Will all people of the world mix creating one race in the future?

[Maleth]

Even washing machines were highly criticized when invented, nothing could scrub better then a good pare of hands down at the communal laundry by the stream . No one stays without them these days. I guess even the thought of opening up humans for some operation was considered unethical and playing god. How many people are having their lives extended these days and with gratitude?

 

[Angela]

I think there's a difference between society deciding who should get to reproduce or not and individuals choosing to get genetic modification for themselves or their children.

If I were having children again and doctors could tell me that my child would normally have a high chance of contracting juvenile diabetes or cancer or becoming schizophrenic or bipolar and they could alter the genes, I wouldn't hesitate for a second. I have a hard time imagining that any parent would hesitate.

As for genetic modifications for intelligence or beauty or athletic ability, I think most would opt for that as well. It's just human nature to want your children to have all possible advantages in life. I'm different to some extent I suppose. I would want my children to look like my mother and my father. Indeed, in the throes of young passion, I wanted them all to look exactly like my husband. As for athletic ability and intelligence, I do think it would be nice if they all got my husband's and father's athletic ability and not mine, but it's not a big deal. The intelligence genes that are already in the pool are fine too. I wouldn't want some genetically engineered super human, but that's just me.

What the consequences would be for society is another question, and then there is the issue about the "morality" or "virtue" or lack of it in all of this.

I have some sympathy for Fire-Haired's point of view. I do think that it would just increase the disparity between the have and have nots, with the wealthy becoming even more of an elite caste than is already the case. That wouldn't be good for society as a whole.

I also don't think that parents should be allowed to do whatever they wish to their unborn children. There are a lot of crazy people out there. One notorious woman had surgery after surgery to make herself look like a cat. What if a parent wants to do the same to their unborn child?

Then there's the law of unintended consequences. Nature has done a pretty good job of weeding out deleterious traits through natural selection, although it could be argued, I suppose, that because we are controlling our environment more, it is slowing down. Still, does everyone really trust scientist to tinker around with the human genome?

 

[LeBrok]

I think there's a difference between society deciding who should get to reproduce or not and individuals choosing to get genetic modification for themselves or their children.

If I were having children again and doctors could tell me that my child would normally have a high chance of contracting juvenile diabetes or cancer or becoming schizophrenic or bipolar and they could alter the genes, I wouldn't hesitate for a second. I have a hard time imagining that any parent would hesitate.

As for genetic modifications for intelligence or beauty or athletic ability, I think most would opt for that as well. It's just human nature to want your children to have all possible advantages in life. I'm different to some extent I suppose. I would want my children to look like my mother and my father. Indeed, in the throes of young passion, I wanted them all to look exactly like my husband. As for athletic ability and intelligence, I do think it would be nice if they all got my husband's and father's athletic ability and not mine, but it's not a big deal. The intelligence genes that are already in the pool are fine too. I wouldn't want some genetically engineered super human, but that's just me.

For that reason I don't expect parents making monsters out of their children. I'm sure they will use their own DNA with some health corrections, and adjustment or two, to make sure they are intelligent and good looking.

What the consequences would be for society is another question, and then there is the issue about the "morality" or "virtue" or lack of it in all of this.

I'm sure, by genetic tweaking we should eliminate psychopaths, serial killers and child molesters.

I have some sympathy for Fire-Haired's point of view. I do think that it would just increase the disparity between the have and have nots, with the wealthy becoming even more of an elite caste than is already the case. That wouldn't be good for society as a whole.

I'm sure there will be government guidelines how to make a proper human being. To make sure some crazy parents won't play Frankenstein.

I also don't think that parents should be allowed to do whatever they wish to their unborn children. There are a lot of crazy people out there. One notorious woman had surgery after surgery to make herself look like a cat. What if a parent wants to do the same to their unborn child?

I'm not sure if we should have restrictions what people can do to their own body. On one hand we are forced to use seat-belts, on other euthanasia becomes a commonplace. But that's another story.

Then there's the law of unintended consequences. Nature has done a pretty good job of weeding out deleterious traits through natural selection, although it could be argued, I suppose, that because we are controlling our environment more, it is slowing down. Still, does everyone really trust scientist to tinker around with the human genome?

