CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Human's are no longer subject to natural selection like we used to be. The result is the human body is weaker, the human brain is smaller and we can't fight off disease as well. Even our testicles are both smaller and less productive than our ancestors' (well, not mine, but maybe yours! =p) (1)
The fact is, making it easier and easier to survive allows the physically weak and the stupid to breed, which passes on their faulty genes.
If we don't start taking control of the path of our genome, we are headed for disaster.
I totally agree. Either we need to go back to having wars, or some other way of weeking out weaker individuals, or we learn how to fix mutations in our sex cells so that our children don't inherit our weaknesses.
To be clear, I'm not talking about improving the species, just fixing things like bad eyesight, allergies, extreme obesity or skinniness, maybe snoring and baldness and such like that. We would start with the more extreme genetic problems, and then work towards the more benign. Eventually we can start thinking of ways to improve the species.
Yes, I think we should get to the point where we have the ability to do so. I have a genetic disease that causes really horrible arthritis. I had my onset at 29 years old. I will live with this forever. While it is certainly not going to kill me, it is going to suck for the entire remainder of my life. Now, this is not a complaint, but with the ability to genetically modify a human, we would be able to apply gene therapy to my condition and it would "go away" as the modified DNA replaced the unmodified DNA.
Everyone in my family has died of either car accidents or cancer.
Okay, I was going to make this into a good argument for gene therapy as a cure for cancer, because obviously some people/families are more susceptible to it than others, so there must be a genetic influence, but then I started thinking, everybody has to die somehow, and cancer at least gives you the chance to say goodbye to those you love. As long as it doesn't happen early in life, cancer's not such a bad way to go.
Yes, I believe this is the next stage of human evolution, I like to call the ultra evolution, genetically modifying along with natural selection could give human beings the push we need to become truly immortal. I picture the future of humans becoming genetically modified both biologically and synthetically to prolong life and colonize the universe.
But not for the purpose of trying to eliminate flaws. Flaws are subjective to opinion.
We should genetically modify for the purpose of giving us new strengths. Then, after a time, we will have created a person strong enough to fix their own flaws on their own with ease.
Genes are a very precise thing to work in, and we have not perfected everything that we know about them yet in terms of experimenting on them.
Therefore it would unwise to intentionally genetically mutate someone. It may be by accident, but you could cause deformities, five heads, even kill them - and since when was that ever a good thing?
Don't genetically modify people because you may make them deformed.
2) You would wind people up
A lot of religious people do not agree with genetic modification because it can allegedly damage the soul. The Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, for example, is against this - and to intentionally genetically modify someone would be seen as going against nature.
This would mean that there would be riots, rebellions, and all sorts of dark things going on in the name of God - and this surely wouldn't result in something bad.
Don't do it because you will really annoy people.
3) People who have been genetically modified could make us obsolete.
As well as meaning that these people would be more like machines than real humans, their characteristics, when designed, could mean that we become obsolete as a race and are no longer the dominant species.
For example, if I designed someone to have an extreme capacity in the mathematical side of their brain, all unmodified people all their calculations would become obsolete; that would really be annoying. If we are to remain the dominant species then creating genetically modified people would be a rubbish thing to do.
4)Impurities
Some people may argue that weeding out impurities is a good thing because then we will not carry any excess rubbish - however that is not the case at all.
We do not know everything that there is to know about the human body and we surely will not for a while to come. So removing what we see as impurities could be something that is vital for survival. Therefore meaning a repeat of point one.
Do not remove impurity because the chances are that you will cause someone to suffer a lot.
Conclusion
These four points:
- You could make people deformed
- You would annoy religious people
- We may become obsolete
- Research leading to removing impurities could kill people
Mean that to genetically modify people will not be a good thing.
This seems like a temporary issue. The science will improve as it matures. When there are better techniques, we probably won't have to worry nearly as much about something going horribly wrong. So while it might not be a wise decision to try genetic modification now, wouldn't it be acceptable to try eventually?
2)The pope wouldn't like it
Eh. I think this is a non-issue. If genetic modification goes against the beliefs of a certain group, they have the right to protest and vote against it if they please. I could see there being a bunch of rallies and associations formed against it, but it wouldn't be the end of the world.
3)The aliens would take over
Genetically tweaking a person doesn't transform him into a different species. I'd equate it to someone taking steroids or undergoing brain surgery. Doing these things changes something about you, but in the end, all of us are still human. So you can't worry about "them" making us obsolete when there is no "them." There is only "us."
4)Deformities
Same as the first point. We don't know much now, but that doesn't mean in the future we won't be better informed.
"While it may not be wise to try genetic modification now, wouldn't it be acceptable to try eventually?"
Little other than experiments in genetic modification would supply us with the information and knowledge we need to perform it successfully.
So unless you are prepared to say that some people are born to matter more than others, and you wish to intentionally make someone deformed so that they have to live with abuse their whole life (like Merrick) then no, it will not be okay to try in the future.
