it is an example.

#12 Zythryn

Zythryn

    Creating

  • Members
  • 1,539 posts

Posted 23 April 2006 - 09:58 AM

in a bleak way, yes, the weelchair is an example of technology taht disrupted the natural way of nature, survival of the fittest. people are living that would normally died in nature. no that i think this is a bad thing, but it is an example.


Just for clarification, when you say "but it is an example" is that 'but it is an example [of playing god]'?

If so, do you wish to restructure your definition of when genetic engineering is ok, and when it shouldn't be done?

Mark

#13 Tarantism

Tarantism

    son et lumire

  • Members
  • 2,133 posts

Posted 23 April 2006 - 06:07 PM

i think that the use of genetic engeneering is fine when you are using it to save human lives, i DO NOT like the idea of growing crops of humans. it just doesnt sit well with me, on a ethical level. it has nothing to do with religion, politics or anything like that, simply a personal opinion.

#14 Zythryn

Zythryn

    Creating

  • Members
  • 1,539 posts

Posted 23 April 2006 - 06:20 PM

Thank you for the clarification, I just wasn't sure what you meant by "playing god".
I concur with you completely, I think it would be wrong to start creating troops, for example, using cloning techniques. Although that really isn't genetic engineering (although it would require it).

Mark

#15 chamilton333

chamilton333

    Thinking

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 02:55 PM

OK, another question. if genetic engineering is not playing god, as many people say, is making a WHOLE NEW SPECIES not playing god? is making a new species just a major form of playing god?

#16 Zythryn

Zythryn

    Creating

  • Members
  • 1,539 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 03:24 PM

OK, another question. if genetic engineering is not playing god, as many people say, is making a WHOLE NEW SPECIES not playing god? is making a new species just a major form of playing god?


I think we are chasing our tail here.

Why don't you tell us how you define the term 'playing god'?

As for species, we have been creating new species for quite some time, especially when it comes to plants.

Mark

#17 Tarantism

Tarantism

    son et lumire

  • Members
  • 2,133 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 03:32 PM

i agree, Zythryn, genetic engineering ought to be used fot the better of mankind, and i think that the troop example was perfect. it cannot work like that.

when you say that we have been creating new species of plants for a while are you referring to the genetic engeneering of farm crops (to make them more sellable)? is there some other form of plant engeneering that i dont know about?