Design your baby!...

Dadu2004

Dadu2004

PF Visionary
May 16, 2008
7,272
0
0
45
Cleveland, OH
zeitgeist said:
There's no need to get nasty. This is a friendly discussion... isn't it?



Yes, you have said that a few times, and I fully support your choice to draw the line there for yourself. As it happens (and as I've said), I would want to let nature take its course for external features too. I don't have a problem with it if another couple chooses to make changes.

But the reason we're going in circles isn't whether other couples should be permitted to make this kind of decision for themselves (the way I fully expected this debate to go), it's a single point: you have yet to explain why one genetic change means the child produced has no parents, one does.




To use your analogy, if I order a quarter pounder my way, with cheese or without, it's still my quarter pounder.
Click to expand...
I'm not getting nasty whatsoever. You're just making me repeat myself over and over, and it's getting frustrating.

By saying that it makes it not their baby, I mean that physically the child is different than what they would have had. Genetically, yes, the child is theirs, but those genetics are now different than what they would have had because they made a decision to change the childs physical appearance. That makes it a different child than what they would have had otherwise.

Now, changing the DNA of the child with a disease to save it's life is different.

Are we clear now?
 
Z

zeitgeist

PF Fiend
Oct 8, 2008
1,464
0
0
fallon said:
are they actually talking about changing the genetic code or are they just pulling certain embryos from a batch that have the qualities the parents are looking for?
Click to expand...
The articles are a little short on the details here, but my suspicion is the latter.
 
Z

zeitgeist

PF Fiend
Oct 8, 2008
1,464
0
0
Dadu2004 said:
By saying that it makes it not their baby, I mean that physically the child is different than what they would have had. Genetically, yes, the child is theirs, but those genetics are now different than what they would have had because they made a decision to change the childs physical appearance. That makes it a different child than what they would have had otherwise.

Are we clear now?
Click to expand...
Yes, your meaning is clearer now... I was looking for deeper meaning in your objection than you were intending.

Of course it's not the kid they would have had if they had just done it the old fashioned way. That's the whole point of doing it this way.
 
Z

zeitgeist

PF Fiend
Oct 8, 2008
1,464
0
0
Dadu2004 said:
Mmm Hmmm...and doing it this way is wrong. IMO.
Click to expand...
Why?

Edit: if your answer to that would be "because the baby isn't the one nature would have provided," let me counter with "what difference does that make? It's still a baby."
 
Z

zeitgeist

PF Fiend
Oct 8, 2008
1,464
0
0
You seem to be answering my question "why do you feel that changing the genetic code of a baby-to-be is offensive and wrong?" with "because changing the genetic code of a baby-to-be is offensive and wrong."

That's not answering the question, that's restating it.

I have the feeling we're both feeling a bit like a duck's dentist. I'm not going to keep pressing. :)
 
A

AmyBelle

PF Fiend
Apr 20, 2008
1,252
0
0
49
Australia
A good friend of mine had her tubes tied (and adopted a child) because she has a medical condition that means that if she were to fall pregnant there was a 90% chance that the child would be born with a severe heart defect.

Honestly, in cases like that I see nothing wrong with weeding out a bad gene that would make a person sick. However going as far as to pick your childs looks im not keen on the idea of.
 
Xero

Xero

PF Deity
Mar 20, 2008
15,219
1
0
36
PA
Um... you know, I think this is one of those things that I'll have to say I don't exactly find wrong, but I wouldn't do it myself. I think it's a little bit immoral and I would feel wrong doing it because it feels like you're playing God or something lol. Also, I'd like for my babies to come out the way they were supposed to, and not the way I'd "prefer" them to. But that's just me. Maybe the stuff that matters to me, doesn't matter to somebody else. If I met somebody that had done that with their children, I wouldn't really care and I wouldn't look down upon them or their decisions. I just think love isn't really about what color Eli's eyes are lol. But whatever, if it floats their boat then hey. It wouldn't hurt any one child one bit to have that done. I just wouldn't, if it were me.

