Gender Selection, Gene Therapy and Gene Sciences: Your Thoughts.

[Razael: The Angel Slayer]

The British have it, Denmark has it, I'm preety sure America's got it and Australia is discussing it....I'm taliking about genetic therapy that lets you select the sex of your unborn child.

I, personally find it reprehensible. I am not neccessarily religious or a conservatist but I think we should not exploit genetic therapy for something as frivolous as a "Steve" or "Eve".

There is also talk of prenatal therapies that affect your DNA so that your child will be born with a calmer demeanor...I mean, why not breed in sub-survience?

So to is the debate of cloning (For which there are some cool threads on this site) but also for extracting chromasones from same sex parents and making a geneitally sired child.
Meaning, Two men can have a child with both of their DNA and only have need of a surrogate to give birth.

As I said earlier, I'm not a religous man (I'm all for Same-Sex marriage, so sue me) but do you think that it's right to screw around with the only thing that scientiffically proves that you are who you are?

Consider and discuss. Looking foward to what you think.

LOVE RAZAEL

[Asorie]

I'm against most of this, but I'm against reproduction in general. Anyone with the excessive money to afford these "therapies" (including infertility "treatments") who is so self-absorbed and status-symbol-oriented as to spend said money on such things instead of adopting one of the millions of parentless children in the world is behaving in a morally reprehensible manner, in my eyes. Having a baby should not be likened to picking out a piece of expensive jewelry ("But I wanted diamonds / a girl !!!), where you pick and choose the features you want until you get something you can show your girlfriends at parties and cluck over.

But in the age of Baby Gap and designer puke-cloths and baby furniture that costs more than most people's first car, what did we expect?

[nik0tine]

I am against all of this.

[Shadow Nexus]

I don't care. People can do whatever they want, but personally I could not understand what is the point of choosing the sex through the whole genetics thing, unless you live under some hard patriarchal society and you need a boy in the family. Which is not the case of Denmark and England*. And then probably it would be a better idea to change patriarchal regime before the sex of the child.

*Well, most developed nations where feminist movements have sprouted are less patriarchal, but I think most countries still have a way to go in their mindset to be actually considered equitative.

[ShunNakamura]

Changing the childs gender is for those people who have always wanted a girl but ended up with 13 boys or some such. This I have little problem with... better then the parents wackign of the kid's wee-wong(heh.. funky word), in an attempt to make them a girl or some such. You know better to develope as a girl then to be changed(still by force) after birth. You see the change as you develop means you will likely have no problems.. afterwards.. well I dunno... that is touchy and I don't know much about that.

Letting homosexuals have kids with this tech I have no problem with. If they want kids that have thier genes let them I say.

There is also talk of prenatal therapies that affect your DNA so that your child will be born with a calmer demeanor...I mean, why not breed in sub-survience?

This is where I really began to go "huh?". I am not even sure how this would work. And haven't heard much of it.

However, I must argue that making them calmer is not sub-survience. Calmer could be a good thing. Many problems are started due to being hotheaded. I know I wouldn't have minded being calmer. The problem here arises is that I think it would limit individuality somewhat. Who would want an angry child? That is the same reason I get iffy on picking physical traits.. that could easily limit individuality. With the about techniques individuality is likely to remain the same, unless science proves one sex is more capable then the other or some such. So I am iffy here. It would be good. Particually since in some instances your child won't calm no matter what. I have seen some otherwise good parents have this one child that is just a monster... it hurts the whole family.

However, I can't help but wonder if they could have done something earlier to prevent that. See a child's personality is defined alot by what parents do. Thus if you keep the kid calm and remain calm yourself there should be little need for this(it of course is more complicated then that.. but it is still possible just by how you parent).

Shrug, as long as the genetics don't turn humans into identical robots(such as taking away the ability to get angry or have any negative emotion in general) I am generally somewhat lenient on it. I probably won't use it.. but I won't limit others.

Heck a good argument in favor of "calming" the child could probably sway me.. I am really borderline there. It seems a bit much but it really depends on what it really does.