Not at the moment. We barely started understanding genetics. In the future, however, there will be increased need for genetic help in creating new babies. Thanks to modern medicine, and saving countless lives of people who wouldn't survive on their own, and who in turn will have a chance making even weaker children. Every coming generation will be less healthy, with more chronic conditions, and heavy burden to healthcare. In this case genetic engineering might be only solution and salvation to our health system.
The only other option will be to drop the civilization and go into wild to live as hunter-gatherers. Embrace natural selection for few generations to get rid of some medical conditions and overall improve basic health of society.

 

[LeBrok]

Eugenics adherents are rejoicing in their graves

It is quite hypocritical of you. Aren't you the one who is advocating marring only into one's races or ethnic group? You don't see it, but you are practicing eugenics by racial and ethnic discrimination.

What I'm for is giving parents tools to improve health and mental acuity of their children. I'm not even forcing them into genetics, just giving them choices if they wish to go this way. If parents would want a blond kid or black kid, tall or short, it will be only their own choice.

 

[LeBrok]

I'm tired of being dis respected and treated as weird on Eupedia because I have conservative tendencies. I'm tired of every middle aged liberal here, like you and Aberdeen, thinking it's justified to insult religious and conservative people. It doesn't just happen at this forum it happens in most public places: in schools, media, etc. and it needs to end. I deserve just as much respect.

For crying out loud will you guys stop with the sarcasm!!! You're not mr. tolerant if in every other post you're insulting someone, then lie by denying it afterwards. You can express your views without so much attitude.

I'm ready to have a civilized debate whenever you are.

Have a grip on yourself dude. You went out into a world of adults and you can't take an argument. I explained what religion has to do with human life, and it is just too much for you to bear?
Isn't Christian and Islam dogma saying that nothing happened without will of god, and that people are created by god, and in time of creation given a sole?

You're twisting the words of the Bible to have a certain view on genetic engineering which you want it to. There's nothing about genetic engineering in the Bible. I'm purely expressing my personal opinion.

Surly, bible missed wisdom of genetics or relativity, but for Christians it should be obvious that god should know about genetics and laws of physics. And when god creates new people he is using genetics, right?

Tolerance is not do whatever you want. I've explained before to you how the "do whatever" philosophy doesn't work. There are hard-to-define limits, but they're nonetheless there and need to be. People in the west are too obsessed with individualism, freedom, and tolerance. There's a wrong assumption that the rule maker is always the bad guy. It's not always bad to take "take away freedoms" like too many people think. Is making LSD illegal a bad thing? Are people wrongly imposing their feelings on others?

It seams that if you are a president you will tell people what to think and what to do. Holly inquisition rings the bell.

We should impose rules on shallow parents who will give their children an unfair advantage. People should not be allowed to do whatever the heck they want to their bodies.I have no idea what-type of genetic engineering you're in favor of. IF someone wasted their time on the work they could find concrete dangers of genetic engineering being widespread. It depends on the type of regulation though of course. If someone shows me the evidence with a certain type of regulation there are no dangers I'll agree genetic engineering is okay. The evidence to me right now though is pointing in the other direction.

Did you ever see a business or a public institution being run without regulations? There will be regulations, a lot of regulations.

What the heck does feminism have to do with God? I'm not taking this!!! I have respect for myself and my views and will not be bullied into allowing the majority(inclu. you) here at Eupedia tell me what I believe, and forge in aspects of my believe that make their position seem stronger and mine weaker.

You have huge tendencies of demonizing and being afraid of many things, especially new things.

Fear is not why I'm against genetic engineering. It's because from what I know so far there are a lot of potential problems. It's quite clear you have a strange favoritive biased for genetic engneering anyways.

I'm sure that if you were a head of patent office we wouldn't see cars, cellphones, TVs, computers, etc, because you would always see potential problems. Surely there are problems with computers and internet, but would you throw away your computer and go back only to reading books?

Cell phones don't make you physically and mentally superior to your peers. These two can't be compared.

Not now, when they are cheap and ubiquitous. But 30 years ago only rich people had cellphones. It gave them superiority, status and better communication. It will be the same with genetics, cheap and ubiquitous thanks to technological progress. It will give poor, stupid and ugly parents a chance to create as smart and beautiful kids as rich parents. Remember, technology is a great equalizer.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Lebrok, here's a few points.

