Genetic Engineering MAG

By Diana Peek, Rockwall, TX

Bam! A 16-year-old takes off running at his high school track meet. He is not a quarter of the way around the track when the first of his five opponents reaches the finish line.

Now, in the 21st century, many people say the world is on the verge of a scientific revolution that brings one of the most ­controversial ideas of all time: genetic ­engineering of humans. I believe this is morally wrong, dangerous, and will lead to problems in our society.

The ethical dilemmas of human genetic engineering are what make this issue so controversial. Humans are trying to play too large a role in the universe. Many people believe that genetic engineering of humans is ­interfering with natural processes like the random selection of genes for looks and talent passed from parents to offspring. Human genetic engineering could let individuals “play God” and choose and manipulate their genes and those of their children. I believe that giving people this power goes against the basic forces of ­nature. All that is really needed is for us to accept ourselves the way we are.

The idea of a divided society in the near future is a troubling and likely consequence of human genetic engineering. Societies have always been divided by varying degrees of inequity and bias. Now, with the emergence of the genetic revolution, society entertains the prospect of a new and more serious form of segregation. One based on genotype.

The destructiveness of prejudice and discrimination is unmistakable. Imagine a world where the rich not only hold all the power, but they become superhuman. They could do things far beyond even the best abilities of normal people. Genetic engineering will bring about a rift between the upper-class citizens who are fortunate enough to afford such technology, and the lower classes who must rely only on their natural abilities. Human genetic enhancement would guarantee that families who can afford it would be able to perpetuate their social and political dominance.

Technology, or lack of enough advanced technology, is another topic of controversy for the genetic engineering of humans. It is interesting to think about the impact technology is having on the world, but is mankind ready for this kind of change?

Genetic engineering has the potential to treat and possibly cure a variety of cancers and chronic diseases, but in reality, this technology is not as promising and reliable as it may seem. Seven years after the first gene-therapy trial on humans, a complete cure for even one patient has not been produced. The technology seems to have an impressive array of benefits, but the science is still in its infancy.

It is simply part of the nature of mankind to want to be better, stronger, healthier, happier, and capable of achieving more. On the other hand, some things are better left unaltered. Change is not ­always good.



Similar Articles

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

This article has 126 comments.


on Jun. 23 2010 at 6:11 pm
giggles38 BRONZE, San Jose, California
2 articles 0 photos 21 comments

Favorite Quote:
Come as you are -Kurt Cobain

This is an extreamly well written article! I agree with you as well, let nature do its job and don't mess with it by adding technology to it. The world was doing fine before humans and all we have done is make it a lot worse

on Jun. 23 2010 at 8:41 am
K9_Typical_Islander SILVER, Koror, Other
7 articles 0 photos 47 comments

Favorite Quote:
Hours of boredom followed by moments of excitement (and adrenaline)- that's fishing

Been pondering on your last sentence.

How can GE save a baby's life before the baby itself is even born? Could you give an example of this situation.

To save a baby, you must have one on hand first in order to do some saving on.


on Jun. 23 2010 at 8:35 am
K9_Typical_Islander SILVER, Koror, Other
7 articles 0 photos 47 comments

Favorite Quote:
Hours of boredom followed by moments of excitement (and adrenaline)- that's fishing

You couldn't have said---in this case written--- it better. Great diction. Well worded and pieced out. I get your flow~

There is also a lengthly debate over Genetically Modified Food, as well. I wrote a handful of research essays on that...never gets boring.


rtprice said...
on Jun. 1 2010 at 7:42 pm
*winces*
Sorry about that.   My computer posted an unfinished comment. 

rtprice said...
on Jun. 1 2010 at 7:36 pm

Hmmmm...

Interesting article.  I have to disagree with you, though.

Although it's very easy to say genetic engineering of humans is bad because it:


on Apr. 18 2010 at 3:59 pm
awakeneded SILVER, Davie, Florida
5 articles 1 photo 1 comment
Enough said. This is an awesome article.

on Apr. 18 2010 at 2:40 pm
kylec000 BRONZE, Cleveland, Ohio
1 article 0 photos 10 comments

Favorite Quote:
Under the bludgeonings of chance / My head is bloody but unbowed...
I am the master of my fate / I am the captain of my soul

William Ernest Henly, Invictus

I agree with you. Making someone perfect due to genetic mutation would, as you say, separate us even more.

mseva BRONZE said...
on Apr. 18 2010 at 11:09 am
mseva BRONZE, NY, New York
2 articles 2 photos 2 comments
I just submitted an essay for the Points of View that was very similiar to this. It's about theraupetic cloning though. I must say I agree. Check out my essay when it's approved. We have many of the same beliefs.

dancer13 GOLD said...
on Mar. 27 2010 at 8:26 pm
dancer13 GOLD, Troy, Michigan
19 articles 0 photos 98 comments

Favorite Quote:
"I do not want people to be agreeable, as it saves me the trouble of liking them." ~Jane Austen

Genetic Engineering in moderation is not necessarily an evil. There should be some regulation, obviously, but if it helps to save some baby's life...why not?