The difference Zeit, between having that done for health reasons as opposed to cosmetic reasons, is that anyone would do whatever they could to ensure a happy healthy life for their children because they love them. And the reasons for doing it are selfless and protective. That makes it right, or moral at least in the eyes of most people. Having alterations made to your child so that they look a certain way that pleases you instead of coming out looking like an average child you may have had, its a little selfish and needless and you're really messing with nature/god for no good reason. Just because you can, to be honest. It doesn't hurt anything, and it's still your child (I laughed my butt off reading your quarter pounder comment though lol) and the child will be fine, but the event in itself is strange and hard to accept in a lot of ways, for many reasons. Its really hard to explain though, beyond "it just isn't right". It's a feeling more than a fact. You know? A human nature thing.

EDIT: And also, if you look at this from a religious point of veiw, even when it comes to defects and disease and genetic disorders, maybe that's the way God intended things to be and maybe they're supposed to be like that for a reason. That's why I worry about humans getting smarter and braver, and I worry about us playing God. It's just a small insignificant thought in the back of my mind, but it's there. I was always taught that everyone is the way they are for a reason, because God wanted them that way. So I think about it like that from time to time, not sure if I agree with it but it is food for thought none the less.
 
Z

zeitgeist

PF Fiend
Oct 8, 2008
1,464
0
0
Xero said:
The difference Zeit, between having that done for health reasons as opposed to cosmetic reasons, is that anyone would do whatever they could to ensure a happy healthy life for their children because they love them. And the reasons for doing it are selfless and protective. That makes it right, or moral at least in the eyes of most people. Having alterations made to your child so that they look a certain way that pleases you instead of coming out looking like an average child you may have had, its a little selfish and needless and you're really messing with nature/god for no good reason. Just because you can, to be honest. It doesn't hurt anything, and it's still your child (I laughed my butt off reading your quarter pounder comment though lol) and the child will be fine, but the event in itself is strange and hard to accept in a lot of ways, for many reasons. Its really hard to explain though, beyond "it just isn't right". It's a feeling more than a fact. You know? A human nature thing.
Click to expand...
Exceedingly well put. The reasoning you put forward here is pretty close to the same reasoning I would use for not choosing to cosmetically alter my children's genetics.

I see it as wrong for me and mine (not morally, just not desired), but if someone would consider it for their child, I don't see the problem. It's not my child.

Part of my reasoning for not wanting to say that others shouldn't do these things is I'm not sure where we should draw the line.

What about a gene that turns a child's hair white by the time they're 13? Is that enough of an abnormality that we should allow it? Well, what about a recessive gene that creates male pattern baldness in women? How about it men? What about a gene that causes polydactylism? None of these are life threatening, but any of them could be socially traumatizing for a kid.
 
Xero

Xero

PF Deity
Mar 20, 2008
15,219
1
0
36
PA
True! I dunno, I think I'd have to be in the situation. You're right, it is VERY hard to know where to draw the line here. Between things like diseases and cancer and heart problems and things like blue eyes and blonde hair, there is a clear line. But then there comes things like the ones you mentioned where it's just hard to put them on either side of the line. That is a tough one. Too many gray areas when you think about it.

Honestly, when we're talking personally, I think I might do it when it comes to that stuff. But maybe not, that's why I say I'd have to be in the situation before I would know for sure how to feel about that. Interesting point though.
 
Xero

Xero

PF Deity
Mar 20, 2008
15,219
1
0
36
PA
LMAO!! Totally unplanned ironic humor!! hehehehehe good one zeit. ;)
 
bssage

bssage

Super Moderator
Oct 20, 2008
6,536
0
0
58
Iowa
My problem with this is that I am always one step behind the trends.

I would have a boy with a mullet, bell bottoms and a 8 track player in his butt. He would excel in betamax tech.

No seriously what whould I do if I could.

There would be a pause/stop button on his head w/remote.

one blue eyeball in back of his head.

He would poop little pellets (like a goat) and would have a stinker filter (baby powder scented)

And a poop timer (umm I would like him to potty @ 08:30 today.

Mute button/with remote.

Genitically instill the desire to clean the house,
Obey my commands,
analize the stock market,
count cards,
cook
do laundry
Remember to send rebates in,
Shovel snow,
And the good sense to put me in the playboy mansion when I am too old to take care of myself.

He would grow to be 5'10" (dont want him bigger than me) but be able to slam dunk a basketball.

Red goat eyes (just because I think they look cool)

And eat grass. Cheap on food and wouldnt have to mow.

Could speak to animals especially fish and dogs.

Yes I think I am ready. Where do I sign up??

Ps I was thinking about making him fuzzy like a puppy. But that just a little creepy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom