Hypothetical Situation (?)

[Eve]

I have nearly finished reading 'The Gift of Fear - Survival signs which protect us from violence' by Gavin De Becker. Aside from not being able to relate to gun crime senarios given within the book for employers.. though times seem to be changing within Europe. I have found this book insightful, accessible and honest.

 

Now, within the pages I found a comment which has been running through my mind. Gavin De Becker states that we will eventually be able to detect serial killers and the like via genetics someday. Apparently there are genetic traits which have already been found to exist within serial killers and assasins. I didnt know that.

 

My hypothetical (?) senario is simply; If we become privvy to such knowledge (which would scientifically be absolutely verifiable) should embryos found with identifying traits be aborted?

 

Thoughts?

[disgracian]

No.

 

Cheers,

D.

[Geishawhelk]

I completely agree with D.

 

What do you think, Eve?

[JamesM]

Actually, if we knew that we can go one step farther. We can sterilize those couples who will have the genetics to produce serial killers. No sense letting them produce if all they will produce will be killers.

 

And then we can eliminate alcoholism and other supposed addictions. And while we are at it...we can eliminate homosexuality (if it is genetic) and anything else undesirable through genetic manipulation prior to birth.

 

The perfect person will have arrived. We will make a perfect world without Go.d

[grogster]

It depends. If there's simply a genetic predisposition to serial psychopathic homicide (SPH), no need to abort. On the other hand, if there's a genetic certainty to SPH, abort the little sucker.

[Geishawhelk]

Actually, if we knew that we can go one step farther. We can sterilize those couples who will have the genetics to produce serial killers. No sense letting them produce if all they will produce will be killers.

Wouldn't it be better to euthanise people who are pre-disposed to such genetic flaws.....? (and on ad infinitem...! )

 

And then we can eliminate alcoholism and other supposed addictions. And while we are at it...we can eliminate homosexuality (if it is genetic) and anything else undesirable through genetic manipulation prior to birth.

 

The perfect person will have arrived. We will make a perfect world without Go.d

 

Oh nossireee. We'd f**k it up. Or we'd find a way to do it.

And if there was no way, we'd invent one......

 

Still waiting for Eve to tell us what she thinks....

I'd be interested.....

[Ronni_W]

If we become privvy to such knowledge (which would scientifically be absolutely verifiable) should embryos found with identifying traits be aborted?

Only if we can be sure that all the er, future individuals, being aborted would not just be playing out their (unknown-to-us) role in some sort of "Karmic Justice System".

 

But then. What when we can scientifically identify future racists...or vegans??? There is always a group for which some other group has a hate-on. Where would we want the line drawn, and who would we trust to draw it?

 

Interesting stuff to consider on a sunny Friday morning .

Have a good weekend, one and all.

Ronni

[quankanne]

If we become privvy to such knowledge (which would scientifically be absolutely verifiable) should embryos found with identifying traits be aborted?

 

no. Because then you – as a believer – are saying that you reserve the right to play God, and because you know better than God does, it's okay to eliminate his handiwork. Once you lose your moral framework, it gets easier and easier to impose your will and justify destroying that which you don't like.

[JamesM]

But the point is....we already abort babies every year and the only reason is as a form of birth control.

 

Why is it any worse to do so if there is actually a good reason for the abortion?

 

There truthfully is no reason not to if abortions are considered okay. It becomes the choice and right of the mother to decide the fate of the fetus. If abortions can not be legally prevented to choice, then abortions of genetically damaged babies cannot be prevented.

 

Think of all of the embryos that are already destroyed in the Infertility Clinics. How is this any different?

[ed-205]

Absolutely not. Eugenics has always been a nasty business.

[quankanne]

But the point is....we already abort babies every year and the only reason is as a form of birth control. Why is it any worse to do so if there is actually a good reason for the abortion?

 

since when does using a wrong action as the basis for a decision make that action "good"? It's taking justification further to suit someone's needs, IMO.

 

take the whole death penalty issue. I live in a state where we've got an express lane in the "kill the killer back" solution, and while I can see how putting someone to death *might* solve a particular problem, it's also saying that said killer has no right to redeem himself. What's the greater punishment – being given an injection and not really caring because you knew that was the pay-off for being convicted, or having an epiphany and coming to a full realization of what you did was so heinously wrong that you must make amends? Personally, I think it's the epiphany part, because otherwise we're putting to death someone who doesn't see how the wrong he did has hurt someone.

 

selectively aborting zygotes and fetuses just because they're "not right" is pretty much the same thing: You refuse to allow that speck of cells realize it's full potential. And if you claim to live by the moral law God provides, how can you destroy the very creature he loves, flawed or not?

[Eve]

Still waiting for Eve to tell us what she thinks....

I'd be interested.....

 

The topic creeps me out a bit..

 

On the one hand, there would be a visible responsibilty for 'Jerry Springer' type parents to never reproduce!! BUT this could never be enforced. Plus would not be relevant if the gene is latent in us all at some level. The suggestion in the book I am reading is that the gene is not latent within us all. It is a product by which the origins are not predictable, but the behaviour of those with the gene are.. they are killers.. So Grogster has got it in one really when he said -

 

'If there's simply a genetic predisposition to serial psychopathic homicide (SPH), no need to abort. On the other hand, if there's a genetic certainty to SPH' ....

 

I would hope that how the child is nurtured could outweigh any predisposition. But looking at our overflowing prisons, I would envisage that there would be high levels of abortion to a magnitude which would change the face of childbirth and parenting forever.

