The biotech debate is ongoing. For some of us who found out eight years ago or more about it the debate has been scant and is long overdue... by Michael
(libertarian)
Monday, March 10, 2008
Argument I
Personally I subscribe to the premise that an all-knowing and all- wise Creator God established barriers between species so that they could not naturally cross-breed for reasons understood only entirely by Him and for now beyond our comprehension. It is the Natural Order of Things which He established. As mankind in foolish arrogance and unadmitted ignorance continues to artificially trespass these natural barriers which God has established for His good reasons what might be the [near] future consequences of our violating them?--I'm afraid that one day soon we will begin to find out...
Argument II
Even viewing this from the flip-side of the atheistic/evolutionist stance; dare we put our feeble, meddling hand into millions and millions of years of natural selection which has led to the current state of bio-diversity? Evidently in the 'survival of the fittest' scenario which this encompasses there was sufficient cause for barriers to develop which prevented cross-species transfer of genetic material. How can we undertake to do this thing without reckoning on unexpected and potentially disastrous consequences and the unraveling of 'millions and millions of years' of the development of the existing natural order of things?
Argument III
It is also very difficult to imagine approval in this matter by those who subscribe to the many New Age, shamanistic 'man as a part of Nature' belief systems. In finding mans' place within the natural web of life I cannot see it, from this point of view, being the dicing and slicing and splicing and rearranging and reordering of the natural order of things.
The Source of it, then...
The only source of this insidious impetuousness must then be pure Humanism, i.e. man as god(s); man as the ultimate intelligence, wisdom and force--and I'm sorry, but they'll not sell me on that bill of goods either!
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 79
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Michael only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Michael is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Here you will find several scholarly articles relating to your subject by Ph.D's in microbiology etc.
I believe that the principles for the general theory of organic evolution include not only natural selection and survival of the fittest, but mutations adding genetic material. So, in a sense the evolutionist believes we got here through natural genetic tampering already.
Posted By: Scott from Oregon
Date: 2008-03-10 23:16:25
"Personally I subscribe to the premise that an all-knowing and all- wise Creator God established barriers between species so that they could not naturally cross-breed for reasons understood only entirely by Him and for now beyond our comprehension. It is the Natural Order of Things which He established..."
So you start out by declaring that you use "magic" and "wishful thinking" and "zero evidence belief structures" as your methodology, and then you want people to take your scientific discourse seriously?
What if I started out declaring I believed in Santa Clause and then tried to convince you that reindeer were smarter than elves?
Now they are creating life from chemistry sets. Billionaire scientist J Craig Venter created synthetic life in his lab this year. And now a prominent futurologist suspects that it may be able to compete with natural life. See http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;329/5987/52 for the research, http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/may/20/craig-venter-synthetic-life-form for a summary, and http://www.adoptalag.com/sci-tech/frontiers-in-biology-i/ for the futurologist's comments.
What safeguards are in place to prevent scientists from doing dangerous and abhorrent research? What can the layperson do to prevent megalomaniacs from populating the world in their own image?
I do believe that there is a creator of some sort, that this universe didn't come from nothing. But I also think that this creator has never been accurately described on this earth. (33% of the world are christians, not including the non-religious people). This would mean (in Christian terms) that more than 66% of the world is going to hell.
Now, not all genetic engineering is crossing breads with animals like some science fiction novel. Genetic engineering (that I support) would ensure your child would not have down syndrome. It would be possible to remove the gene that correlates to addictions (gambling, smoking, drinking, drugs... ect). Above all else, it would ensure your child had a high quality life.
I understand your beliefs, because I came from a strong christian family. But one aspect of life that is normally NEVER considered is that religion has caused the most blood shed on the face of this earth. If God loved us, as we are told, than WE would be better off (for our sake, and His conscience) to not have religion at all.
I'm not trying to change your opinion. These are nothing but facts from a logical person.
It's a rediculous argument that evolution is false because species can't interbreed; for one thing, it implies evolution teaches such interbreeding is required; which further implies the author has little knowledge of evolution.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
