So how do we feel about engineering our babies to be what we want them to be? Let's say I want a blonde, blue eyed girl with no birth defects or hereditary diseases.

I think it would be rather cool myself, being able to "order up" what we wanted as a family. Giving us the balance we desire along with removing the chances for some terrible disease afflicted our little love muffin.

If we have the means to accomplish such a thing, shouldn't we? Why or why not?

If I looked like you id definately push for a girl :)

I don't really like that idea. From the kid's point of view, well, if they don't like it, then you'll end up with a bunch of kids having a legitimate reason to be mad at their parents. And from the parent's point of view, would that be really dull, knowing exactly what your kid will grow up and look like? Much better to not know and take it as it comes, rather than be bored knowing this is exactly how the son/daughter will look like, and knowing it can't be changed.

Now, I know there are some who would like it, but I know I for one am glad my parents never picked what I look like, else I might turn into ^^!

Id like a Handsom son nice black hair and blue angel eyes thats very popular in school.

Than life would be about perfect.
Oh and a Dog with Angel blue eyes and nice brown silky hair :P

Last edited: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 6:06:33 PM

^ so being hot and popular is all that is important to you? Hmm, what is wrong with this picture.

I, myself, would like to know simply that my child wouldn't have any re-occuring or chronic health problems. My father has chronic sinus infections, and my sister has some never before seen version of CF (not lethal, thank god), and me, I am simply wierd. Happy that way, but I wouldn't want my kid to have to go through the hassle about worrying what he (or his siblings) can or cannot eat. If I had one wish...

^ Good point.

@ Rabban Do you remember someone living in 1940 ? Named Adolf Hitler : he wanted all ppls

What is this idea ? I can't trust that actually (& in the future) people propose things like that : !!! EUGENISM !!! : After 3 generations will appear wars between 'blond' & 'braun' ; 'fat' & 'thin' etc. Does humanity only will have ONE male & ONE female ??? (all mens named Phil lol) (& I really simplify my mind 'cause of my bad spell)

We all wish cute babies/childrens/adults , we all wish they will be cool , rich & apply some human values as charity , ecological behaviour or find a solution to worlds problems...we all whish the best for our offspring.

These whishes are all that mother nature allow us : & I thank her everyday that God make : we all are responsible of ourselves & not our parents (obviously they made our education & have most influence on our become).

The day that I receive a 'babycatalog' I think it'll be time to burn humanity !!!

PS : obviously I think test are helpful against hereditary diseases & I'm for the abortion. But I think the perfection at each moment is boring : so why if our children become perfect ? A boring world is waitin us...

For this thread : '@uré has put Rabban on ignore'

Also, don't forget, the world is a changing environment. We won't know what the 'IDEAL' physique is in the future. Some perceived weaknesses now may be a necessity in the future. A wide base of gene pool is a necessity for humanity's survival. Just my two cents. XD

You would think that by now I'd expect some of the responses I've seen here, having been a member of this community for some time. Yet, I'm still amazed by some of the responses posted here. You try to engage people in an intellectual conversation about the implications of genetic engineering and eventually someone compares you to Hitler. What a joke!

As it turns out, I and my son are blonde and blue eyed. So there's a good chance my daughter would have the same thing naturally, but if I wanted to make sure, what's the big deal? And why would she be mad at me for choosing that combo (assuming I even told her)? Heck, she might be just as mad if I allowed her to naturally end up brunette with brown eyes (after her mother). But that's just the cosmetic stuff.

If I could remove hereditary cancer, scoliosis, or Parkinson's disease from my little angel, I would. No doubt about it, regardless it it were "dull" or not. For some of you to claim that its "God's will" that we have these things, I reject that idea and attempt to remind you of Genesis . Death and disease came after sin entered the world and its creation was never considered good, but accompanied the curse.

So if the good doctor came to you and said, your baby's going to be blind because of this defect, but not to worry because we can recode it, are you saying you wouldn't because it wouldn't be exciting to do it that way or that God wanted it to be blind? Shiva help us!!!

