Forcing Evolution

[dairygirl4u2c]

do you think it'd be possible to prevent humans with bad genes from being conceive, and not do it in a morally wrong way?

if you assume you could determine which sperm and which egg combination conceives, then no people are potentially being exterminated in the name of creating superior offspring. do you think this assumption could be true... eg no trial and error that destroys conceived.

is it inherently immoral to prevent it, even if no conceved are being destroyed?
it'd seem at least theoretically possible, and the human race then could become say super smart.


just fyi, i contend on incidental note that human evolution is for the most part complete. sure there are countries thrid world that doesn't copulate, and minor deviations within places like the US. but, for the most part, even the low species of our society further their genes. evolution is where the lower die and cannot copulate,,,, it doesn't have to do with things like cutting your thumb off and having thumbless kids. so, it seems mostly done.

the gene manipulation would be the only ethical way to further our evolution.

[CatherineM]

My husband is an advocate for the disabled. His great-grandmother and his mother both had schizophrenia. When he was diagnosed with it as well, one of his aunts suggested he be sterilized. I certainly don't wish that his birth had been prevented, even if before conception.

He told me something I never knew. The lion's share of the money being donated every year to Jerry Lewis' telethon goes to finding the gene for MD, so that those fetuses can be tested for. They aren't really looking for a cure for those who have MD, they are looking for a cure to people with MD being born. What you are purposing is the same thing in my mind. God has his reasons for which eggs become fertilized, and which children get conceived. I certainly don't feel qualified to make those decisions, and I don't know of any other human I trust with it either.

[Galloglasses]

Designer Babies.

Eugenics.

The master race theory, courtesy of the Nazis.

Forcing Evolution, (if its real just to be fair to the creationists), can have unforseen consequences.

Nuff Said.

On another note, we don't need to evolve, not now. We haven't sorted out our problems now let alone the problems of the future... today.

Edited April 16, 2008 by Galloglasses

[Archaeology cat]

I'd say this situation sounds a bit like Gattaca (though I admit it's been a long time since I've seen that). I don't agree with eugenics in any way.

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1500917' date='Apr 16 2008, 07:03 PM']The lion's share of the money being donated every year to Jerry Lewis' telethon goes to finding the gene for MD, so that those fetuses can be tested for. They aren't really looking for a cure for those who have MD, they are looking for a cure to people with MD being born.[/quote]
Really? That's just sad, and wrong.

[Galloglasses]

Gattaca is the PERFECT example of eugenic future. Those who choose Eugenics become a master race, those who don't become a slave race regardless of ethnicity and/or colour. In the space of a single generation. Religion becomes ignored and likely, forcibly removed from the public life. (Who's gonna take God seriously if one can 'play' God?)

Edited April 16, 2008 by Galloglasses

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1500871' date='Apr 16 2008, 12:25 PM']do you think it'd be possible to prevent humans with bad genes from being conceive, and not do it in a morally wrong way?

if you assume you could determine which sperm and which egg combination conceives, then no people are potentially being exterminated in the name of creating superior offspring. do you think this assumption could be true... eg no trial and error that destroys conceived.

is it inherently immoral to prevent it, even if no conceved are being destroyed?
it'd seem at least theoretically possible, and the human race then could become say super smart.
just fyi, i contend on incidental note that human evolution is for the most part complete. sure there are countries thrid world that doesn't copulate, and minor deviations within places like the US. but, for the most part, even the low species of our society further their genes. evolution is where the lower die and cannot copulate,,,, it doesn't have to do with things like cutting your thumb off and having thumbless kids. so, it seems mostly done.

the gene manipulation would be the only ethical way to further our evolution.[/quote]

Since I didn't evolve, and I was formed in the womb personally by God Almighty, and life didn't evolve on earth, and it was all created in 6 days, when I have these words to day.

[size=7][font="Arial Black"]No person has the right to play God![/font][/size]

We have no idea what manipulating our genes would do? What if messing with one gene creates babies with two heads, or four arms, or any other gross combination?

What if we tried to create 'smarter' people, but when doing so, there isn't enough cranial volume to hold that over-sized brain?

These are things we shouldn't tamper with!

