|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
posted September 24, 2012 06:40 PM |
|
|
*BUMP*
Should gender selection during IVF be legal?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 24, 2012 07:46 PM |
|
|
I see no reason to outlaw it.
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 24, 2012 08:52 PM |
|
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted September 24, 2012 10:53 PM |
|
|
What is next?
Hair color?
Eye color?
Height?
tststs...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 12:35 AM |
|
|
For the sake of argument, is there a problem with choosing such traits for your child?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 01:22 AM |
|
|
Corribus, I envy you. I envy your innocence. You are asking a German why he is against picking traits for his child, and you are doing this in all honesty. 
____________
The empty set
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 01:26 AM |
|
|
I see what you're hinting at, but that's not really the same thing. I'm not talking about killing people who have traits you don't like. I'm talking about picking traits you do.
But let's step back from choosing hair color or something superficial like that. What about screening embryos for ones that don't have Downs Syndrome?
Or am I a Nazi to suggest as much?
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 01:43 AM |
|
Edited by dimis at 01:44, 25 Sep 2012.
|
Apart from religious fanatics, and people who know by a doctor that they can not have another chance for a child, few people would not take the necessary measures against a child with the Down syndrome, if they could so. So, if you are against such a screening, I don't know if you are a Nazi, but you certainly don't pass the sanity test for me. The whole test is about life vs ... an "inferior"-life to say the least.
____________
The empty set
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 01:44 AM |
|
|
Angelito:Quote:
What is next?
Hair color?
Eye color?
Height?
Sure. Those traits have at most a minor effect on quality of life. It's not like it's common to think of a short brown-eyed black-haired person as better or worse off than a tall green-eyed blond. If those traits are arbitrary, I don't see any reason not to let would-be parents choose.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 01:45 AM |
|
|
If it is legal to kill a child in the womb because the child is a male or a female or is black or white or simply because the child would cramp Mommy's lifestyle, I hardly see why it should be illegal to engineer the child in the womb. On that basis, sex selection should be legal, making him have blue eyes and blonde hair should be legal. Making him hunchbacked or diseased or to have a maximum height of 1.5 feet tall or 10 feet tall should be legal. If Mommy has the right to kill the child she certainly has the right to impose those lesser conditions on the child.
Of course there will be repercussions to sex selection and other selections. We see abortions in China often used to murder the girl babies as the couples want a male child and are limited to one. This leads to am imbalance in the number of males and females in society. Sex selection during IFV potentially leads to similar problems as more aging women decide they want to bear children.
|
|
dimis
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
|
posted September 25, 2012 01:55 AM |
|
|
Quote:
It's not like it's common to think of a short brown-eyed black-haired person as better or worse off than a tall green-eyed blond.
Take a large sample of opinions from girls as to whom they would prefer to date and come back with your findings.  Or may be you won't come back ... 
____________
The empty set
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 02:04 AM |
|
|
On the other hand, if you're short, you're more comfortable in an airplane (and if you're tall, flying coach is miserable). You also don't need as big of a car, so you can save money.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 03:42 AM |
|
|
@Elodin -
Are you against IVF in general?
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 03:58 AM |
|
|
In general, I am opposed to IVF. In certain specific cases, like an infertile couple trying to have a kid using their own egg and sperm, I am not opposed to. That does not mean I think all other IVF should be illegal, however.
I am opposed to "let's play God" in engineering children. However, if the legal standard is that unborn babies can be killed at Mommy's whim is it inconsistent to say Mommy can't engineer her baby to have whatever diseases she may want it have or whatever "birth defects" or "enhancements" she may wish it to have.
Of course I am opposed to Mommy being able to kill her unborn baby unless giving birth, even through C section would threaten Mommy's life. If that standard were in place legally then I'd say outlaw all engineering of children. Exceptions would obviously be eliminating genes that cause some disease or other as that would be a medical treatment.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 04:38 AM |
|
|
Alright, supposing a couple has IVF to conceive a child and it is one of the situations that you think IVF is OK. All the embryos are already there, and the doctor has to decide which ones to implant. Do you feel there's a moral difference between the doctor randomly choosing which ones to implant and the doctor choosing specific ones based on which traits they will have? In other words, if people are having IVF anyway, and it's moral to do so, does it become suddenly immoral to choose which embryo to implant if the technology exists to do so. Keep in mind, there's no extra embryos made or destroyed with the technology to choose. The technology only tells you which embryos have which traits.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
friendofgunnar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
able to speed up time
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 04:48 AM |
|
|
|
Ultimately it's an arbitrary personal choice whether people think the state/community should extend protections to zygotes. I personally don't oppose culling zygotes for any reason whatsoever - furthermore if I had the opportunity to do so with my own begotten I would.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 05:14 AM |
|
|
The implications of engineering specific physical traits is an unusual prospect, particularly related to height, as that is a stand-off between the cultural/cosmetic/athletic favor towards big vs the practical favor towards being small. Being tall doesn't relate to being fat, but a big person still consumes more than a small person, which is playing a major factor towards the up-and-coming agricultural/food challenges of the later century. It's not just that there are more mouths to feed in the world, which forces us into heavy industrial farming that is enhanced via fertilizers that use minerals that are in dwindling supply, but also that the people themselves are bigger. Need bigger clothes. Need bigger shoes. Need more soap. Need more space. Fart more methane.
Since height is entirely relative to what the norm of what everybody else is, it seems beneficial to specifically engineer people to be short, but due to sentimental attitudes, it could go in the complete opposite direction. 50 million parents want their kids to be basketball players, and suddenly in 20 years you have a bagillion bare-skinned yetis walking around that drain the entire state of Kansas's food supply.
I still hold the opinion that humanity should hand over all legislative authority to squirrels. We can survive without clothes on in climates ranging from arctic to tropical. Want to know how many pairs of pants I own? Zero. Squirrels have no pants. Squirrels need no pants. We can easily navigate every terrain the world has to offer (your pathetic mariners have yet to even discover the elusive deep sea squirrel) Our tract record of successfully storing supplies in the winter surpasses that of the overrated 21st century ape-tards. To put it bluntly: we're better than you.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted September 25, 2012 07:04 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Ultimately it's an arbitrary personal choice
Not on planet Kolob.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted September 26, 2012 01:37 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Alright, supposing a couple has IVF to conceive a child and it is one of the situations that you think IVF is OK. All the embryos are already there, and the doctor has to decide which ones to implant. Do you feel there's a moral difference between the doctor randomly choosing which ones to implant and the doctor choosing specific ones based on which traits they will have?
An embryo is a human in the earliest stage of the human life cycle. An embryo should not be murdered.
If one egg is used there should not be multiple embryos. If an "identical twin" scenario happens I assume both embryos can be implanted.
If multiple eggs and sperms are used and multiple conceptions occur the embryos that are discarded are murdered. That is not acceptable.
I's say one good thing about the late Christopher Hitchens. While he was a die hard anti-theist he was staunchly pro life and recognized the absurdity of not calling an embryo an unborn child and the immorality of killing said child.
Hitchens pro life
____________
Revelation
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 26, 2012 01:41 AM |
|
|
Quote:
An embryo should not be murdered.
Well then you should be against IVF in all incarnations, because oodles of (unused) viable embryos are discarded yearly as a result of it.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
