(Philosophy and Politics Group) Ever wonder about unsolved mysteries/theories, such as aliens, or ancient egytians? Join now, and express your thoughts, and see your response! Were quickly becoming one of the fastest growing groups on Re! Join today! Mods - MetallicA-1703 - Snatch - elGatoBlanco(FP #44310) You must be a member of this group to post here. You must have a member level of 1 or greater to post new topics here and a level of 1 to post replies.
Genetic Engineering: Good or Bad? a question of morals
Power Egg
Member Lvl: 10
Egg Points: 17897
Posts: 587
Posted: Feb 09, 2006 5:49 p.m. - Subject: Genetic Engineering: Good or Bad? a question of morals
I just read an interesting article in a wired magazine on genetically altered pets. In afew years glow in the dark cats and dogs might be for sale on the market. They make them glow by putting the DNA from deep-sea squid and jelly fish into the cats and dogs, causing them also to exhibit the strange and novelty qualities.
Scientists already did it with a cow...
But after glowing pets becomes a trend, who knows what other similar ideas would arise that some may consider sick and twisted?
And then there could be mistakes, like monsters accidentally being created and then escaping into the wild, destroying and damaging much of the original enviroment and possibly eating ppl too... 0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0oo
Similar biological disasters could occur in the genetic engineering of plants like super-fungi that could infect and destroy crops, sort of like foriehn invasive species only extreamly worse.
I understand genetic engineering is nessesary in our ever growing planet but is it wrong to meddle, yes meddle with nature?
Normal Egg
Member Lvl: 6
Egg Points: 4721
Posts: 147
Posted: Feb 09, 2006 10:31 p.m. - Subject:
i have a whole theory that could shed alot of light on this, but its too long to type and too good to let someone steal it.
but yeah, i heard about that like 2 years ago when they did a rabbit and some mice, befor the idea for pets.
as long as it doesnt cause suffering i dont see to much of a problem, kinda like if you lived in a cave with no lights a cat might naturaly evolve to glow like deep sea creatures. technicaly its just boosting evolution...
but this is a fine line on my own theory so i cant say to much without slipping the vantage point.
Normal Egg
Member Lvl: 3
Egg Points: 451
Posts: 14 AIMYIM
Posted: Feb 10, 2006 1:25 a.m. - Subject:
This member has placed me on its block list, but what COULDN’T I say? (??) After all, I am a clone.
Posted: Feb 10, 2006 8:10 p.m. - Subject:
Why have a block list?? Maybe just the Spammers, but that should be it.
Posted: Feb 10, 2006 8:14 p.m. - Subject:
Man is the first creature on earth that can change it’s environment and everything around it. It stands to reason that it’s just a matter of time that the things we change will eventually get down to the molecular and genetic level. As with other discoveries, it’ll take time to temper the use of such power, and I suspect man will figure ways to exploit and overuse such powers.
Normal Egg
Member Lvl: 4
Egg Points: 1973
Posts: 148
Posted: Mar 26, 2006 8:48 p.m. - Subject:
It is no different than when we discovered fire - at first a few people probably got burnt, but now it is essential.
We have grown in knowledge to the point were we can manipulate things at the most micro of levels - it is no different to me than when we manipulate things at the most macro of levels.
Power Egg
Member Lvl: 10
Egg Points: 13325
Posts: 2544
Posted: Apr 04, 2006 1:42 a.m. - Subject:
I disagree, i think it’s very different.
I think there is a line that we should not cross, we studied this in biology class a coupla weeks ago. I think there are some definate benefits to genetic engineering, such as fixing genetic defects, creating vaccines and hormones, such as insulin. But I dislike the idea of changing information that effects a species in a way that creates a new one. There will one day be wasy to make your children look better through genetic engineering, I think that this is unethical, right up there with the procedure where they can asexually reproduce humans by taking dna from onc cell in the woman’s body and impreganting her with it. It’s not natural and it’s never good to go agaunst nature, dire consequences will follow.
Normal Egg
Member Lvl: 4
Egg Points: 1973
Posts: 148
Posted: Apr 05, 2006 8:18 p.m. - Subject:
Quote:
I think there is a line that we should not cross, we studied this in biology class a coupla weeks ago. I think there are some definate benefits to genetic engineering, such as fixing genetic defects, creating vaccines and hormones, such as insulin. But I dislike the idea of changing information that effects a species in a way that creates a new one. There will one day be wasy to make your children look better through genetic engineering, I think that this is unethical, right up there with the procedure where they can asexually reproduce humans by taking dna from onc cell in the woman’s body and impreganting her with it. It’s not natural and it’s never good to go agaunst nature, dire consequences will follow.
Who makes this line?? Who decides that the line is in the right place?? Who could possibly have such authority - no one. There is no line.
It is not going against nature anymore than termites building a mound. If we have the ability - why not exercise it?
