"Designer Babies"—Why The Hell Not?

Great Debates
21

Can someone please tell me what is wrong with parents deciding to have a child that is not (or is, for that matter) gay?

Being hetero, I would prefer to have a hetero child. If I were homo, perhaps I’d rather have a homo child. But, either way, shouldn’t the parents be allowed to determine the genetic factors that might give their children the edge in life?

This sort of “breeding” has been done since the dawn of man. Right now (consciously or not), people are looking at each other sexually, to see if they might be fit for having the type of children that they wish to have (body fitness, attractiveness, hair/eye color).

And economical differences? Why would genetically altered children be any different than any other elective procedure that have always been available to the rich?

Don’t worry. Someday there will a Genetic-Mobile, Tubes on Wheels, where a humanitarian doctor will provide free genetic engineering to poor neighborhoods.

22

Can someone please tell me what is wrong with parents deciding to have a child that is not (or is, for that matter) gay?

Being hetero, I would prefer to have a hetero child. If I were homo, perhaps I’d rather have a homo child. But, either way, shouldn’t the parents be allowed to determine the genetic factors that might give their children the edge in life?

This sort of “breeding” has been done since the dawn of man. Right now (consciously or not), people are looking at each other sexually, to see if they might be fit for having the type of children that they wish to have (body fitness, attractiveness, hair/eye color).

And economical differences? Why would genetically altered children be any different than any other elective procedure that have always been available to the rich?

Don’t worry. Someday there will a Genetic-Mobile, Tubes on Wheels, where a humanitarian doctor will provide free genetic engineering to poor neighborhoods.

Side effects? We’ll never get anywhere without taking a bold step now and then. Proper procedure and testing will determine side-effects, causes, etc.

23

Can someone please tell me what is wrong with parents deciding to have a child that is not (or is, for that matter) gay?

Being hetero, I would prefer to have a hetero child. If I were homo, perhaps I’d rather have a homo child. But, either way, shouldn’t the parents be allowed to determine the genetic factors that might give their children the edge in life?

This sort of “breeding” has been done since the dawn of man. Right now (consciously or not), people are looking at each other sexually, to see if they might be fit for having the type of children that they wish to have (body fitness, attractiveness, hair/eye color).

And economical differences? Why would genetically altered children be any different than any other elective procedure that have always been available to the rich?

Don’t worry. Someday there will a Genetic-Mobile, Tubes on Wheels, where a humanitarian doctor will provide free genetic engineering to poor neighborhoods.

Side effects? We’ll never get anywhere without taking a bold step now and then. Proper procedure and testing will determine side-effects, causes, etc.

24

hopefully genetic engineering will disable multiple posts

25

I say we engineer a race of Christie Brinkleys, Tom Sellecks, Errol Flynns, and Kay Kendalls, keep 'em penned up, fatten them sedulously, and slaughter them for their fur.

I want a full-length green fur coat to wear to the Princeton-Dartmouth football game, as I drive up in my Stutz Bearcat.

Where did I leave my pennant?

26

Folks, designer people is waaay down the pike. The HGP only sequenced our code. Another decade at least is going to go into understanding it. Please do try to recall that genetic expression is very, very, very complicated and rarely do you have only one gene controlling a trait. Moreover, for many traits, environmental stimuli certainly are as important or more important that your genes (within reason of course.)

There’s a lot of really simplistic ideas about how genetic coding works. Listen, even genetic work with plants is still quite hit or miss --it’s what my dear employer does after all, I should know. (well hit or miss is not quite right, but the process is not easy nor exact.) It will be a while before anyone has the skills to attempt engineering people. Even animals (for consumption) is something which will move slowly, more for social than fundamental differences from plants…

In short, this discussion is a bit premature but it strikes me that the OP depends on a number of incorrect assumptions about what can be done with GE in the reasonable future. (with the caveat that a decade could make this all nonesense.)

A last word

Intelligence is certainly one of those complicated multivariable traits. I highly doubt one can engineer with ease a more intelligent kid (well, given a century who knows). Environment easily trumps genes within the normal range of expression – we’ve got plenty of literature telling us early childhood stimuli, diet and upbringing can have profound effects on brain development and thus intelligence.