Last edited: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 10:46:42 AM

I don't have a strong opinion on this subject, but I won't let that stop me. It seems like comparing people to hitler has become very fashionable these days. The more common people are compared to people, the more hitler is in danger of looking like common people.

Save the comparison for real a-holes, would ya? Rabban isn't setting in place the architecture for world domination. He's discussing genetic engineering.

Honestly, I wouldn't go in for ordering up a baby with any consideration of cosmetics...outside of say, making sure he/she had no structural anomolies like an elephant head, or a teeny-tiny pecker like dear ol dad. No, I'd be more concerned with heading off some of the diseases/afflictions rabban mentioned above. I work with some children with profound cognitive, or physical involvement. Its no bed of roses for the kids or their parents...in fact, in some case it seems like a bit of a life-sentence for both.

I don't have a kid yet but will raise a family eventually, and my take on this is that it's 'conditional' love. The idea is to welcome a new soul on this planet for the journey, and a genetically improved kid is like, I don't know, cheap and cheating.

It will be a scary time when parents, self-obsessed with their own image, order custom-designed and engineered cute babies. Then say your baby doesn't turn as nice as in the catalog - 'oh yes you disappointed me all your life, you weren't as cute as the catalog'.

This is an insane epoch we're in. So much conditional love it's sickening.

Good points hugo. But if it were a matter of choice between major birth defect or not, would it be ok to choose "not"? Is this dabbling going too far? I know that I would love my daughter regardless of what physical or cognitive condition she came in, and unconditionallly. I am very relieved to be honest that she came in great shape and is normally developing. A deep fear of mine, given the kids I work with, was that she would have some serious developmental issues...i know its not PC to say it, but I worried not just about what life would be like to her, but also to her mother and i. I see what some of the parents go through when their children are multiply handicapped, and it appears extraordinarily challenging, demanding, depressing.

Btw: aint you gettin a bit long in de tooth to be thinking about starting a family "one day?"
what you waiting on, grandpa?

Last edited: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 11:59:13 AM

Heh I'm 35. I've been enjoying the 'single man dating' lifestyle for many years now, but I have to think about society and the next generation! I want to do my part too. And frankly I'm sick of my selfishness, without really being able to get out of my patterns... :(

Which is another topic: the epidemic of beautiful, smart, educated, independant girls in their 30s without a progeny/family/good man. If you want to talk about the death of civilization you have it there: low birth rate. It's a tragedy.

On the non-PC side, I often think if I had a disabled kid I would 'give it away'; I know it's sickeneing, it's the typical male thing to want a problem to disappear. Anything I say is theorical, so I'm not monstrous yet; I doubt I would have the capacity to institutionalize a newborn.

Another of my 'fantasy' (it stays a fantasy until I'm confronted with the situation) is that if I had an 'abnormal' kid (gosh I hate those expressions) I'd talk to my sweetie to make another kid right away - I'm inspired here by a couple who lost their newborn and the woman said to her husband: 'don't be too sad we'll have another one' and they did, 10 months later, their 5th chil. The man is not one of my friend, but a local politician. I found that very inspiring, this willingness to give birth to life. My own mother lost her second kid (heart malformation) kid, and I was next; my parent were extatic. Such is life. When you het bingo perfect everytime, it dullifies life.

Another point: more and more now they're talking about the male biological clock - older men (re 40+) are also more likely to father kids with 'problems'... Autism, etc.

I must be old-fashion but all that genetic crap gives me the bump. I'm sure nature has an encrypted protection code that will bring payback to those wanting to cheat on her. Maybe I'm a dinosaur, but that's how I like it.

This goes well in this 'risk-free' society and the Dictatorship of Good; perhaps genetic correcting will me mandatory in 100 years (or less). Like right now: no smoking! We're heading toward imposed goodness .

But I like imperfection, mortality, aging and the rest. It brings suspense to life.