If you wish to do it successfully you must first ruin some lives (maybe more than thousands) intentionally.
"I think this is a non-issue"
Do you know how many things have been done in the name of God? If there were people who rebelled they wouldn't just be from groups that are always peaceful unquestionably, there would also be some who would take it as something against their religion. All sorts of terrible things have been done in the name of religion, such as the Twin Towers.
Almost all wars can be traced to have origins from religion. You said how "it wouldn't be the end of the world", and maybe you're right; but, it could be, and if not it may come quite close.
"Genetically modifying a person doesn't transform him into a different species"
Doesn't it?
If you are human but your child is genetically modified to have three heads (for example), then are they really human?
Anyway, I never said: the aliens will take over. I am sorry if you interpreted it that way.
The genetically modified people would receive hate from other people who had not been genetically modified.
4) This point isn't all about deformities. It is about impurities with some links to deformities.
If you are human but your child is genetically modified to have three heads (for example), then are they really human?
1) Some humans are born with more than or less than 10 toes and/or fingers, are they still human?
Some are born with a tail, are they still human?
Wolfman, dude with a hair condition all over his body that seemingly "confirms" the appearance of werewolves, is he human?
2) I'd leave your question for scientists who do that classification to answer. But simply because it'd have three heads doesn't automatically make it a non-human.
Do you know how many things have been done in the name of God?
I do. But that's no justification to get needlessly alarmist. Think of all the things that go on in this country today that blatantly defy certain religious beliefs. Abortions and gay marriages are going on as we speak, but the only rebuttal is a few protests here and there -- not the horrific gloom and doom you seem to fear.
I feel that genetic modification would fall into this category. People would moan groan and complain, but saying it'd lead to chaos and pandemonium is a bit much.
The fact is that there would be a lot of distaste from certain powerful religions and groups.
The Catholic Church is powerful, and because a lot of people are Catholic a lot of people will listen to what the Church has to say. If the Church says that gays are immoral then a lot of people will listen to them and believe what is said so truly, that their opinions will be changed by what is said by the Church. There are other groups against cloning and some see it as something that takes away the soul. Not allowing nature to take its path is a common reason people supply for this, and this has a huge effect that I do not think you have correctly understood. There are wars going on in the name of religion right now, and to add cloning for a reason for war into the fray is a stupid idea.
You added another argument with just the word 'yes'. I will respond to that here when I say that it is a matter for debate and many people do not share the same views as you do. You didn't, however, respond to my other points.
There would be a lot of distaste from certain powerful religions and groups.
I know. I agree. Think of all the things that go on in this country today that blatantly defy certain powerful religions and groups. there are things going on today that receive a lot of distaste from certain powerful religions and groups. It's already happening, yet there is no war.
You're saying genetic modification would be bad because it would piss off certain groups. The fact is that they're already pissed off and nothing's happening.
Little other than experiments in genetic modification would supply us with the information and knowledge we need to perform it successfully.
So be it. That's the way the pharmaceutical industry operates today, so I don't see why you'd suggest genetic modification has to operate any differently.
At the moment there is a war going on in Afghanistan because of religion and human rights (which is exactly what this is about), yet you appear to think that there is no war? Maybe you think that that isn't a war? Well, let me explain what a war is for you:
A state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups withing a nation or state
We are currently engaged in armed conflict between nations, so unless that was just some huge 'typo', you appear to be mistaken.
"So be it. That's the way the pharmaceutical industry operates today, so I don't see why you'd suggest genetic modification has to operate any differently"
Pharmaceutical immoralities are irrelevant.
This debate is about genetic modification and the fact is that it is immoral to intentionally enslave people to deformity for the rest of their lives.
Can you imagine putting someone in the position where they are bullied and abused every day at school for something that is completely out of their control? Would you do that to people? I don't think you would.
This debate is about genetic modification and the fact is that it is immoral to intentionally enslave people to deformity for the rest of their lives.
Goodness, nobody is enslaving anyone. What makes you think genetic modification constitutes slavery? If a particular modification advances to the point that they feel ready to administer it to willing volunteers, slavery has nothing to do with anything. At all.
There is no war? Really?
At the moment there is a war going on in Afghanistan because of religion and human rights (which is exactly what this is about), yet you appear to think that there is no war? Maybe you think that that isn't a war?
The war going on in Afghanistan because of religion and human rights is irrelevant.
This debate is about genetic modification and what its ramifications would be here in the nation where I actually live.
You said that it would be a good idea to make thousands of people live with deformity for the rest of their lives, so I responded with "it is immoral to intentionally enslave people to deformity". This isn't actual slavery, where someone goes around with a whip and asks people to clean his shoes. I am not talking about actual slavery I just made a point through a metaphor - don't take it so literally.