>Insults, sarcasm, and manipulating what people believe to make your opinion look good is not arguing like an adult it's unproductive and divisive. There should be no tolerance for it. I'm simply reacting to garbage which has been thrown at me ever since I posted at this forum.

>Genetic engineering has little to nothing to do with the Bible. No one believes God creates a brand new being, unconnected to others, with every person. The writers of the Bible obviously knew this and about genetics, reproduction, bloodlines, etc. Saying the Bible is against genetic engineering is like saying the Bible is against medicine, lifting weights, life support, or anything else that does things to you a 100% natural human life wouldn't

>I'm not afraid of new things. I'm afraid of things which are harmful to society. To me right now genetic engineering seems harmful to society. With the feminism thing, what I said is common believe(that's what I've noticed).

>You're miss interpreting my views on "tolerance". I think your's are too laze fair, and that most Americans and Europeans(Not you) are obsessed with the word "freedom", etc. Just watch Braveheart. The underdog, discriminated poor person, nontraditional, informal hero soundtrack has been playing for 100s of years and is overused. People need to understand how complex the world is, and that sometimes the establishment isn't the bad guy. Not every event in human history is black and white. Sometimes what seems to be progress(human engineering) won't happen. Taking my initial opposition to genetic engineering and comparing my believes to the inquisition is a huge stretch.

>Human history and our personal lives(especially as kids) are full of situations where regulations couldn't keep things regulated, and big problems are the result. Humans are often indiscipline and unable to keep promises. With something as demanding and dangerous as genetic engineering I'm not ready to take that risk. I don't know much about it so my opinion might change.

 

[LeBrok]

Lebrok, here's a few points.

>Insults, sarcasm, and manipulating what people believe to make your opinion look good is not arguing like an adult it's unproductive and divisive. There should be no tolerance for it. I'm simply reacting to garbage which has been thrown at me ever since I posted at this forum.

Now, this is an insult.
Sarcasm is quite valid figure of discussion, unless it turns into insult.

>Genetic engineering has little to nothing to do with the Bible. No one believes God creates a brand new being, unconnected to others, with every person. The writers of the Bible obviously knew this and about genetics, reproduction, bloodlines, etc.

Most what you said here is a heresy in biblical and scientific terms. Not mentioning that these two statements are contradictory. Can you see that?
Could you cite bible about genetics please.

>I'm not afraid of new things. I'm afraid of things which are harmful to society. To me right now genetic engineering seems harmful to society.

So, on a base of your belief in harmful consequences of something that doesn't exist yet (parents genetically adjusting babies), you are against it?!
Why don't we try it first, measure the prose and cons, and make a decision based on tangible consequences? The way science work.

>You're miss interpreting my views on "tolerance". I think your's are too laze fair, and that most Americans and Europeans(Not you) are obsessed with the word "freedom", etc. Just watch Braveheart. The underdog, discriminated poor person, nontraditional, informal hero soundtrack has been playing for 100s of years and is overused. People need to understand how complex the world is, and that sometimes the establishment isn't the bad guy. Not every event in human history is black and white. Sometimes what seems to be progress(human engineering) won't happen. Taking my initial opposition to genetic engineering and comparing my believes to the inquisition is a huge stretch.

If you know how life in Cuba or North Korea looks like, you should know what word freedom means when used in context of Western World. When I use this word I'm not advocating anarchy. In general terms, you will give as much of personal, political and social freedom to people in democracy, till you see a grave consequences. For example I think the freedom to bear arms in US is not working in a favor of whole society. I'm not sure if new freedom to buy and smoke marijuana is beneficial one. I'm against of "freedom" wearing burka. In all these situations these are existing problems and can be measured and expressed statistically in terms of deaths and sickness, and compared to other societies which addressed these issues differently. We don't need to use people beliefs in making a decision, we can use science helping us making the right one.
As you can see, after 200 years of technological and social changes/progress, the Western Civilization is doing great. People live longer, going on vacations all the time, drive cars, fly, and enjoy more freedoms than any time in the past, and most countries in the world today. That's why I'm very optimistic about our future.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Lebrok,

>The writers of the Bible knew about human reproduction and family bloodlines. There's no debating this. I never said they knew about the science of genetics. Your interpretation of the Bible is usually a bit off, and gives it a negative image which makes your position look strong.

