Eugenics, genetics, your kids and mine...

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

An important question looming on the horizon is: "to what extent can couples determine the genetic make-up of their kids."

I have a simple answer: "It's not evil eugenics if a majority of those with the genetic trait advocate helping future children avoid it. "


For example, I'm quite short, this has not really had a positive impact on my life my husband is tall and I'd be quite happy to let his genes take over the whole height thing. I'd have a similar feeling were I abnormally tall. On the other hand it'd make me angry if someone ruled out darker skin for our child, that'd be cowing to the pressure of racism, I think ... and creepy. (dark skin also protects one from skin cancers and painful sunburns) I don't envy the lengths my husband must go to avoid getting burned. My husband has often been quite cheerful about the prospect of his kids not having a hard time with the sun as he has.

So, I think the solution is to ask people who have these traits if they *want* them passed on or not. In that sense, maybe the "looming question" isn't so big-- most couples will naturally want persevere human diversity, but will not have much interest in saving traits that just make life more difficult.

But of course things are not that simple. Many black folks (for example) might have chosen lighter skin (and some might do so today) to protect their child from racism. I find this depressing and my instinct is to find a way to prevent it. But, should the state have any place in such choices?

There are lots of people who would quickly choose to reduce the chance of their child being gay (I doubt being gay is as simple as a single gene, so mercifully it may not be possible to tamper with this without tampering with other traits) --on the one hand, maybe it's good that gay kids don't end up being born to intolerant people, on the other, there are enough intolerant people that, if the genetics of sexuality were simple enough, we'd probably see a sharp decine in the gay population. I think this is really depressing.

Now I treated the height issue like it was simple, but there are probably some short people who feel differently.

I think we could come up with reasonable laws by asking those who have a given gene what they think about people selecting for it or against it.

And now for a incomplete poll:


[Poll #1768916]

PS. Here is a great documentary that relates to these questions.

Comments

What IS this "allow" business? Where do YOU get the authority to forbid?

[montecristo.livejournal.com]

According to the currently prevalent Western theory of government, the State gets its authority through delegation from the citizen. If nobody is "more equal" politically than anyone else, then NOBODY has the authority to knock on their neighbors door and forbid them to do with their own genetics what they will. If nobody has that authority themselves then nobody can delegate any such authority to the State.

Re: What IS this "allow" business? Where do YOU get the authority to forbid?

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

That Vatican hold that authority over their subjects.

Re: What IS this "allow" business? Where do YOU get the authority to forbid?

[montecristo.livejournal.com]

If one buys into the divine right of kings or the political theory of theocracy, either direct or representative, then all bets are indeed off. Agreed. All I am saying is that these philosophical positions are in direct conflict with the supposedly accepted western theories of government at the present time.

Re: What IS this "allow" business? Where do YOU get the authority to forbid?

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

The state forbids forms of incest (though many laws go further than is required by science, there is no evidence that cousin marriage* is dangerous, but serious problems can arise from sibling and parent marriage* )'

*it's old fashioned but in law marriage acts as a stand-in for having kids with a person.


I see your point, though.


I object morally to someone who screens out "gayness" (if this is possible) yet, I don't know what sort of law I would write to stop then.

Re: What IS this "allow" business? Where do YOU get the authority to forbid?

[montecristo.livejournal.com]

The real problem is that won't be able to stop genetics from being abused. It may certainly be possible to forbid free people from using genetic technology in ways some politically powerful groups find repugnant but that would take granting immoral, arbitrary authority over human autonomy to representatives of those groups in the name of preventing those unfortunate exercises of human freedom. The problem with this is an old one, summarized as, "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes," or, "Who will guard the guards themselves?" Given the potential absolute power that genetic engineering represents, at least in the minds of people, what will guarantee that the political actors, to whom people give or surrender a monopoly over the power of genetic engineering, do not abuse it for their own interests? There is no guarantee. In fact, history would suggest, in my opinion, that they will inevitably abuse it.