Genetic Engineering - Playing God or being Man?

[Silver Guard]

And for those of us who don't believ in God: Generaly disturbing

Genetic Engineering leads to attacks by animal rights activists, graphic novels and destubing films, however it also is a way to test new ways of providing vital things for those unfortunates who don't have everything, for example geneticly engineered germs producing insulin for the diabetic

So: You decide, and I'll make fun of all your views and send you nasty PMs
Woops, did I just say that aloud?

[Tom Paine]

Ah, genetic engineering, tool of man to improve what some call the work of God. We are shoddy, as a being, we have flaws, and we have problems. I'd rather see those problemss fixed using a method that harms no-one than see us languishing in a false sense of moral superiority over not playing God. What's wrong with playing God anyway, huh?

[Kino]

Deleted by user.

[Silver Guard]

tGS: Harmless...look up some mutant images would you for some examples of what MIGHT happen if we geneticly engineer the wrong gene...Whats wrong with playing God? Well, it would be difficult seeing that he dosn't exist and I'm going off topic so I'll shut up and go onto something else

There isn't already an underclass, don't you look at your next door neighbour trip over a cat, then kick it, thinking it will understand, and thing 'oh my God...I can't believe I'm part of his species...'
Personaly the first improvement I'm looking for is either extra arms or legs, or hearts which don't run on blood, therefore removing the risks of heart attacks and meaning anyone can be as fat as they like....wait...thats a bad thing...
Hmmm....wings, if we had wings big enough and strong enough to fly they would fill about 15 span and we'd have chests as big as the round table of camelot, but true, you would look prrrety impressive with 15 metre wings!

[Tom Paine]

tGS: Harmless...look up some mutant images would you for some examples of what MIGHT happen if we geneticly engineer the wrong gene...

Which presumes we start on humans rather than perfecting the technique on simians, and it also presumes that the mutant images are true. Most mutations don't get noticed, you realise, as they are in the parts of the gene which code nothing, and of those which do most are tumours they benign or malevolent.

[Necromancer]

Genetics is a very delicate issue, that should be taken very seriously, especially with humans, you're tinkering with someone's life. I have always believed in what Dzoavitz stated, if we can think of doing such things, then the guy upstairs must have given us the ability to do so, so let's give it a try. However, the work that we do on someone should be very small. Taking away/modifying un-needed/un-wanted genes that don't really benefit us too much. We shouldn't attempt to modify or remove 'large' and/or important genes UNTIL we have a MUCH better understanding of genetics.

[Silver Guard]

It is phisicly impossible (at the moment) to tinker with someone's genetics after they're born, or even after they reach foetus stage, as this would cause rejection leading to haemorages and later possible death....not a good thing to experience...

[Tom Paine]

It is phisicly impossible (at the moment) to tinker with someone's genetics after they're born, or even after they reach foetus stage, as this would cause rejection leading to haemorages and later possible death....not a good thing to experience...

Haemorages? Not at all. Tumours. Different things entirely. And actually we can do it... how do you think you cure a cancer, given that a cancer is a genetic mutation?

[Silver Guard]

Cancer curing? Sinse when could we cure cancer? No, we destroy it using rays (What type I have no idea, pobably some type of electromagnetic). Yes Haemorages, have you ever seen the effects of an implant being rejected? BLOOD EVERYWHERE, probably this could be stopped from being too serious today, but when we change genetics it'll be alot of work to change back again, perhaps impossible, and it'll cause damage everywhere. No, the only way to do it successfully is when you havn't developed very much yet

[Tom Paine]

Actually a genetic alteration wouldn't lead to or be invovled with any kind of implant, sg, don't get the two medical things confused; and the electromagnetic radiation we use causes the mutated cells to die off or mutate to a non-malignant form, but we aren't destroying the cancer but a tumour. Again, get your medical terminology right.

[Silver Guard]

Aha! I see your point!
So, care to point out the new cure for cancer using genetic modification?
Genetic alteration, unless concerning the entire body will have much the same effect as an implant, as the body would consider it a foreign body and attempt to evict the altered area

[Tom Paine]

No, it wouldn't, sg, just like it doesn't do it to cancersm because you are in fact replacing a part of the coding but you aren't changing the coding of whose genetics it is...
And the use of radiation is a genetic cure for cancer. In theory.

[Silver Guard]

So using radiation is genetic engineering?
So you havn't seen pics of Genetic Engineering gone wrong (apparently done in russia, they looked real...I think) they were in the express some years ago

[Tom Paine]

So using radiation is genetic engineering?

In effect. It is using the radiation to alter the genetic makeup of cells to become unviable, in this instance.

So you havn't seen pics of Genetic Engineering gone wrong (apparently done in russia, they looked real...I think) they were in the express some years ago

In the Express a few years ago from Russia? Highly suspect in three regards. First, that its the Express... general scare story. Second, a few years ago? We don't have the technoogy today to really genetically engineer! And third... is it just me or is Russia a dumpting ground for all these conspiracy theories?

[Zelech]

I'm not all up on the current medical lingo, personally.

As to the general topic, I am against genetic engineering of a "super" class of humans.
If you want intelligence, that should be socially engineered first. Developed countries (most specifically the USA, which is where I live, fyi) are seeing increases in laziess. Personally, I am seeing a lot of apathy as well as the laxness does away with morals and family bonds. And if you combine laziness with apathy, you get people who don't keep their mind sharp and witty, and strong memory.

Diseases and such, though--I am torn on that. On one hand, much life gets destroyed and damaged just for the testing and trials with tampering with genes.
But on the other hand, for a parent that would be a huge pro to know that one's children would be born without certain defects and diseases.
For the sake of picking a side, though, I am against it--it is safer not to tamper than to tamper, I believe.

[shenmueguru]

We had this arguement in class, brought about by the book Flowers for Algernon. Most were for it, though I was opposed to the idea, of course. I could see it as a potential cure for severely low I.Q's and diseases, though not for normal people trying to be super-human.

[Silver Guard]

Fair points in all respects
@ Zelech: There is something wrong with super intelligence? If everyone was illeligent no-one would be lazy (When was the last time you saw a clever person infront of a TV with a soda and a hotdog?) In terms of physical abilities, if we had someone with bullet-proof armour who didn't need ot breath for hours and could jump skyscrapers, how long would the Gulf war have lasted? Days?

[Keresztes]

For the most part I'm against it, unless the modification is to cure genetic diseases.

Why? Because people who inherit power without having to work for it usually end up being dicks on a grand scale.

In the case of genetic engineering that power isn't in the form of land or wealth, but in the form of superior intelligence and (possibly) strength.

[Punkus]

Sure it's playing God. We play God every day, although certainly not to quite that degree.

I'm all for bettering ourselves in any way that we can all agree on, though certainly in the private corners of my soul I sometimes wish we could better ourselves even if the method weren't acceptable to the majority. Unfortunately(or perhaps fortunately), since this is something which would allow us to change the very definition of the human condition, it causes us to scrutinize our own moral and ethical values more than ever before.

It is easy to unmake a man, but to make a man is a monumental feat - and a monumental burden.

[Seleucus I Nicator]

Genetic engineering is a good thing, and should definately be continued. But I think human test subjects should be used instead, as it would probably allow more things to be tested and give more exact test results.