Last edited: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 1:18:44 PM

Yes, it does. Sorry about accusing you of senility. You seem much older than 35, and I mean that in a good way. Wizened...that kind of thing.

I feel the same way, actually. Pulling an end-run on evolution can't play out well.

With all the typos I do, it's only natural you point to my precocious senility. :) Perhaps typos can be prevented by genetic perfecting? :o

Last edited: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 1:25:12 PM

After discovering that Mrs. Three had some damaged fallopian tubes--probably from an infection she never even knew she had--we learned that we were going to have to go through In-Vitro fertilization. I had no idea what we were in for. A year and a half later, we were successful, and now have our daughter Ali, who is, yep you guessed it, three.

After enduring this emotionally (and financially) draining process, my only descriptive word for it is amazing. Quite a humbling experience for a cocky 33 year old guy to learn he really doesn't know shit. And that he (me) could do nothing to "fix" the situation. Mrs. Three went through more shots, pokes, and prods in that time than most respectable heroin addicts. All of this just to get pregnant, when most people can simply grab a half rack and jump in the back seat.

Fighting to keep this short, my point is we were elated just to have a baby, not worried about how we could've altered it. Learning the percentages on conception, I'm amazed so many people have healthy babies without complications somewhere along the line.

Rabby: I think the idea of genetically engineering healthy babies has some merit to it, however, like many good intentioned ideas, I'm sure it will be bastardized into a for profit "aesthetics only embryo machine". And by the way, what parent doesn't already think their child, no matter how it was conceived, is the best looking kid they've ever seen?

I see there's two ways to approach this topic, which I hadn't really intended to do, but I kinda slipped into it. Personally I think it would be a little messed up to customize your child only for personal preference, but then if it was an option for a few dollars more, wouldn't we all be tempted to make a few selections? Say, violet eyes like Elizabeth Taylor or glow-in-the-dark finger and toes nails? I don't know, but it bet it could easily be the rage in a few years once a few more generations past and genetic engineering is more common.

That said, it would seem that removing diseases and mutations would be an easy decision to make, especially once we had gotten a knack for doing it. Why would anyone what to subject their child to some inherited disposition towards breast cancer? I doubt anyone would, especially if they had the means to do something about it.

Are those mushrooms growing down there?

Germline engineering is very interesting.

It could lead to cloning which is in nature.

But gentic memory many become diluted,

And lead to spiritual apathy.

On the topic of cloning, my sister came up with an interesting point (those who do not beleive we all have souls, skip this):

You can clone a body, and change a body, but can you change the soul? If you clone one person, what soul is in the cloned body? Is I someone who recently died and is just looking for a home, or is it somone who has a certain prefernce. Who know?

^ Ah! So if God can make clones, why can't we? XD

And the deal with the Right is that they oppose using embryos for research, not stem cell research in general.

The In-Vitro deal is a tough one. I some times think our technology is just beyond our moral capacity and continually creates situations where we have to devise new ethics to deal with them. There are so many times were I think we need to ask ourselves, just because we can do a thing, must we do it?

Whew... This thread did take off while the weather slammed us around up here.

Eugenics... No thanks. Designer babies... Nope, too much responsibility could come on me for that trick.

But- I'm stuck on the whole question of what if you know there are genetic problems in your yet-to-be-born child? Do you do anything about it? What? Abort? Genetic repair?

We had to answer that question when we were pregnant. The triple-screen test came up fishy, and we had to decide if we wanted to do an amniocentesis. We went for the test. Our decision was that if we found there was a problem, we would use that information to help us prepare for a special needs child. It turned out to be a false alarm, though.

The technology indeed has gotten ahead of the traditional views on reproduction. What does a kid call the lady who donated eggs so Mommy could carry a baby full term and give Daddy a baby? What does a kid call the lady who got paid to carry the egg mom and dad had fertilized and implanted?

I'm tempted to throw this thread into a different direction, but will put that on hold.

