Human Genetic Engineering Research: Where to draw the line

Abstract clement hereditary technology science science is the homosexualipulation of an individuals ge nonype with the goal of choosing the phenotype (Singers 1). This has already been a very disputed burden when it has been done on animals, solely tampering with hu human beings takes this issue to a whole different level. It holds the promise of curing genetic diseases a like(p) cystic fibrosis and improving the immunity of people to viruses (Conner 4). However, it likewise opens up a whole new world where the laws of nature bathroom be broken.Pargonnts bunghole subscribe to to diversify the gender of their baby they merchantman choose to change their appearance, and they can even choose to change the mental faculties of their baby like memory and intelligence (Sanded 1). This seems like some liaison out of a science fictionalisation movie but with our rapidly increasing technology, it is definitely more than a possibility. The genetic engineering of humans can be the greatest thing to ever happen to us, however, such power can lead to rotting and cause us to regress as beings. atomic number 18 we trying to correct the world a amend place for each another(prenominal) or ar we on the button making the world more superficial or should I say artificial?Thats the main question that is asked as the interest issue of human genetic engineering is further evaluated. Human transmitted Engineering Where to Draw the Line Perfection is something that human beings re in ally havent been subject to relate to very well, but thanks to our rapidly advancing technology, that could all change. Human genetic engineering may be the break with we exigency to tear d make the walls that keep us from being perfect. However, there argon many questions that need to be answered and things that need to be considered before we endeavour to break through the walls.For instance, what if those walls are there for a reason? What if those walls arent divinatory t o be torn down? Maybe they are there to cherish us from perfection or perhaps protect perfection from us. A disease-free world sounds good to everyone but what about a world where parents can actually design their own child? What if not only the stir of the baby could be chosen by parents but also the sensory hair color, eye color, intelligence, and even their talents (Sanded 1)? This is the rail that human genetic engineering is leading(p) us to however, our main concern should be where that path will end.Human genetic engineering should be used only to cure diseases or other disabilities and not to the extent where we start treating human feel like a computer game. We all should strive to be perfect but we should also have a certain level of respect for life and the lessons it teaches us. other our quest for perfection will only lead us into destruction. Jacqueline Vaughn Sisters member Assistance and Treatment is about the struggle disabled people go through to fit into g olf-club. They are stereotyped as pitiful and laughable and they are often discriminated against (Sweeter 3).There seems to be a prevailing belief in our society where people who are in need of charity are thought to be incapable of living the same life as others (Sweeter 3). Because of these beliefs and stereotypes, the progress to fully include the handicapped in American life make even more difficult (Sweeter 3). The disabled are a minority group and they have fought hard to be recognized as one, however, theres no doubt that if every handicap had a choice they would choose not to be handicapped whether they were being treated equally or not.No one would miss being blind or being deaf. Thats why Sweeter, who is raising awareness for the discrimination of handicapped, would agree with the argument that the use of genetic engineering should be limited to curing diseases and disabilities. The cruelty assignn towards the handicapped is the fine reason why we shouldnt allow parents to design their children. It will Just consecrate us with more inequality because our human nature tends not to show humility and respect for those who are less advantaged than us.Jack Donnelley article The Concept of Human Rights explains how humans can have rights naturally. Human rights are supposed to be equal rights (Donnelly 2). Therefore every human being has the same rights (Donnelly 2), but how does this work when relating to children. On one episode of the Steve Wilkes show, there was a transgender man who was upset about being born a woman because his parents persistent to go through with a gender selection operation scorn being told that he would have more male hormones than female hormones.So this man felt that his rights were violated even though he was still unborn and hes right. You cant force any human to go through a all unnecessary procedure, so why would the rules change if theyre your own kid? Are kids not human too? Parents are supposed to make decisions f or the better of their children but this was Just an act of selfishness. Donnelly would agree with the argument that genetic engineering shouldnt be allowed to the extent that parents can design their own kids for that very reason. Its unethical, irresponsible, and potentially harmful to the child.Melvin Sooners article Genetic Enhancement Should Be Left to person-to-person Choice is about why human genetic engineering should be a personal choice like getting breast implants or taking steroids (Conner 3). He argues that theres no intrinsic preference between inserting genes and inserting steroids (Conner 2). great deal are al substances finding ways to enhance life and this is Just another way to do it. He does agree, however, that the weightiest moral problem in the quest for perfection is that, it increases inequality but that doesnt mean we shouldnt complete the quest (Conner 7).Antibiotics at one gunpoint were being used irresponsibly, but the ethical path is not to stop usin g them but to use them more Judiciously (Conner 7). Conner would dissent with the argument that human genetic engineering shouldnt be allowed to the extent that parents can design their babies because he takes a very liberal approach on this issue. The problem with his argument is that he fails to understand that the quest for perfection involves eliminating inequality, not increasing it.If we are increasing inequality, all were doing is backtracking on the progress weve made as human beings and thats not what we want. Michael Sandals article Genetically Designing Babies is wrong explains why human genetic engineering shouldnt be allowed at all. He argues that changing our nature to fit the world rather than the other way around is an ethical defeat and an attack on our freedom (Sanded 6). He looks back at the dark history of eugenics and how it was the driving force dirty dog the Nazi holocaust (Sanded 1).It was done to eliminate all of whom the Nazis considered as undesirables. Sanded argues that in the same way, the successful would be even more likely than they are now to see themselves as self-made and self-sufficient, and those at the bottom of society would be seen not as disadvantaged, but simply as alter (Sanded 6). Sanded would disagree with the argument that human genetic engineering should be allowed to a certain extent because he is against the whole idea of genetic engineering. What he fails to realize in his argument is that as human beings, we have an certificate of indebtedness to improve our lives.If we can have a cure for the flu or for bronchitis, why not have a cure for blindness, ATA Cash disease, or any other sickness or disability that doctors can do nothing about? Human genetic engineering should only be allowed for use in the medical field to cure diseases and disabilities and not to the point where human life becomes a game. Genetic engineering is a scientific concern, but without boundaries t becomes a moral concern. Life is th e most sacrosanct thing anyone can have and it demand to be approached with caution and respect.It is also a great teacher and one of the main lessons it tries to teach us is humility. Humility involves accepting others for who they are and plays a key role when it comes to our relationships. When you theorise about what rightfully matters in life, family and relationships with others tend to come up start which is really no coincidence. The purpose of life seems to be to lift up those around us and genetically designing babies will do the ingest opposite of that. Parents who would choose to do this are doing it for cynical and selfish purposes.They are taking the childs freedom away so they can satisfy their own desires and out of those desires will come corruption. Thats why a line needs to be drawn about to what extent human genetic engineering can be used. With great power comes great responsibility, so this is something we really cant afford to play around with. If geneti c engineering to cure diseases becomes around accessible as the flu shot, we will be that much closer on our quest to perfection. One day we will get through that all, but its going to take one brick at a time.