We are perfect, just the way we are. Nobody needs to "Evolve" and be more fit, because it is all in God's capable hands!

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1502013' date='Apr 17 2008, 04:40 PM']We have no idea what manipulating our genes would do? What if messing with one gene creates babies with two heads, or four arms, or any other gross combination?[/quote]
Theoretically, that could never happen. An embryo would die long before characteristics like that would be made manifest.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1502105' date='Apr 17 2008, 07:03 PM']Theoretically, that could never happen. An embryo would die long before characteristics like that would be made manifest.[/quote]

fidei, if you think I thought such a child would live, give your head a shake, I just wanted to say we shouldn't mess something God created perfectly.

[dairygirl4u2c]

well there's people who cross pollinate and etc etc. corn itself came from a weed type plant until hybrated into something super. i think people actually opposed it.
manipulating genes might be worse, has more potential to be. but, i'm not sure all the bad things you mention would be so surely the case.
and if it's not, i don't see it as that big of a difference between hyrbidization etc. i can see how you'd disagree but.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1502356' date='Apr 17 2008, 11:19 PM']i don't see it as that big of a difference between hyrbidization etc. i can see how you'd disagree but.[/quote]
While the act of hybridization might be the same, the object is distinctly different. There is something inherent in human dignity (i.e. being created [i]in imago Dei[/i]) which sets it apart from the rest of creation. Threre is something fundamentally different between a human and corn, between a human and a cat.

As others have said, there have been instances of practiced eugenics in human history and a lot of sci-fi written on the topic. Whether real or fanciful, the results have been bad.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1502356' date='Apr 17 2008, 10:19 PM']well there's people who cross pollinate and etc etc. corn itself came from a weed type plant until hybrated into something super. i think people actually opposed it.
manipulating genes might be worse, has more potential to be. but, i'm not sure all the bad things you mention would be so surely the case.
and if it's not, i don't see it as that big of a difference between hyrbidization etc. i can see how you'd disagree but.[/quote]

dairy,

hybredization his actually a natural process, that can happen in nature. It actually probably happens all the time, because how pollonation works, making it a process God intended to happen in the world.

God did not intend us to manipulate genes on the molecular level, because that is something that doesn't happen in nature. Such things are only available because sinful man wants to make something better than what God already created.

There are groups who oppose genetically altered fruits, vegetables, and animals because of what impact they have on the environment. I am one of them. We should not alter anything God has already created.

It says in the book of Genesis, that after God had created everything, it was . . .

[size=7][b]VERY GOOD[/b][/size]

Do you want to be the one who says, I thought we could make things better, when Jesus says, I already made it very good, how much better did you want it?

[Galloglasses]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1502925' date='Apr 18 2008, 07:05 PM']Do you want to be the one who says, I thought we could make things better, when Jesus says, I already made it very good, how much better did you want it?[/quote]
I'm not one to agree with you often, but that last bit actually did make me chuckle.

[hoosieranna]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1502925' date='Apr 18 2008, 07:05 PM']dairy,

hybredization his actually a natural process, that can happen in nature. It actually probably happens all the time, because how pollonation works, making it a process God intended to happen in the world.

God did not intend us to manipulate genes on the molecular level, because that is something that doesn't happen in nature. Such things are only available because sinful man wants to make something better than what God already created.

There are groups who oppose genetically altered fruits, vegetables, and animals because of what impact they have on the environment. I am one of them. We should not alter anything God has already created.

It says in the book of Genesis, that after God had created everything, it was . . .

[size=7][b]VERY GOOD[/b][/size]

Do you want to be the one who says, I thought we could make things better, when Jesus says, I already made it very good, how much better did you want it?[/quote]

We get the point without the boldface.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1502925' date='Apr 18 2008, 08:05 PM']God did not intend us to manipulate genes on the molecular level, because that is something that doesn't happen in nature.[/quote]
Can you please define by what you mean "in nature" or "naturally?" Do you set human actions in opposition to nature? If so, why?

