• theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    On one hand, crispr isn’t safe. And life is not something people have a right to create - that tremendous imposition should be met with a responsibility

    On the other hand, life is treated as cheap almost everywhere. If we’re going to force people to justify their right to exist, why not take a chance on their genetics to improve the species?

    I mean, this was risky science, but not reckless. At some point we need to start fixing our genome, or we’re just going to poison ourselves to extinction

    • ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      And life is not something people have a right to create

      Yes they do?

      Having children is literally the one thing most of us are equipped to do, and those who cant can adopt; the children of the future are our responsibility to raise. You seem to have a pretty self centered and unrealistic idea around child rearing; people raise children through invasions, unless you want to stop people from fucking somehow you’re never going to stop reproduction.

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Most of us are equipped for rape and murder, but we don’t have a right to it.

          • jsomae@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            “because that would be eugenics” is not an explanation. You’re just asserting that eugenics is bad, which is begging the question – this is a post about the ethics of eugenics. You can’t just come in and say “eugenics is bad because it’s eugenics.”

            Anyway, I don’t think anyone is calling China’s former One Child Policy eugenics.

            • ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              Thats because the one child policy was coerced by the IVF in order for China to survive during a period of economic isolation, more so the one child policy only applied to han Chinese, and many still choose to have children, it wasn’t a ban on having extra children, they where just heavily disincentivized and given access too birth control.

              Literally banning who can have sex would be eugenics yes