The news that Chinese researchers recently attempted to alter what is called the "germline" of human embryos — essentially, rewriting sentences in our genes — has set off a huge and necessary discussion of how we should deal with genetic engineering. In Washington this week, a large international conference, featuring big-name scientists from around the world, sought to grapple with the moral and ethical consequences of these developments. The Chinese experiment was made possible by the development of a new technology known as CRISPR, which for the first time provides a fast and easy way of editing individual genes in a chromosome.
The moment when we will be able to alter characteristics that will be handed down to all future generations of human beings is upon us. These developments have re-ignited a huge debate over the proper uses of this technology. The ability to permanently alter human characteristics, from predisposition to disease to looks to intelligence to aggression, raises both huge opportunities and dangers.
In my view, this type of activity potentially strikes at the core of what it means to be human. It is not something that should simply be left up to market forces, or to the whims of curious researchers; rather, we need as a society to establish some red lines regarding uses of this technology.
One that I would personally draw is between therapeutic and enhancement uses of gene editing: While the boundary can sometimes be fuzzy, it is far more legitimate to help people subject to inherited genetic diseases than to spend money so that a rich family can enhance the appearance and acumen of their children. But no ethical red line will be meaningful unless it can be enforced, which means that we as a society need to regulate the practice of assisted reproductive medicine, which is where such experiments would likely be carried out.
No such regulation exists today in the United States, apart from self-regulation by the assisted reproduction industry. It may surprise people to know that it is today perfectly legal for a scientist or doctor to try to clone a human being, or to repeat the Chinese experiments. The Food and Drug Administration has in the past tried to exert some authority in this area on the dubious grounds that embryos are "medical products" — a rather strange claim.
In any event, the FDA has no capacity to make moral distinctions between ethical and unethical uses of genetic engineering. When the prospect of such engineering first appeared in the s, a coalition of scientists and business interests worked to beat back formal regulation, in favor of things like toothless bioethics advisory boards. What we need today instead is a new statutory authority with oversight power over germline engineering and similar reproductive technologies to make it clear what is and is not permissible.
Other advanced countries have long since put similar institutions in place, like Britain's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. The reason why genetic engineering is wrong is because it could lead to an irreversible alteration of the entire human species. Any technology that offers benefits will usually come with risks as well.
Condemnation of this new technology could be denying human beings the key to finding the a cure for all diseases and cancers. And the enlightenment of who and what we are. The truth is that human clones are just has human as any one else and do not deserve to be treated like second rate citizens. Clones have souls too and are autonomous individuals with their conscience and personalities.
Parents need to be given more credit in that they would not objectify their cloned children, but love them unconditionally. There would be large number of identical genes, which minimizes the chances of mutation, and, in turn, evolution - the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment.
Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely extinction. Furthermore, cloning would eliminate the uniqueness that each one of us posses. Thus, leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes and, chances are, that those individuals would be regarded as 'objects' rather than people in the society in grand scale.
It is also one of the top controversial issues of the 20th century Epstein 1. Others argue that such inventions as human clones, which are genetically constructed humans, and other genetically created figures, are wrong and should be stopped Epstein 5. Overwhelming textual evidence proves that genetic engineering is not beneficial to society.
Accordingly, genetic engineering is unethical and therefore should be stopped. Today they would be seen as seriously deviant. There will be two species of humans - those with genetic enhancements, the superhumans and those without, the subclass. As they say in the film, Gattaca, "we've got discrimination down to a science. James Watson, the co-discoverer of DNA, believes it to be the responsibility of science to address the 'genetic injustice' that leaves people with inherited conditions.
Needless to say, society placing such value on improving oneself is often associated with superficial humans, in fact, with genetic enhancement being more accessible, our society will become an artificial world. The uprising of this particular behavior will change societies demographically by first the abuse of genetic enhancements and even further pursing in other extremities, such as creating a new world with the new creation of modified human species.
Our society cannot manipulate the process of nature; the life of nature is to be unchanged and if nature is to be changed then the undesirable consequences are near. Open Document. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. In the essay "Ethics in the New Genetics" by the Dalai Lama, the author states that before biogenetics may continue human beings must hold with them a "moral compass" that will protect all human beings from their fundamental characteristics to be taken away; the Dalai Lama hopes this will create more ethical decisions in the future.
Similarly, in " Human Dignity" by Francis Fukuyama, the author examines the rise of human genetics and how it is going down a path that does not consider human essence, or in his words Factor X, as a legitimate attribute to all human beings as these biogenetics continue.
