Designer Babies: Web Sources

In order to continue to prepare for this project I explored more sources found when I conducted a basic web search. A website that explores popular issues contained an article about genetic engineering. The article asserted that the biggest risk associated with genetic engineering is intentional germline genetic engineering in which any changes made will be passed on to successive generations. Essentially, this is natural selection as accelerated by science. However, critics state that the use of this science will create an unstable environment in which social, political, and other forces will influence the lives of children. These uncontrollable force will cause an unstable society. This source also suggests that with the widespread use of genetic engineering, society will be split into two social classes. Molecular biologist Lee Silver refers to these classes as the genetically engineered GenRich class and the Naturals class. Silver speculates that these two classes will become so divided that no cross breeding will occur and a way of life will be firmly established. This source also suggests that giving human beings the ability to play G-d, especially human beings without true foresight about what they are doing, is extremely dangerous. Overall, the information presented in this article was interesting as it displayed various risks to genetic engineering. It seems that while some people support genetic engineering for health benefits, many fear the general societal repercussions of creating "super-humans."

The second web source I used is by Mike Adams, editor of the website Natural News. This article, in contrast with the other sources I have explored, voiced solely the benefits to genetic engineering. Adams asserts that men and women are borne with outdated "software" that limit how they interact with the world. He suggests that men are borne with the idea that they are meant to lead and control, while women are borne with "social software" that causes them to innately desire to connect with others. He suggests that men are motivated by power and control, while women are motivated by social desires and a desire to procreate. Consequentially, he says, women are more concerned with the common good than men. Adams sees genetic engineering as a solution to these innate desires and other problems. For example, he suggests that by engineering babies to hate the taste of sugar, America's obesity problems will be solved. Adams does acknowledge that America is not at a level of maturity in which genetic engineering is advisable, but sees it as a problem-solver for the future. He sees genetic engineering as the way to uplift our species and hasten improvement. This article was extremely interesting to me because Adams explored benefits to genetic engineering that are hard to argue with. It seems logical to want to create humans to be the best they can be. Yet, Adams largely ignored some of the risks of genetic engineering that the other articles explored.