Good questions indeed Greenie. Although, I don't think there's any question as to what to call the person(s) who take care of a baby through the years of life, those who are respnsible for the gift of life have to be in there somewhere. Although we were lucky to be able to carry and have our own child, with the bypass of some "plumbing" issues, others have to go a lot further in the process.

Our next major moral dilemma is what to do when we're done having kids. We at this point have 6 cryogenically frozen fertilized embryos to utilize for future children. If we're lucky enough to have one of those take, we'll be done. And then the decision of what to do with the remaining will be upon us. At this point, there are three options we've been given.

1) Donate the embryos to fertility challenged couples so they can use them, which sounds noble and helpful until you consider the prospect of being in a restaraunt one day, and having some kid that looks eerily familiar come up to you. (just a joke, flame all you want)

2) Donate them to scientific research, which also sounds okay until you start thinking of how hard it was just to make the little suckers.

3) Have them destroyed.

None of these options really trips my trigger, and Mrs. Three won't let me put them on ebay. I'm sure in the end, if we're lucky enough to have "leftovers", we'll do something that helps out in some manner. It's the least I can do with a life spent doing nothing but giving people shit.

THREE IS SHOOTING BLANKS! THREE IS SHOOTING BLANKS!

@ Rabban:
@uré was comparing your idea's to the ones Hitler had. If it is quite the same, and it is, face it. @uré never compared you to Hitler, but his post is completely true...
At the next mass eradication Humanity will no longer stand. We will end up like the Paradoxides, and the dinosaurs. Why? Those that want to control Mother Nature have to go. And humanity seems best in wanting to control God, if you call him that. Let the next Ice Age come, so all will be erased.

Last edited: Saturday, November 18, 2006 at 1:58:16 AM

@ ggg : bodys can be cloned BUT not the soul : soul is build on what you live not by your chromosoms !!!

@ Rabban : your first post was really provocating : I answered in the same way.
Now about my mind : of course (& its actually done for some several genetics deffiences) test have to be made ! And parents have the choices (fixed by law to keep or not the baby). BUT WHY WOULD YOU ABSOLUTELY CHOOSE YOUR CHILDREN LOOK ???? I saw much ppl answer you here many reason for not choosin that : this choice will necessarily be yours ! Not the one of your childrens !!
Understand me well : I'm not against genetics interventions for 'helping/saving/escapetodisease' our offspring. I 'just' dont like the idea that someone will do choices w/out having any clue of the consequences for the childrens...

@ hugo : good point in your 1st post (you explain well what I'm thinkin)

@ Three : IVF & embryonic tranfer is a benediction in your world : parents which can't naturally have childrens can also transmit their genes (its an hard psychological process to accept another genes or not transmit our own...) to their childrens : I'm happy for you (& Mrs) that it works !

@ shutruk : x to clarify my point & good point for you too about the human extermination...
If we really want to have better childrens or less disease : we have 1st to stop our chemical/radiation/pollution wars & safe/save/make sane our environment !

Last edited: Saturday, November 18, 2006 at 2:18:38 AM

Someone has to know about that french doctor who impregnated 5000 to 6000 mothers; all the sperms were his, but were supposed to be coming from donors. He was the donor, and now this: an unprecedented phenomenom. Been trying to retrive it, couldn't. Not sure if it's an hoax.

Here's more on the business:
http://www.freevials.com/profile.html

It could be YOU!@

^ Wow. That's like 16 years of whacking off everyday. Still it won't beat the Canadian record will it bubba.
:)

^^ lol hugo ! I don't need to be a doctor to impregnate 5000 mothers... XD (& about the link : I only have a Master of biology & am an 'ordinary people'...& hope this is an hoax !! (else it froze my back !))

I just have high sensivity on this subject 'cause did 6y of biology (& geology) studies... So this subject raise SOOOOOOO much ethic question : in science on one side , about te human behaviour on another & and all the interactions/consequences that can generate these 2 areas of application.