Summary: Evolution In The Age Of Genomes

DNA are like legos, they work together to build the traits of living things. They are the building blocks of the body. Many scientists today have been figuring out different ways to manipulate, change, add, and subtract genes from the DNA in living things; this is process is called genetic engineering. Some of the living things being experimented on are live people, plants, and animals. Today scientists are debating on the morals of genetic engineering due to what the community thinks of it, because of the christian 's viewpoint of genetic engineering. To some christians it may pose a threat to their, but to others it may be a blessing or a gift. Genetic Engineering is a growing breakthrough in the science community. “Over the last 30 years, the field of genetic engineering has developed rapidly due to the greater understanding of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as the chemical double helix code from which genes are made. The term genetic engineering is used to describe the process by which the genetic makeup of an organism can be altered using “recombinant DNA technology.” This involves the use of laboratory tools to insert, alter, or cut out pieces of DNA that contain one or more genes of interest.”(Pocket K No. 17) Scientist have yet to unlock the full potential of genetic engineering, but the information and the use they have found for it today has reached farther than anyone 's expectations.

The second reason genetic engineering is unethical and should be stopped is due to the fact that it involves reconstructing nature, which is not the job of society. Genetic engineering could potentially breed new animal and plant diseases, new sources of cancer, novel epidemics and other serious problems in which nature cannot conquer (Epstein 4). Many scientists argue that genetic engineering has a positive outcome, and occurrences such as diseases or other casualties in nature’s balance should be ignored (Bereano 18). Co-discoverer of the DNA code and Nobel Laureate, Dr. James D. Watson, has continuously disregarded the risks of genetic engineering (Bereano 19). In 1979, he wrote the following about possible diseases that might be inadvertently created through genetic engineering: “I would not spend a penny trying to see if they exist'; (Bereano 19). The above statement clearly shows that society cannot depend on the “high priests'; of science to make ethical decisions (Bereano 18). Too much is at stake.

Gregory Stock, in his article Choosing Our Genes, asserts that at this point not ethics are important, but rather the future of genetic technology. Stock supports his conclusion by providing powerful examples of how genetic modifications can benefit our population anywhere from correcting genes at the time of conception to extending lifespan. He wants to inform his audience about all of the benefits of genetic technology in order to prove that there are way more advantages in this technology that are highly desirable by people of different ages. He reaches his readers by writing a very detailed yet coherent article that brings awareness to various groups of people from parents to be to older populations.

The world we live in is advancing more and more every day. We are beginning to exceed boundaries and reach new limits. Science and Technology has come a long way since Copernicus said that the sun was the center of the universe. Science fiction is slowly coming to life. We are building robots that are extremely similar to humans, modifying genes, and creating clones. Authors wrote about these abstract ideas not too long ago, but at the time they seemed far-fetched. Scientific and technological advancement may be for good or for evil. The good side is the advancements in medicine that could limit the risk of a particular disease or even cure one. The potentially bad side is the steps we may take to get there without knowing the long-term effect. In Michael Bess’s article “Blurring the Boundary Between Person and Product,” he discusses the advancement of genetic

Gene technology carries with it social and ethical implications—many of which engender personal views and discussion.

Within the last 100 years or so scientists have many valuable discoveries that have benefited mankind. These discoveries include the discovery of genes. Scientists have discovered what makes humans so unique from one another. However, with this newly gained knowledge of the function of genes comes the ability to alter or change them. Just imagine in the not so near future, you and your partner want to start a family together. You travel to your local gene councillor to pick the physical and characteristic traits of your child. That’s right. With the knowledge that has been gained about genes, scientists can “create” the perfect child genetically. The thought is scary. Nature has always taken us down the right path but are we really ready

George Church and Ed Regis: the two authors attempt to depict a clear picture of what the future is likely to be as a result of scientific engineering of the genome (Church & Regis, 2012). Church and Regis attempt to analyze the pros and cons of the use of synthetic biology for re-genesis (Church & Regis, 2012). This study involves the alteration of the human genome to extent human life. The two authors suggested that in order for this to become possible, there is the need to redoing the human genome if there is any hope of increasing human longevity. They continued to suggest that germ cells have the ability of promoting human immorality (Church & Regis, 2012). To support this, studies suggest that the germ line of the sperm and egg cells

The genetic engineering of human genes has been a long-time dream of many scientists and researchers, to me exact just under a century. Depending on who you talk to they will tell you different things; Futurists will tell you that it has the ability to change the world for the better. Some medical professionals may say that we could be cured of all our genetic disease, making us healthier, stronger, and more invincible. However, some of the greatest minds on the planet have their concerns, and rightfully so. These world acclaimed scientists are questioning the ethicality of such genetic modifying process, as well as the technology presenting unwanted repercussions difficult to resolve. Against strong advice of these warnings, development in this field has continued and even grown. Leading to the invention of editing tools like CRISPR/Cas9, which make it inexpensive, quick, and simple to conduct genetic modifications. So are we knowingly opening a Pandora’s box of complexities we can never solve?

These enhancements would improve basic human cognition and emotions as well as human bodily capacities, but at what cost? The consequences outweigh the pros of altering human genomes. As a nation, we have decided to stray away from such technology that could infringe on our morals. However, it is understood that making a decision for every single human being on Earth is a stretch—some may agree and some may not. Regardless, enhancing our genomes is a phenomenon that many have aimed to one day see come true. Scientists have developed technology and conducted research to one day achieve the idea of changing or creating the perfect human being, but they understand that actually going through with the process brings up whether it is ethically right or not. Whether such a process will help humans become “better,” it is not desired by a mass population. Do these enhancements actually guarantee that humans will become a better and more well-rounded

The genome is generally considered sacrosanct and any modification to it is deemed “playing god”. For some, this opposition roots from religious faith and for others, it could be social and developing as a retort to science advancing too quickly for public moral compass to shift. Furthermore, a certain level of uncertainty exists in any scientific approach but any unintended consequences in genome modification or misuse could be devastating. For a non-scientific public, this could create a “Frankenstein”. The report does not delve deep into these moral, social and religious views that account for most of the opposition to gene

On the most surface level, human genetic engineering and human genetic modification are a new and rapidly developing field of science that deals with directly altering the DNA (genetic makeup) of a living human cell. From early science fiction to the present day, taking control of humans’ gen es and directing the flow of evolution has been a subject of debate for many people. Human genetic engineering or HGE tends to bring up thoughts of dystopian futures where altering DNA has unexpectedly resulted in horrible mutant humans that can’t survive and thus the human race perishes, but this is not necessarily the outcome. Since genetic engineering is an emerging field of science, there are still many moral and ethical issues that need to be addressed before continuing research. Atheists and theists both have valid reasons to support / resist the continuation of this field of science. For the purpose of this paper, it will be assumed the reader has a reasonable understanding of the terms atheism, theism, DNA, genes, genome, and how a persons DNA (their genotype) essentially dictates the physical appearance and abilities that person portrays (their phenotype).

Although the Human Genome Project has allowed for enormous amounts of new scientific breakthroughs and has the potential for many more opportunities, there are many dilemmas with the use of its information and much opposition towards it. One of the biggest scientific topics heavily debated is whether or not to use the information provided from the Human Genome Project. If it is ruled ethical to use the information from the Human Genome Project, the next biggest question would be whether to use certain aspects and pieces of information from the Human Genome Project or to use it entirely.

With the advent of Darwin’s theory of evolution came curiosity; What would the next stage of human evolution look like? Then came the discovery of genes, and mankind’s curiosity was piqued; What if we could alter our genes to our liking? However, now that we are finally on the verge of cracking the genetic code, we must ask ourselves; Should we use this technology? This single question has fueled a fiery debate among a variety of groups in modern times, but where does the heart of the debate lie? One could argue that there is an issue of fact, as we don’t know all the potential applications human genetic engineering (henceforth called HGE) could have, but many uses of the technology have already been identified. Therefore, the heart of the debate lies in the quality of these applications and whether we should allow the research of HGE to continue.

Human Genetic Engineering is the alteration of genetic material. As science is improving as so does our need to make the world a “better” place. Technological advancements have let us cloned many animals but the next step you say? The next step is human engineering, as humans of perfection; we are always trying to find ways to make things better than others. They are able to manipulate the human genome and to cure the world of diseases. Scientists are able to make the perfect humans, stronger, faster, smarter, and no deformity. As humans should react, many problems rise up about “what being human really means?” Science is moving faster than moral understanding. Values, morals, and our humanity are thrown at

The chance of developing breast cancer, colon cancer, certain thyroid cancers, neurological conditions, and some mental illnesses can be diagnosed even in childhood. What does this knowledge in terms of privacy, self determination and self-image of our patients?. What is the ethical guidelines for genetic testing? . We are able to improve the genetics of life forms through genetic engineering. Bacteria could be changed to produce useful products such as insulin and other medications. It is conceivable that the human genome can be changed by inserting new genes or deletion of genes that produce pathologies. New skills for human beings, now found only in animals and plants could be introduced to improve our performance. We could run like a gazelle, stop our breath for an hour as cetaceans or retain information like a computer. We could remove the gene for schizophrenia or change the color of eyes or hair, skin pigmentation or family characteristics such as a large nose. Action could restore tumor suppressor genes to stop its growth in cancer patients. But who decides what to do or what is better?. Who decides whether it is appropriate to change the order of the genetic bases maintained by millions of years, just based on current concepts of beauty, diet, longevity, optimal functioning and biodiversity?. The genome is not as mysterious as before, but its complexity still defies understanding which would imply a change in genetic