>I never said I'm against western Democracy. I know North Korea sucks. What I said is some people are obsessed with it and are too laze fair. You're taking my statements and comparing me to the inquisition, North Korea, etc. I'm against genetic engineering just like how you're against the right to bear arms, etc. It isn't any differnt.

 

[Maleth]

Lebrok,
Your interpretation of the Bible is usually a bit off, and gives it a negative image which makes your position look strong.

Instead of obsessively keep telling people that their image of the bible, quran or torah is off which are all interwoven in many ways, why don't you give examples of how to justify the obvious savagery, racism, chauvinism promoted and tell us why they are so necessary? Anyone who is able to debate and discuss should not find this uncomfortable and screaming offence is not enough in today's word for anyone to stop a discussion and expose the truth with logic and reason.

 

[Kardu]

It is quite hypocritical of you. Aren't you the one who is advocating marring only into one's races or ethnic group? You don't see it, but you are practicing eugenics by racial and ethnic discrimination.

What I'm for is giving parents tools to improve health and mental acuity of their children. I'm not even forcing them into genetics, just giving them choices if they wish to go this way. If parents would want a blond kid or black kid, tall or short, it will be only their own choice.

I have liberals as wonderful mentors of hypocricy, I still have a long way to go

Mind your false and cheap accusations of discrimination! This word has a specific meaning today.

And don't get emotional and jump to conclusions when did I say that I am against genetic engineering?

 

[Fire Haired14]

Instead of obsessively keep telling people that their image of the bible, quran or torah is off which are all interwoven in many ways, why don't you give examples of how to justify the obvious savagery, racism, chauvinism promoted and tell us why they are so necessary? Anyone who is able to debate and discuss should not find this uncomfortable and screaming offence is not enough in today's word for anyone to stop a discussion and expose the truth with logic and reason.

You're the one getting emotional. You're the one who appears to hate(religions). I don't see a reason to waste my time with you, but maybe I will. I have a lot of other things to do. Maybe religious people hurt you when you were younger saying you're damned to hell or something. BTW, something like that doesn't justify your hate.

No logic justifies discrimination and hate. You are a hater and need to change.

 

[Maleth]

You're the one getting emotional. You're the one who appears to hate(religions). I don't see a reason to waste my time with you, but maybe I will. I have a lot of other things to do. Maybe religious people hurt you when you were younger saying you're damned to hell or something. BTW, something like that doesn't justify your hate.

No logic justifies discrimination and hate. You are a hater and need to change.

:bored: Okay fine no answers to an in depth discussion with facts and examples with logic and reason. Just the usual beating round the bush scenario. Try to know the content of the religious texts you defend and you might spot what real hate is. If ever you will be ready we can discuss.

 

[skaheen15]

I'm tired of being dis respected and treated as weird on Eupedia because I have conservative tendencies. I'm tired of every middle aged liberal here, like you and Aberdeen, thinking it's justified to insult religious and conservative people. It doesn't just happen at this forum it happens in most public places: in schools, media, etc. and it needs to end. I deserve just as much respect.

For crying out loud will you guys stop with the sarcasm!!! You're not mr. tolerant if in every other post you're insulting someone, then lie by denying it afterwards. You can express your views without so much attitude.

I'm ready to have a civilized debate whenever you are.



You're twisting the words of the Bible to have a certain view on genetic engineering which you want it to. There's nothing about genetic engineering in the Bible. I'm purely expressing my personal opinion.



Tolerance is not do whatever you want. I've explained before to you how the "do whatever" philosophy doesn't work. There are hard-to-define limits, but they're nonetheless there and need to be. People in the west are too obsessed with individualism, freedom, and tolerance. There's a wrong assumption that the rule maker is always the bad guy. It's not always bad to take "take away freedoms" like too many people think. Is making LSD illegal a bad thing? Are people wrongly imposing their feelings on others?

We should impose rules on shallow parents who will give their children an unfair advantage. People should not be allowed to do whatever the heck they want to their bodies.




