Should we breed human beings for health, strength, intelligence, beauty etc?

Question

Hello onelight--yes, I'm interested in a lot of different things. But it's amazing how many people think that a person who asks a question has some kind of agenda. (They may have, but not all the time.)

Answer 1

No, that's immoral, we're people not machines or plants. What are you thinking, to start your own race? That is disturbing!

Answer 2

I notice that many people are against this whole idea. But I must ask you, is your goal for the betterment of humanity? If so we may be on our way to putting genetically superior qualities in our species without the need for breeding.

If you believe in the theory of evolution, then you believe that there is all ready eugenics going on. Its a part of the natural world. Natural selection. The survival of the fittest.

We, however, have evolved to the point to make conscious decisions of our selves.

I don't think we should exterminate a race, but we can genetically engineer future human beings to have certain traits. We can promote genes that give way to better intelligence, physical strength, better immune systems and be more resistive to genetically cancerous conditions.

I support the idea of genetically engineering humans for the sake of humanity. If we make humans more empathetic, more humanitarian, we might be that much closer to having a species that does not starve millions for the sake of a few.

Our species just may last a little bit longer.

To get past the freedom of eugenics problem, there can be a choice. Do you want a baby that can have a better chance of survival in this day in age, or just a natural one with much lower odds of getting anywhere?

After a few generations I would suspect that after seeing the results, more people will be for genetic engineering.

Answer 3

Breeding superhuman beings is the beginning of the end. Eliminating natural human life to make way for artificial life will result in a lack of compassion that is required to preserve life.

Once we are convinced to trust a group of people to determine life that is worthy to exist, greed, corruption and vanity will also destroy the artificial being.

On the other hand, health, strength, beauty and intelligence are all human standards that a group of people are willing to accept. Even if we allow artificial interference, what’s to thwart someone in the future from deciding the new and improved human is not good enough and must be replaced with something else?

Just because media and corporations (wanting to make a profit) tell us something is better, doesn’t mean it really is!

Answer 4

We naturally breed for all of these things when we find ourselves drawn or attracted to certain people. There are certain physical and behavioral cues we are all set to notice at a level below that of the conscious. However, that is very different from people purposefully drawing up a chart of people with desirable genetic qualities then breeding them like show dogs! That is repugnant, and it takes the people's choice out of the equation. One is nature, the other is turning over the free will of a group of people to the will of one, to the will of a person who has decided they alone know what it is to be human. No human being is qualified to make that decision.

Answer 5

No we shouldn't, that call eugenics, that isn't something that should be done. Now if you're speaking of being able to weed out things just a alcoholism,, parkinson's, and birth defects that's also considered eugenics, but I don't really see a problem with that honestly. I think that's different then trying to make designer babies so that they physically look a certain way.

Answer 6

Sounds to me like someone believes the gene pool needs to be cleansed. Somebody wants to start a master race. If you want to see change how about you strive for strength of character. Perhaps we'd have far fewer problems in the world.

Answer 7

This questions have been asked & practiced - the "Yes" answer has a disastrous outcome !

Human is much more complex !
We can NOT understand by its parts but as a Whole (science has made tremendous progress on understanding 'Parts' but very little about 'Whole')

Cheers

Answer 8

I don't generally do this...but, I read your past questions and answers before I answered here. You do have an eclectic mind.

Did you really expect any other reply other than " no " to this question ? Interesting thought of why you posted and asked this question here.

Just for notation . . . my reply to your question is also no. Reason ? That's found in the other replies here. Did you expect anything less.
.

Answer 9

We do so anyway even though most will deny it.

Do you choose a healthy mate, or a sick mate?
Do you choose an intelligent spouse, or a challenged spouse?
Do you choose a weak partner, or a strong partner?
Do you choose an attractive individual, or an ugly one?

We practice eugenics in our own way.

Answer 10

Hitler had this idea long before you were born. That's why he killed millions of people he deemed inferior. Ironically, he would not have passed his own test. People are not dogs or horses; breeding them for anything is a disgusting idea.

Answer 11

Nice