The rest of your argument for that was about how genetic modification constitutes slavery, and you didn't actually respond to what I said in a satisfying manner, meaning I win!
"The war going on in Afghanistan because of religion and human rights is irrelevant.
This debate is about genetic modification and what its ramifications would be here in the nation where I actually live"
The war is not irrelevant. I should know, I made this debate.
The debate is not just about where you live. I should know I made this debate.
Universe is the competition... Sacrifices must be made in form of deformities and death...nature is the proof that always the fittest will prevail... We have no idea what's out there in the Universe... as you referred we would become obsolete...True we might already have become obsolete... We need to improve ourselves... There is no rule as fair and just in the book of Universe(I am not being paranoid) but just think about it... what happens when a superior species comes in contact with a inferior one it directly results in extinction of the inferior species... Our end may come as Alien intervention or asteroid or epidemic etc. We must be prepared for it. There is no rule of fair and just in the book of Universe. We must not exploit and extensively use the technology but we must arm ourselves with it because one day we would need it for sure... If not today or tomorrow maybe 100 or 500 years latter but because of the complexity of the field we must start today.
There is this thing called evolution, where we naturally become better over time, genetically modifying people is just speeding it up, but with higher risks.
Well, there is two different evolutionary theories.
Microevolution which is essentially the process of natural selection, in that a species will continually evolve to become, like you said, better over time.
Then there's macroevolution, which is the process of one species evolving into another, which I consider to be false.
and i was referrring adapting to changing into what the mayans and countless others have predicted, evolving into psychic beings, but oh god this is just looney bin garbage talk, right? guess we will find out
Why find out later, when we can look at the science today! There is no known sending and receiving apparatus for information in thought form in the human brain, and no known theory as to how that information could be sent without sound/radio waves.
well i dont have to find out later, i already know its true, and if according to string theory everythings vibrating on different strings, then that would mean thoughts do too, and i dont want to argue this with you because its pointless, but check out this its pretty interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDMzvJOu9vQ, and dont just ridicule, just keep an open mind about it...
That video has no evidence, in several places it flat out lies;
"there are the mind body and spirit, we only understand 2"
No, thats because only 2 exist in reality.
"nobody knows where thoughts are stored in the brain"
Um, yes we do. In circuits made of cells.
Your just a bullshitter. Youve posted 2 videos ive reviewed without a shred of evidence in them. They start off with the conclusion they want to prove and then try to collect evidence that ONLY proves them right.
This isnt ridicule. You have no evidence, you spread lies because of it, and that makes you a moron. It doesnt matter if im here to see it. You'd still be one.
you must have only watched 2 minutes,a nd there is an entire series, so if you dont want to believe it, thats cool its your choice, it said interpret it at your own experience, i interpreted my experience, and you obviously did yours, we have highly different vies on reality, and this series has helped me become an extremely more knowledgeable person about the one thing that matters to me: people, i dont dismiss science, i love science, i grew up staring in awe of the planets, and i still do, but this opened up a whole different reality for me, one 1000x what science has to offer, so like the video says: have your own experience
Your telling me there are more of these videos that lack evidence?
I dont bloody care if there is 900billion videos! They started off with an assumption and no evidence.
You dont have any evidence to believe what you believe. You have become knowledgeable in myths and foolishness because of an inner psychological need to have a spiritual world, despite the fact that none exists because there is no evidence for it.
Experience is subjective and not evidence. Your experience is effected by how illogical you are, and your illogical because your mentally ill and want to believe in a fairytale world.
i think we should let time do its work or maybe later find a way to help the weaker of the human race become stronger via cures for diseases like aids cancer and other serious conditions.
Red Indians,Indians, Americans whenever a species or a race or a culture has shown weakness it has been dominated by another. Time is of essence we have crossed the line where we wait for time or nature to do evolutionary work and take just decision. We must build our own future. There is nothing fair about competition. We live in a ruthless universe it won't be long before we realize it. So me must prepare ourselves...
If anyone wants to accidently end up with 3 heads or somthing they can genetically modify themselves, they can, but frankly, I think most people don't want to be a mutant freak... which would probably happen.
People tend to forget that we're animals. We're too smart for our own good. Things we create have destroyed other life on the planet in mass amounts. We're playing God. We need to let things happen as they should and stop fucking with the way we were created. I'm not religious or anything, but I do believe we're supposed to be living like the rest of the animals that aren't killing the planet. Just survive and reproduce.
It may cause birth defects or genetic problems for the baby in the future. It may also destroy human embryos in the process. Also, it has the potential to cause a total chaos in evolution which takes time, and speeding it up can cause conflict with nature. Also, religious customs are not fond of these scientific experiments which they call "a bunch of people playing God" and it may anger large organizations of the church from various religions such as Christianity, Catholicism, or even Islam in some instances. Also, it is unnatural and we don't know the other side effects or dangers of this risky experiment.
