From: Michael M. Butler (butler@comp-lib.org)
Date: Fri Dec 01 2000 - 10:38:51 MST
We need some sort of "control natural" law, too (ref: Papa Heinlein).
Think hybrid vigor, vintage seed catalogs, etc. Carrying on with the
analogy, selecting for beauty or too particular a kind of "intelligence"
could lead to monocultures that are vulnerable to Ponzi schemes, etc.
"Michael S. Lorrey" wrote:
>
> Brian D Williams wrote:
> >
> > >From: GBurch1@aol.com
> >
> > >The survey showed that 67% of respondents feel embryo selection is
> > >all right in such a case. However, 72% said parents should not be
> > >able to ``choose to have a child who is good-looking", and
> > >two-thirds were against picking a "gifted" child. Sixty-four
> > >percent opposed choosing the sex of a child. Respondents were
> > >split on whether it is acceptable to pick an embryo free of
> > >genetic disease--48% were for it, while 44% opposed it.
> >
> > >Overall, men gave more support than women did to parents' ability
> > >to choose embryos. (Reuters)
> >
> > Geez, what a species... despite the fact that almost every time we
> > look at another human we are making potential genetic choices.
> >
> > No, No, it's better to play the lottery than invest...
>
> Thats right. Investing takes hard work (thinking) and 'lots of money'
> (i.e. money many would prefer spending on beer and smokes). Anyone can
> play the lottery on spare change. ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:32:09 MST