The critique as I understand it regarding intelligence testing is that many tests assume obvious standards which are in fact culturally encoded – testing in itself is a strange and new practice which takes some getting used to. Frankly I don’t have much faith in them other than as very gross relative indicators rather than of fundamental ability. (Once having tested poorly, now testing well, I don’t know what to say? Did I get smarter or better at tests?) Any way, as the originator (Binet) of such tests warned its best not to read in fixed

(Note heritable does not mean encoded in genes, it means passed through generations. Something can be heritable without being encoded in the genes. It’s a population level concept, not individual. Intelligence is highly heritable, but the degree to which that is genetic in variation as opposed to from other sources is another matter entirely. Using the same statistical methods we can find high heritability for occupation etc.)

27

In case anyone is interested, this site is a nice primer on
, well exactely what it says, Genes, Environment and Behaviour, which might prove helpful for some

http://www.biology.ucsc.edu/people/barrylab/public_html/classes/animal_behavior/BEHAVIOR.HTM

A basic course, nicely done I think.

28

Ike—Fat, furry Errol Flynns? Well, SqrlCub would be happy, anyway. And I hope your pennant says “Rah!”

—Eve [who once again starts a serious discussion, then goes all giddy]

29

To me, the most problematic element of the genetic engineering this is the alleged existence of a “gay gene.” (It’s been my casual observation that there is a genetic component to sexual orientation.) Anyway, as a lesbian, I don’t know if I would have wanted my parents to change my genes if the technology were possible. It’s an impossible frame of reference- I’ve never been straight, so I don’t know what it’s like or if I’d be relatively happier if I were.

I keep on having these visions of the last lesbian on earth… she’d be single handedly responsible for keeping the flannel industry afloat… can you imagine the burden? :wink:

Would I want a gay child? Hard question- it’s not an easy life, but what of it? A lot of people’s lives aren’t easy for a lot of different reasons. Besides, there are a variety of environmental factors at work in any situation.

Fixing disease is obviously a bonus to genetic tinkering, but I think it’s a very gray area to tinker with personality traits.

By the way, there’s no way to eliminate mental retardation. A significant number of mentally retarded people are retarded due to non-genetic factors such as parental drug abuse, early childhood physical abuse, complications during pregnancy/labor, accidents, ect.

I want a green coat. Uke, come with me to the next Dartmouth football game!

andygirl, whose pennant says “green”

30

**QuickSilver wrote:

I don’t know how else to evaluate intelligence than asking problem solving questions and evaluating answers. Do you? IQ test may not be perfect but it’s one of the best tools we have developed thus far. If little Johnny is being tested within culturally similar criteria to his own then the results should be fair indicators of his intelligence.**

Let’s try a thought experiment; I sneak up behind a young professor of engineering at MIT and knock him out with cholorphorm. I use my instant transport device and take him to the Kalahari desert and release him, letting him wake up on his own.

While there, I do the same thing to one of the !Kung bushmen and transport him back to New York City and release him there. One week later, I go back and check to see which has survived. Which one do you think will survive? I presented them with (an admittedly) ultimate problem-solving test; survival. Given this test, which is the more intelligent?

Now, what if I simply administered a basic IQ test to these two individuals. For this experiment, assume the tests were administered in a language each could understand. What would the results be?

**Mmmmmm… Christy Brinkley… **

Well, there’s something to be said for Tom Selleck, if he at least grew a goatee and dropped the NRA/Republican attitude. :smiley:

I don’t really see that. I don’t think Eve is suggesting tight interbreeding here. We are still operating with the same general gene pool as before.

Maybe not in a few generations, but over several, say 10, 20 maybe even 100, it would end up like that. Lets say everyone had access to the technology and used it. In 10 or 20 generations, society would be full of Tom Sellecks and Christy Brinkleys.

But since we cannot predict what particular trait will or won’t be missed in the future we may in fact be helping ourselves by strengthening some features that are presently weak. It’s kind of a hard thing to speculate about with any real success given that we cannot predict the future. Also, if we are smart enough to do genetic engineering, chances are we’ll be smart enough to overcome the threats of unforseen diseases as well.