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='Paphnutius' post='1502934' date='Apr 18 2008, 07:32 PM']Can you please define by what you mean "in nature" or "naturally?" Do you set human actions in opposition to nature? If so, why?[/quote]

The fact you only use half of a sentence that I wrote, that really makes your argument weak. I don't like being misquoted, as it is something that is actually giving a false witness. It's like you really don't want to make people consider, gene manipulation (meaning there is a manipulator - a sinful human being) is something man does, and isn't a process God put in place in nature. What manipulated the genes before us then? Aliens! I don't see God actually manipulating genes, but actually creating perfect genes from the get go. He does that, because he loves making perfect things, because he is a perfect God!

Pollenation happens naturally, which can create hybridization. Manipulating genes on the molecular level does not.

So hybridization is something that happens every single day, without man doing anything. Man can help it along by creating the most ideal situations for it to happen.

Genes don't get manipulated, unless someone is in a labrotory manipulating them. So, men are trying to take a world that God says is very good, and make it 'better'.

If you don't see it as playing God, please think of it like this. Imagine a two year old finger painting of the painting of the Mona Lisa! You think you are improving, but you're not really, and you are actually destroying a beautiful piece of art. So, lets agree to this - 'Forcing Evolution' is a bad idea, because you are trying to improve on something that God says is very good!

Edited April 19, 2008 by JesusIsMySuperHero

[Galloglasses]

That and we have absolutely no idea what the heck will be the result even if we try.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1502944' date='Apr 18 2008, 08:46 PM']The fact you only use half of a sentence that I wrote, that really makes your argument weak. I don't like being misquoted, as it is something that is actually giving a false witness. It's like you really don't want to make people consider, gene manipulation (meaning there is a manipulator - a sinful human being) is something man does, and isn't a process God put in place in nature. What manipulated the genes before us then? Aliens! I don't see God actually manipulating genes, but actually creating perfect genes from the get go. He does that, because he loves making perfect things, because he is a perfect God![/quote]
Sir, I did not quote only half of a sentence. Please recheck my post. Furthermore, if you had read my previous post, you would know that I too am against genetic manipulation of humans. I was writing simply to ascertain your use of the word. Please take a deep breathe and re-read my posts.

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1500871' date='Apr 16 2008, 02:25 PM']do you think it'd be possible to prevent humans with bad genes from being conceive, and not do it in a morally wrong way?[/quote]

Well, first of all, what are "bad genes"?

[quote]if you assume you could determine which sperm and which egg combination conceives, then no people are potentially being exterminated in the name of creating superior offspring. do you think this assumption could be true... eg no trial and error that destroys conceived.[/quote]

The thing is, I think we're more than the sum of our individual qualities. Human dignity is something that cannot be earned; it just [i]is[/i]. Personally, I don't see the point in creating "superior offspring." I don't think human beings should be characterized as such. I may be smarter than someone who is mentally handicapped, but as a person, I'm not superior to him.

[quote]is it inherently immoral to prevent it, even if no conceved are being destroyed?[/quote]

I think so. To me, it seems like an affront against human dignity to assume that some people are inherently superior to others merely because they have more desirable traits.

[quote]it'd seem at least theoretically possible, and the human race then could become say super smart.[/quote]

Honestly, I don't think it'd be too feasible. Human DNA is incredibly complex, and there's always a chance that something will go wrong after conception. We're influenced by our genes, but environmental and psychological factors also play a part in our overall makeup. There are just too many variables that we'd never be able to fully control.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='Paphnutius' post='1503114' date='Apr 18 2008, 11:01 PM']Sir, I did not quote only half of a sentence. Please recheck my post. Furthermore, if you had read my previous post, you would know that I too am against genetic manipulation of humans. I was writing simply to ascertain your use of the word. Please take a deep breathe and re-read my posts.[/quote]

Since all sentences in a paragraph convey the whole thought, you forgot to put in - Such things are only available because sinful man wants to make something better than what God already created.

That is the whole point of my post. God doesn't change genes on the molecular level, only human beings do.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1503593' date='Apr 19 2008, 08:06 PM']Since all sentences in a paragraph convey the whole thought, you forgot to put in - Such things are only available because sinful man wants to make something better than what God already created.

That is the whole point of my post. God doesn't change genes on the molecular level, only human beings do.[/quote]
If changes to genes do not happen at the "molecular level," then what is the cause of a genetic mutation? Again, how are you using the word "natural?"