The rise of biogenetics will create an unfair advantage to many, including farmers who will find that they must depend entirely on biotech companies …show more content… Fukuyama argues that the need for humans full emotional gamut is the most important unique human characteristic and humans will constantly believe they know what are "good" and "bad" emotions.
Fukuyama presents the idea of biogenetics being able to take away attributes that are perceived to be "evil", but "in the absence of these human evils there would be no sympathy, compassion, courage, heroism, solidarity, or strength of character. This becomes an issue because humans have lost respect for those emotions and forget that they are needed for their ethical emotions to be apart of them.
Fukuyama coins the term "genetic lottery" which is the wide range of genetic variations that make humans all different, but also makes them all human. Once humans narrow this genetic lottery down, they lose their differences, and now being human will become a narrow definition instead of a unique one.
With the rise of new genetics neglecting the idea of human dignity, or what it means to be human, we will see that a hierarchical system ruled by genetically modified people and the oppression that will. Get Access. Satisfactory Essays. The Science of Cloning Words 2 Pages.
I will carry you gently away. I even kissed a few weary, poisoned cheeks. I listened to their last, gasping cries. Their vanishing words. I watched their. Society has been taught to strive for that and normally perfection is accompanied by a religion that exemplifies it and the reward tends to be unimaginably amazing.
The problem is that no one is perfect, and because there is no way to measure that we try our best or we give up and follow other paths. Dante Alighieri, born in Florence, Italy in , was born into a very power hungry age. In the Divine Comedy Dante makes a point of writing. They might have needed that one soul you just took away from them. If they need advice from someone and they knew that this human being could have the answer where would they go?
To their tomb and hope that he or she rose from the dead and helped them out? How he or she would always help them with everything. They would remember. Have you ever gone through a hard time? Did you have people in your life help you get through that difficult time? In Slob, by Ellen Potter, a realistic fiction novel, Owen, the protagonist, has a few people who help him get through many challenging situations.
Also, in Every Soul a Star, by Wendy Mass, a realistic fiction book, protagonists, Ally, Bree and Jack, all help each other when they are faced with a difficult situation. In Slob, Owen is a boy who gets bullied a lot and has a low self-esteem. Gu Xiaobai was a cultivation master that lived for more than 10, years. He was the Supreme Master of the 9 Dragon Continent. He also had a best friend named Zhu Rong, a person that Lin Fan saved almost years. But for some families, I guess that doesn't work out.
Sadly for me, I was one of those families. When my family broke up, it was the saddest time in my life. And because I am a male, I thought that crying was for females. That you are weak if you cry. The concept of picking certain traits and characteristics of a human may appear desirable, but many risks and potential.
Genetic engineering is the process of manually adding new DNA to an organism. However, I believe that genetic engineering has the potential for eradicating all disease and for creating superior human beings. One of the benefits of genetically modifying humans is to eradicate all disease. Genetic engineering on the human genome should be approved because it. Genetic Engineering has been controversial for many years. But, so far genetic engineering has been very advantageous for human evolution.
Genetic engineering is a term often misunderstood. The term means to direct manipulation of an organism's genes using biotechnology. It is a set of technologies used to change the genetic makeup of cells, including the transfer of genes within and across species boundaries to produce improved or novel organisms. This recent exploration has been a breakthrough. Genetic engineering does not only affect human DNA, it can also be used to modify animal DNA to preserve species and cure diseases.
The concept of genetic engineering has been around for decades but only recently caught the attention of the media. It is incredible that we are capable of creating life saving devices and tools, but at some point we need to find a limit. Sometimes research and curiosity exceeds its boundaries and can become harmful to other people. With genetic engineering, someday this future could become reality.
Genetic engineering can cure genetic diseases, and extend and empower human life. However, many people have overestimated and reacted to ethical and safety concerns associated with this new technology. This has been done worldwide in genetically modified crops, and to a limited extent in animals. In human genetic engineering, the modification. This technology techniques are developed by the genetic of both plant and. Genetic Engineering has been exponentially growing over the years with the media unsure of whether they should support the advancement of genetic engineering or not.
While the term genetic engineering is often used in mainstream media, much of the general population does not have a clear understanding of its meaning, current uses, and potential applications. This leads to misinterpretation of the information that the public's receive creating problems which worry them. Despite the risk and ethical.