Costom made babies

I'm not really against the idea of screening to prevent any potential children suffering from problems that would cause them to not be able to live their life to the full. I am entirely against the idea of screening for hair and eye color, or other such aesthetic details. The idea of children with 'made to order defects' chils me to to the bone, and I personally would question the fitness of parents who ask for such things.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by LordsSword

This is already done but suppose just for the sake of argument, the day comes if any undesired trait combination could be considered a hinderance to quality of life.

I'm not even prepared to entertain such a notion. That's such an improbable situation that I don't see the value to discussing it. What you propose worked well as a plot device for such films as GATTACA, but only because they are so far removed from reality. I don't believe even for a second that such a situation would ever come to pass.

The vast majority of humans like to consider themselves to be moral creatures, as judged by whatever code pleases them. This fact would have to change in order for anything you suggest to become reality. I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that those seeking 'custom babies' represent the majority, and I certainly don't believe that the majority possess the capacity to ignore the moral implications. It scarcely seems to matter what moral code such ideas are judged by, because I can't imagine any of them to have sympathy for such a notion.

Quote:

I assume that everybody wants their kids to have the best in life, what guideline would you use to define what is best for people?

It's very simple. I have no doubt that you will insist that it is not simple, but in the absense of sophistry I do consider it simple in the extreme. If a child would be be born to endure a life of constant physical suffering, that's grounds for intervention. If a person would have a physical or mental capacity which would be below the normal adult range, that also is grounds for intervention.

It's important that you understand that I'm not suggesting that nobody should be stupid, weak, or ugly. I'm not in favour of science providing us with a world filled with genius athletic supermodels. I'm in favour of people not having to endure life with severe physical disabilities, or with a mentality that can never surpass that of a 5-year-old child. These things do happen, and if science can prevent that, then I've yet to hear a convincing argument why it should not.

If the tone of this response seems harsh, it is because I perceive that you already have your response prepared. Do you suppose that I've never heard these arguments before? I'm just not willing to admit that it's necessary that we should forego the use of any technological advancement which has the potential to be used in a bad way.

There's nowhere I can't reach.