I have no idea what-type of genetic engineering you're in favor of. IF someone wasted their time on the work they could find concrete dangers of genetic engineering being widespread. It depends on the type of regulation though of course. If someone shows me the evidence with a certain type of regulation there are no dangers I'll agree genetic engineering is okay. The evidence to me right now though is pointing in the other direction.




What the heck does feminism have to do with God? I'm not taking this!!! I have respect for myself and my views and will not be bullied into allowing the majority(inclu. you) here at Eupedia tell me what I believe, and forge in aspects of my believe that make their position seem stronger and mine weaker.

I have nothing against women. That's my view on feminism. Let male and females flow naturally in society with little regulation, that's my view on gender roles. I'm against most of whom I've seen labeled as "feminist", because they're unhealthily obsessed with the female gender, wrongly assume each gender has to be the same to be equal, and are for enforced affirmative action. The 50/50 thing by 2030 is an example of what I'm talking about.



Fear is not why I'm against genetic engineering. It's because from what I know so far there are a lot of potential problems. It's quite clear you have a strange favoritive biased for genetic engneering anyways.



Cell phones don't make you physically and mentally superior to your peers. These two can't be compared.

You're making some very good points, and I agree with a lot of the things you're saying. It's true that genetic engineering services will probably be available to monied folks in the future(and I agree that it's not comparable to cell phones or washing machines, as big as those innovations were), just like cosmetic surgery is today, but it will have to be tightly regulated, I can't imagine that it wouldn't be. Otherwise, we'd almost certainly be seeing pop stars and publicity-hungry celebrities having "vanity" children who look like exotic animals or whatever.
Fear not, rules will be in place, assuming our species survives the oncoming climate nightmare we're facing, since if we don't this entire discussion will have been for nothing.

That said, I definitely don't mean to attack or insult you, at all, but it is difficult to see how you could reconcile a belief in the Bible with what you know to be true about the sciences, history, etc.

 

[Fire Haired14]

:bored: Okay fine no answers to an in depth discussion with facts and examples with logic and reason. Just the usual beating round the bush scenario. Try to know the content of the religious texts you defend and you might spot what real hate is. If ever you will be ready we can discuss.

I just said I would if I feel like it. I have a lot of other more important work to do.

 

[LeBrok]

Lebrok,

>The writers of the Bible knew about human reproduction and family bloodlines. There's no debating this. I never said they knew about the science of genetics. Your interpretation of the Bible is usually a bit off, and gives it a negative image which makes your position look strong.

>I never said I'm against western Democracy. I know North Korea sucks. What I said is some people are obsessed with it and are too laze fair. You're taking my statements and comparing me to the inquisition, North Korea, etc. I'm against genetic engineering just like how you're against the right to bear arms, etc. It isn't any differnt.

It is way different. My opinion is based on gun and murder statistics, a science. Your opinion is based on assumptions and feelings.
I'm not sure why you can't see that, when I pointed it out countless of times.

 

[LeBrok]

I have liberals as wonderful mentors of hypocricy, I still have a long way to go

Mind your false and cheap accusations of discrimination! This word has a specific meaning today.

And don't get emotional and jump to conclusions when did I say that I am against genetic engineering?

Speech worth of demagogue, Kardu. Lot's of words with no substance.
Now this is substance:
Isn't it you who said that people should marry into their ethnic group and race?

 

[Kardu]

Isn't it you who said that people should marry into their ethnic group and race?

Only a totalitarian mindset of a leftist liberal can read "discrimination" in that

 

[LeBrok]

Only a totalitarian mindset of a leftist liberal can read "discrimination" in that

Don't blame people not understanding you if you have your own definitions. Here is a common one:

1. Treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.

 

[sparkey]

Kardu, have you outlined exactly what you propose should be done to prevent interracial marriage? Suppose we're living in Kardutopia. What happens to people who attempt to marry into a different race? Does the government step in and block it, refusing to allow any marriage-type contracts? Does the government step back and allow some sort of "community justice" to be administered at the discretion of whatever their home communities are (and how far would that go)?

 

[Kardu]

Don't blame people not understanding you if you have your own definitions. Here is a common one:

If I choose a bacon over cereal for my breakfast it's also a discrimination...

What you say is an example of totalitarian thinking. Who isn't with you is against you....
Who does not support interracial marriage by that commits an act of discrimination, being 'evil nazi supremasist'... Brave new world it is...