[Captain Maxx Power]

Technically speaking, this could cause a potential population boom, if done right. If you had more females than males, then in a situation whereby the repopulation of the human race was needed, it's more productive to have more females since it only takes one male to do the deed to several women, whereas a woman can only get pregnant once. I'm thinking laterally of course, but if there were a situation (say, mass disease) in which we knew that something bad was going to happen to everyone as a whole, we could set the population accordingly. Of course this is the work of a twisted mind, i.e. mine. But like all things of this nature I'll find something intriguing about the whole prospect.

As for removing genetic defects, how far could it go? Christian parents could go to a doctor and ask them to make sure their child isn't Gay. A inter-racial couple could ask for their child to be one race in paticular to avoid half-caste biggotry. Exactly where do we draw the line as to what should be change. After all, changing the sex of a child in itself isn't needed per say, yet doctors will quite happily do that, so why not other "trivial" conditions? (I of course speak hypothetically, since they haven't isolated the gene of homosexuality, nor can they change the race of a child, but in a decade or so time...)

[ShunNakamura]

That is the real problem of this issue.. the slippery slope and what exactly you should change. The only real reason I can understand having sex change as a common option is the fore mentioned family that just can't seem to have that girl they wanted. Then they could.

What we really need is some sort of fair regulation. Something that allows it but keeps it in hand. but what is kept in hand?

I think many don't like this cause it raises issues that aren't black and white. It ain't easy to pick out. As long as people keep individuality(apperance and mental) then I am mostly fine with it. The question is ... when does it go overboard?

[Cz]

The idea of gender selection/designer babies really worries me, mainly because it is quite possible in the forseeable future. Manipulating nature to suit ourselves would do more harm than good, and the few practical purposes it could have would be far outweighed by the disadvantages. The whole thing seems a bit too close to Brave New World for my liking.

[Madame Adequate]

The idea of gender selection/designer babies really worries me, mainly because it is quite possible in the forseeable future. Manipulating nature to suit ourselves would do more harm than good, and the few practical purposes it could have would be far outweighed by the disadvantages. The whole thing seems a bit too close to Brave New World for my liking.

And what are these disadvantages? Whilst Huxley provided a scarily plausable world, it was run by the state, it did not come around through individual freedoms.

[Razael: The Angel Slayer]

And what are these disadvantages? Whilst Huxley provided a scarily plausable world, it was run by the state, it did not come around through individual freedoms.

Huxley had a means to provide a cautionary tale in the guise of parody, just as Orwell is juxtaposed to communism for 1984.

I consider messing with genetic identity a grave disadvantage and the only justifyable case of gene therapy would be to quell genetic disorders...but only in severe circumstances, this reminds me of the book "I know what you did last summer" (The book about the crisis of conscience and not that damn AWFUL movie).

The dychotmie of all of this can be simply put with the famous quote "The needs of the many out-wiegh theneeds of the few" -Dr Spock. All in all, scientist will continue these studies regardless and will only serve to the justifyable defense of helping others and not cater to the whims of those who would seek to use the frivolous therapies in question, although it is inevitable that these thing will occur even for the equally frivolous means of profit.

[Cloud No.9]

it doesn't matter. it will be done. regardless of public opinion. if it is possible then i will be done. like cloning and everything else. once science sees it is capable of doing it it will do it.

[Razael: The Angel Slayer]

True, but if sociology is of any factor it is conceivable that public outcry, in colusion with governmental democracy, the "Depraved sciences" as quoted by many conservatives will be out lawed.

The only possible justifyable way to accept these sciences are as follows.

1. Gender selection should be made an option for those who suffer from rare genetic disorders that manifest on one chromasone, eg. males.

2. If a genetic disorder that causes early death or psycho-analyitical problems should be cured if the genetic sciences can do so.

and 3. If it is a matter of life and death, (Such as sacrifice one child to save the life of millions) if no other method can be procured then do it.

LOVE
RAZAEL

[cookieface]

In our lifetimes and beyond, I wouldn't worry about this too much. Most would-be parents would be naturally repelled by something like this.

But if you ask me, in some eventual future, DNA manipulation is inevitable for the human race. Gender choosing won't even matter by then, they will build super humans, or something.

[Razael: The Angel Slayer]

If we can somehow be inter bred or crossbred with anime characters then i'm all for it, if not then you'll just have to call me old fashioned.

[ThroneofDravaris]

....

Anyway, I'm all for gene manipulation. Seriously, if we don't have superhumans by the year 2021 I'm going to be pissed...