Where To Draw the Line With Embryo Selection? 727
Tjeerd writes "There is currently a discussion going on in the Netherlands about embryo selection. The process means that when using in vitro fertilization, you can check what kind of genetic defects will definitely become activated during life. When embryos with those defects are identified, they can be avoided or destroyed. The next step the government is considering is to make it possible to select against genetic defects which might become active in life, such as breast and colon cancer. Of course, this is a very difficult discussion; where do you start, and where do you end? People are worrying that there is no real limit, and that you could potentially check for every genetic defect. I think if you're in a situation where you or your family have genetic defects, you surely want to check whether your children would have them too. What does the Slashdot community think about this?"
Re:Government should not be involved at all (Score:5, Funny)
Anyone not involved should mind their own business? I agree with that. Government religion you listening? Hey! Religion, get your ass back here! Don't you walk away!!
Retroactive Selection? (Score:2, Funny)
Can we make selection retroactive?
There's several people I'd like to retroactively select...
Re:One Word . . . (Score:3, Funny)
"You want to know how I did it!? I never saved anything for the swim back."
Re:Government should not be involved at all (Score:5, Funny)
Re:vasectomy (Score:3, Funny)
Wrong question (Score:2, Funny)
The question isn't "should parents do this" - they will. The real dilemna will come when children with genetic problems start suing there obstetricians - or parents - for "wrongful birth" or "wrongful life".
"Dr. Whatisface was negligent in not compelling Mr. And Mrs. Doofus to take a genetic test prior to young Jimmy Doofus being born; Jimmy is under the average height for a male, which is obviously a genetic defect, and therefore the embryonic Jimmy should never have been implanted and brought to term. We therefor ask the court to find for the plaintiff and compell the defendant to support poor, short Jimmy for the rest of his life."
Viable life at the 52nd Trimester (Score:1, Funny)
As a Christian, I draw the line at The words "Screw You, Im not doing that..." Or complete rebellion. Until then, they are just an undifferanted mass of protoplasm, kinda like telephone support in third world countries. Somewhere around the 52nd trimester. Anything else we should be allowed to terminate, after they gather the intelligence to totally rebel! Now thats viable life! ( important exception, of course is village idiots from Texas ).
Mutant Super-power Disambiguation is my line (Score:5, Funny)
I have no problem with anyone who wants to sift through endless embryos until you find one that has the markers for mutant super-powers. After all, that's helping usher in the next stage of human evolution. Once you've discovered that, though, I don't think it's right to continue selecting based on the nature of those powers. Just let super-nature take its course. You should be proud just to have an X-Man running around your house, even if it is a crappy one like Dazzler.
Re:There is no line. (Score:3, Funny)
I think you meant pandering to wine and cheese conservatives. The liberals are the ones who want to let you do whatever you want in this area. The conservatives have 3 sections:
1) don't care
2) opposed to anything
3) middle position that makes no sense (wine and cheese)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A counter example (Score:1, Funny)
Wait. I'm confused again. Intelligent design good or bad? Can someone make this into a car analogy for me? Thanks.
Re:Government should not be involved at all (Score:1, Funny)
Know then that God has dealt unfairly with me, and compassed me round with his net.
If I cry out "Injustice!" I am not heard. I cry for help, but there is no redress.
He has barred my way and I cannot pass; he has veiled my path in darkness;
He has stripped me of my glory, and taken the diadem from my brow.
He breaks me down on every side, and I am gone; my hope he has uprooted like a tree.
His wrath he has kindled against me; he counts me among his enemies.
Job 19:6-11
Re:Government should not be involved at all (Score:1, Funny)
You're wife and child are dangling from different cliffs. Both could fall at any moment. You have time to save one - which do you choose?
The correct answer is neither. Having a kid will only slow you down while you are crusing for chicks in the 'vette that you purchased with the payout from your wife's life insurance policy.
Re:Government should not be involved at all (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, and that argument is self-evidently silly because you're presupposing that there is a difference between "you" and "your fingernail clippings" when your criterion for deciding what is or is not a human just IS having human DNA.
Do you have human DNA? Yes.
Does your fingernail clipping that you just clipped this morning? Yes.
Well then, if 'having human DNA' is the criterion for deciding humanity, both "you" and "your discarded fingernail" ARE human, and it doesn't do you any good to say "No, I'm human, that's just a fingernail clipping."
That argument misses the point because it changes your definition of what constitutes a human. First you said it's "stuff with human DNA." And then we point out the absurdity of that criterion, you change your definition to "A fully grown human specimen" which implicitly DENIES humanity to the very thing you were trying to attribute it to, that is, an undifferentiated clump of human cells.
If we incinerated that fingernail clipping, we would be incinerating ITS "entire DNA", now wouldn't we? And yet you don't care one bit about this, because it's manifestly not human, even though it has human DNA. And yet you DO care about a set of undifferentiated cells that you probably couldn't even see unaided.
To put it succinctly, the "having human DNA" argument just doesn't even get off the ground, regardless of your attempts to backdoor in some other criteria, like *actually being a human*.
Don't be fucking stupid. Of course your finger nails are human tissue, but they do not deserve rights? They are PART of you. As they are part of you, you may do with them as you wish. If you want to give them your rights, I guess that's OK. Now, is a fetus part of the mother? Sure, it's inside the mother. It's attached to the mother, but is it part of the mother. Do a DNA test and you'll find out that it is NOT part of the mother, and therefor, nothing like your fucking dumbass fingernail example.
I don't believe there are people so fucking stupid that they needed that explained to them.