RahulD. SILVER said...
on Mar. 5 2010 at 9:08 pm
RahulD. SILVER, New Haven, Connecticut
6 articles 0 photos 4 comments
This issue has been addressed many times, and I would argue that genetic engineering isn't wrong because of the reasons that this author proposes, but rather, for the far more serious risk of genetic homozygosity. THAT is the major risk of artificial selection when pertaining to humans.

on Mar. 5 2010 at 4:42 pm
awesomeaugust GOLD, Boston, Massachusetts
10 articles 0 photos 176 comments

Favorite Quote:
"Keep your eyes on the stars and your feet on the ground"
~Theordore Roosevelt

I definitely appreciate your opinion but I don't know enough aboutt he subject to know if I agree. Your article was very convincing and made really good points, so based on soley you article I would have to agree. One point of critique I might have is that you leave off the last line:"Change is not always good." It's a bit repetitive to the line before, and I think leaving it off would make the ending a bit more open. Overall, great article! Please keep writing!

on Feb. 11 2010 at 9:30 pm
StandardToaster PLATINUM, Pasadena, California
20 articles 0 photos 210 comments

Favorite Quote:
I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy ever minute of it."

hmm. i also don't agree on some of this. i mean i agree that genetic engineering in humans is for the most part bad, but the curing of diseases would help our world immensly. i think genetic engineering in general is very interesting, but needs to be better understod before it is used.

on Feb. 11 2010 at 3:19 pm
-alice- PLATINUM, Colorado Springs, Colorado
21 articles 0 photos 81 comments

Favorite Quote:
I care very little if I am judged by you or any other human court; indeed I do not even judge myself. My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. -1 Corinthians 4:3-4

I agree with you for the most part. I think that we should accept that we may or may not look like our parents or act like them. However, there are emergency cases where it's a good thing that we have human genetic engineering, as in cases when you need a child to be similar to another for health purposes.

on Feb. 11 2010 at 6:50 am
xAllegria BRONZE, Singapore, Other
1 article 2 photos 112 comments

Favorite Quote:
Ça fait tellement du bien d’aimer les gens qu’on aime, que ça finit par faire mal. Je sais pas comment on survit a ça. Non franchement, je sais pas. LOL (laughing out loud) ®, Lola.

Change is not necessarily good or bad, but change which is not natural is probably bad.

Anyways, "when all children are above average"... =D

xJ3rZyxBoyx said...
on Jan. 20 2010 at 9:50 am
well when it comes to genetic engineering, i am kinda on the fence. it is right because it can help make our society stronger smater and so on. on the other hand, every couple can afford 30k for their baby to be engineered and the would be a misfit. hmm.

on Jan. 20 2010 at 7:54 am
i m with u, but the last bit i think isnt really true. Change is good most of the time, and the only time where i see where it's not good is with the genetic engineering. Change is nature, and i think that we should change, but for the better. And genetic engineering is jus wrong

on Dec. 29 2009 at 12:25 pm
toxic.monkey SILVER, Tashkent, Other
6 articles 0 photos 210 comments

Favorite Quote:
"Homo homini lupus"

it seems to be a good start but you could really write more on the topic. (i agree with you though:P)

Diana P. said...
on Oct. 25 2009 at 6:27 pm
thank you to everyone who has read and commented on my article!!! :]

Wordgasm GOLD said...
on Oct. 24 2009 at 1:44 pm
Wordgasm GOLD, Kingfield, Maine
12 articles 0 photos 45 comments

Favorite Quote:
If it was a unicorn it would have gored you.

i think that the only way that the only way genetic engineering in humans is alright is to eliminate disease. its just not natural. genetic engineerin in food is also dangerous and causes allergic reactions in some people. and before u say i know nothing about it, ive benn involved with this issue for awhile, and im in a biotechnology votech program.

on Oct. 2 2009 at 10:07 am
AquariusSunandMoon SILVER, Sublette, Illinois
8 articles 17 photos 69 comments
I have nothing against GE as long as it is used wisely and not just 'because we can'.


SciArc

MacMillan Books

Aspiring Writer? Take Our Online Course!