How did the first contemporary issue effect your principles? Did it challenge them? Were your principles helpful in working out your response to the issue? Which philosopher's position was most consistent with your own principles and why?
The first contemporary issue being human cloning, did challenge my priniciples. I am a Christian and dealing with a matter that would effect mating and manipulating natural conception is a problem. I feel that cloning is playing God and will eventually eliminate human relationships. In my view, God originally created sex to be for reproduction purposes. As humans continued on living, the concept became distorted and used as a means of enjoyment and sexual fulfillment. Kass used points that said that individuality will be compromised with the mass production of human beings. Genetic variablilty will be limited to a small percentage and natural conception will slowly be eliminated. I agree with Kass's argument because individuality is the fun part of life. The things that make us different are the things that make us, us. Why walk around being an 30 year younger exact replica of someone? That is a major societal fail to me.
For those who have seen GATTACA, a movie that has a basis on showing a world where children are made by computer. Genetic specialists make children that are the best possible outcome for parents. Deeming the children naturally concieved as invalid in society. The natural born children are forced to second class treatment and jobs while the genetically supreme rule society. Is that the kind of world we want? A world where the 'mistakes' will be deemed inferior to the perfect clone. Honestly, that is where I see cloning going and that is why I cannot agree with it.
This week I commented on http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/ and http://evonsommerville.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment