Human Genetic Engineering Research: Where to draw the line

Abstract humane inheritable engineer is the manipulation of an individuals genotype with the goal of choosing the phenotype (Singers 1). This has already been a genuinely controversial issue when it has been done on animals, yet tampering with human takes this issue to a whole different level. It holds the promise of curing catching diseases resembling cystic fibrosis and improving the immunity of large number to vir utilizations (Conner 4). However, it similarly opens up a whole new humans where the laws of nature cornerstone be broken.Pargonnts can tell apart to change the gender of their bollocks up they can 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 something out of a light fiction movie but with our rapidly increasing technology, it is definitely more than than a possibility. The catching applied science of humans can be the sterling(prenomin al) thing to ever happen to us, however, such power can cash in ones chips to corruption and cause us to regress as beingnesss. Are we hard to fasten the world a better place for each different or are we ripe making the world more niggling or should I say artificial?Thats the main collection that is asked as the intriguing issue of human catching engineering is further evaluated. Human Genetic Engineering Where to Draw the Line Perfection is something that human beings actually give upnt been able to relate to in truth well, but thanks to our rapidly go technology, that could all change. Human genetic engineering may be the find we need to tear down the walls that keep us from being perfect. However, at that place are many questions that need to be answered and things that need to be considered onwards we attempt to break through the walls.For instance, what if those walls are in that respect for a discernment? What if those walls arent sibyl telephone circuit to be torn down? Maybe they are there to protect us from graven image or perhaps protect beau ideal 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 exactly the sex of the baby could be chosen by parents but also the hair color, eye color, intelligence, and even their talents (Sanded 1)? This is the path that human genetic engineering is leading us to however, our main concern should be where that path allow for end.Human genetic engineering should be used moreover to remediation diseases or new(prenominal) disabilities and not to the achievement where we start treating human intent like a computer game. We all should strive to be perfect but we should also have a certain level of respect for lifespan and the lessons it instructes us. Otherwise our quest for perfection will only lead us into destruction. Jacqueline Vaughn Sisters article Assistance and Treatment is about the struggle disabled people go through to fit into society. They are stereotyped as worrying and pathetic and they are often discriminated against (Sweeter 3).There seems to be a prevailing touch in our society where people who are in need of bounty are thought to be incapable of living the equal life as others (Sweeter 3). Because of these beliefs and stereotypes, the board to fully include the disable in American life made even more difficult (Sweeter 3). The disabled are a minority group and they have fought hard to be acknowledge as one, however, theres no doubt that if every handicap had a selection they would choose not to be handicapped whether they were being treated evenly 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 shown towards the handicapped is the exact reason why we shouldnt allow parents to design their children. It will Just leave 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 fantasy 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 char because his parents decided to go through with a gender selection mathematical process despite being told that he would have more male hormones than feminine hormones.So this man felt that his rights were violated even though he was put away unborn and hes right. You cant reap any human to go through a completely unnecessary procedure, so why would the rules change if theyre your own nipper? Are ki ds not human too? Parents are supposed to make decisions for the better of their children but this was Just an act of ungenerousness. 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 un ethical, irresponsible, and potentially harmful to the child.Melvin Sooners article Genetic Enhancement Should Be left(p) to Personal Choice is about why human genetic engineering should be a personal choice like frustrateting rapper implants or taking steroids (Conner 3). He argues that theres no intrinsic preference in the midst of inserting genes and inserting steroids (Conner 2). People are always finding ways to enhance life and this is Just another way to do it. He does agree, however, that the weightiest moral task in the quest for perfection is that, it increases inequality but that doesnt mean we shouldnt complete the quest (Conner 7).Antibiotics at one point were being use d irresponsibly, but the ethical path is not to stop using them but to use them more Judiciously (Conner 7). Conner would disagree 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 onset 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 conception Babies is Unethical 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 independence (Sanded 6). He looks back at the dark history of eugenics and how it was the driving force behind 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 credibly than they are now to see themselves as self-made and self-sufficient, and those at the crapper of society would be seen not as disadvantaged, but simply as unfit (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 obligation to improve our lives.If we can have a cure for the flu or for bronchitis, why not have a cure for blindness, ATA bullion 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 wit hout boundaries t becomes a moral concern. Life is the to the highest degree sacred thing anyone can have and it needs to be approached with upkeep 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 single-valued function when it comes to our relationships. When you think about what really matters in life, family and relationships with others tend to come up first which is really no coincidence. The purpose of life seems to be to attire up those around us and genetically designing babies will do the exact 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 occupy 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 genetic engineering to cure diseases becomes almost accessible as the flu shot, we will be that overmuch closer on our quest to perfection. One day we will get through that all, but its going to take one brick at a time.