A real story: in some humans there’s a random mutation such that a particular macro-molecule of protein doesn’t come thru the surface of a particular cell in humans. This mutation has no effect on the functioning of the cell or the normal functioning of the human body. By testing and other evidence, we discovered that this particular mutation happened about 20,000 to 50,000 years ago.

No big deal, it’s one of those random genetic things that happen. But it is a big deal, you see, if you have this random mutation, you’re effectively immune to HIV. That little bit of protein is the hook site on human T cells that allows HIV to infect them.

The point I’m trying to make is, we don’t understand everything about genetics. Before we start tinkering with our own genetic code, we better have a damn good idea of what we’re doing.

If you want more intelligent, beautiful people, I’d rely on good old-fashioned methods like good pre/post natal care, good nutrition, access to excellent education materials, well-trained teachers and staff and having a loving home support enviroment.

31

Quote:
If you want more intelligent, beautiful people, I’d rely on good old-fashioned methods like good pre/post natal care, good nutrition, access to excellent education materials, well-trained teachers and staff and having a loving home support enviroment.

AHA! Leaving out the poor and detitute I see!!! Good old fashioned values are disciminating in favor of the rich and middle class!!!

32

Bah! To heck with your old fashioned methods! I want a six legged, nine eyed, gay daughter with a 20kg brain and 3 meter wingspan. By golly, I’ll have ‘er if I have to glue ‘er together myself!

33

:::Sits down with a Miller Lite and pops in “Reanimator”:::

34

Tymp, I like the way you think!

She’s gonna have a rough time getting dates, though. I can just see her on Prom Night, sitting (squatting?) by the telephone, crying her nine eyes out.

35

Maybe . . . but there wouldn’t be a kid in her class who would dare turn her down or stand her up.

36

Poor Tymp didn’t you learn anything from the greeks? If she flys too close to the sun her glue will melt and she will fall into the ocean. History repeats itself.

37

OK… let’s get this back on track… although the thought of me having wings is kinda cool…

I abhor the idea of genetically engineering your kids solely to suit your tastes, because:

  1. A lot of people have been born with nasty genetic diseases but have lived productive lives that enriched the world: e.g. Abraham Lincoln had Marfan’s Syndrome, JFK had Addison’s Disease, Stephan Hawking has, well, whatever the hell he has. To say that just because your kid is free of genetic diseases, he’s going to get so much of an advantage at life, is bullshit - I’m sure all of us know someone who is healthy but has completely wasted their life.
    Sometimes being ill makes you a better person - you’re stronger emotionally, you’re more mature about the important things, etc.

  2. My idea of a perfect kid may be a whole lot different than society’s view of a perfect kid. Let’s say I’m a serial murderer, and I want to breed a kid that has no gene for feeling emotions (if one exists), so that it can kill without remorse. This kid is going to make a whole bunch of people’s lives miserable, just because I got exactly what I wanted.
    We are living in a world where we can get things at the snap of our fingers, but kids should not be one of these. Part of the “joy” of having kids is that they’re going to be pains in the ass, piss you off, and generally be not what you expected. And that’s the beauty of the whole spiel.
    My mother (she’s never admitted this, but this is what I’ve gathered) wanted a tall, red-haired, cheerful, religious daughter that wore tons of make-up and loved to shop and watch Oprah with her… and she got me (I’m, well, quite the opposite). And am I happy to be here? Why, yes. Do I think I have every right to be here? Why, hell yes. Am I happy that I’m exactly the opposite of what my mother wanted? Oh, enormously so.

38

Since the thread has been thoroughly hijacked, anyway, I figured I’d add this bit…

The Eloi weren’t the strong, smart, healthy ones. They were the happy, but weak, stupid ones.

The Morlocks were intelligent (Intelligent enough to run the machines that the Eloi depended on, anyway), strong, and healthy - if cannibalistic.

/End Hijack.

39

What would Hitler say?

40

So, it’s okay that they have suffered? Are you saying the only reason they were great people was because they were afflicted?

How much GREATER would they have been if they were NOT so inflicted? How much more could Stephen Hawking do if he were free from restrictions? Your example is the very reason genetic testing is so important!!!

As for your mom (and I’m sorry your relationship with her might not be all rosy), all the genetic engineering in the world won’t affect personality… that’s part of the nurrture side and your experiences after birth.