Arguments Against Genetic Engineering

776 Words4 Pages
Genetic engineering, by definition, is the deliberate modification of the characteristics of an organism by manipulating its genetic material. There are two types of cells in the body: somatic (cells that are found in the body) and germ-line (cells that are found in sperm and eggs), and therefore two types of gene therapies. Somatic cell therapy consists of genes being introduced to a patient in order to help them recover from a disease (e.g. Cystic Fibrosis), and germ line therapy consists of changes made to genes that could alter future generations. The main controversy revolves around germ line therapies, as scientists have not yet determined the long-term consequences of this. Even though genetic engineering has been used in cloning unicellular organisms, plants, amphibians, and has led to significant advances in agriculture, industry, and medicine, many still argue that it will…show more content…
Because choosing desired traits and perfecting an individual, one could say that humans are trying to play the role of God. Changing what was intended to be, many believe, will have religious consequences, which is why they stray away from this. Those same people say that changing one thing will affect everything else, like a domino effect, having unknown consequences in the future. In terms of morals, the process of embryo selection includes discarding embryos that are not wanted, and are essentially killed, and the question is whether that embryo is considered a human being or not, similar to the conflict in abortions. Compassion is something that humans will always have, and this trait has caused millions of people to look down upon these procedures. Other research, such as purely offensive military intentions, also encourage regular society to show resentment to the procedure. Section 4- My

More about Arguments Against Genetic Engineering

Open Document