 

Gavin De Becker points out in his book that serial killers and the like are not monsters from the outset. Some researchers report that of 100% of those studied were abused, which is really messed up. So maybe abuse acts as like scar on tissue somehow within our genes? Which can be passed onto future generations but is only activated if the person is abused. Still some people kill because they enjoy it so the unpredictablity of the gene could outweigh any level of nurturing.. maybe?

 

Plus for those who choose to keep their child I am quite certain that they would be highly cautious around the child/children which would influence interactions.

 

I think that many people would give God a backseat on this one..

[Moose]

I think that many people would give God a backseat on this one..

Well....count me out of that crowd.

 

You've said it yourself Eve:

I would hope that how the child is nurtured could outweigh any predisposition.

AND IT DOES! If more parents put their Faith in Christ and instilled His Words, Values, and Morals into their children, they are more apt to put their Faith and Trust in the Same.

 

Unfortunately, the fact that our society wants to take a more scientific approach, (playing, "God") will lead to this:

there would be high levels of abortion to a magnitude which would change the face of childbirth and parenting forever.

We are naive as infinite beings to come to the conclusion that God can't change even those whom are, "genetically challenged"....

 

Case in point, Paul, (once known as Saul) who ABSOLUTELY loved killing Christians for the joy of it.....

 

Another is King David and his lust for women.....today's equivalent of porn addiction, yet he wound up being after God's Own Heart.....

 

There are more examples that we could/SHOULD learn from.....

[quankanne]

"if there is no moral Law Giver, there can be no moral law ... and we have no room to judge, because there is no basis for our judgment." – Frank Peretti (well, paraphrasing him from his book on bullying)

[D-Lish]

On the one hand, there would be a visible responsibilty for 'Jerry Springer' type parents to never reproduce!! BUT this could never be enforced.

 

No- you're right, that could not be enforced. But a mandatory parenting class could be beneficial to society as a whole.

 

We're jumping into that whole slippery slope arguement here. I have never seen that defense arguement as being on solid ground. It assumes human beings are not capable of discerning between positive change and outright ridiculousness. One must always remember that the slippery slope slides upwards to positive changes as well (abolishing slavery led to equality).

 

'If there's simply a genetic predisposition to serial psychopathic homicide (SPH), no need to abort. On the other hand, if there's a genetic certainty to SPH' ....

 

We all have genetic predispositions... Not everyone succombs. Environment and upbringing play a huge roll in the adult product.

We all have genes that make us susceptible to something.

 

 

Gavin De Becker points out in his book that serial killers and the like are not monsters from the outset. Some researchers report that of 100% of those studied were abused, which is really messed up. So maybe abuse acts as like scar on tissue somehow within our genes? Which can be passed onto future generations but is only activated if the person is abused. Still some people kill because they enjoy it so the unpredictablity of the gene could outweigh any level of nurturing.. maybe?

 

No, I think you hit the nail on the head when you said many serial killers and other violent criminals grew up with abuse. If you are abused as a child- your chances of becoming an abuser increase.

 

I think that many people would give God a backseat on this one

 

Can't speak about that side of things and how that would play out from a religious aspect. I can speak from a human viewpoint though and answer your original question with a firm "no". There is no way of mapping out a persons life from beginning to end based on genes.

 

Currently, women have a right to choose abortion in many places around the world. Many people have said, this practice will lead to murdering all "undesired" individuals including the elderly and handicapped. The slippery slope....

 

The slippery slope takes one aspect of change and theorizes that doing "A" will inevitably lead to "Z". Maybe what you are discussing here is like an "F" down the slope from legalizing abortion to gov't sanctioned selective murder (Z).

 

The problem with laws is that they are based on antiquity... and there are often things we cannot ever anticipate ever actually happening (think about the internet). So there is no basis to enforce new laws in such a rapidly progressive world that sees us in situations never dealt with in the past. If you could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt by mapping genes that a person would become a serial killer or a child molester- you'd be stepping into a whole new system of regulations and laws.

 

Legalized abortion based on a patients right to choose and state sanctioned abortions without consent is too much of a leap. That would be going from free state to big brother in zero to sixty. I'd never vote for a party that would support such a thing- nor would the majority.

 

However- think of it this way... Our system of laws do not include anticipating the future. What if one day time travel is discovered- or an alien race wishes to peacefully integrate in our world. I know it sounds crazy.... but who would have anticipated the concept of a world wide web 20 years ago, going into space, stem cell research...but it has happened.

 

If, one day- science progresses to the point of being definitive... then I'd think about how wiping out a certain gene that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that a tiny embryo was going to be an adult monster... I would rethink how I wanted my gov't to protect me from that.

[Trialbyfire]

If you consider how DNA works (layman's version), there's DNA that controls the DNA that defines us. Add nurture on top of this and I would seriously doubt we could ever isolate what causes a group of actions that turns into serial killing.

 

If we ever get this capable, I would hope that we could figure out a way to somehow disable the impulse to keep it latent.

[Moose]

If you consider how DNA works (layman's version), there's DNA that controls the DNA that defines us. Add nurture on top of this and I would seriously doubt we could ever isolate what causes a group of actions that turns into serial killing.

 

If we ever get this capable, I would hope that we could figure out a way to somehow disable the impulse to keep it latent.

As far as I'm concerned, There is no such as, "we".

 

God knew us even before our very fibers were being woven in our Mother's womb.

 

Created for His Purpose(s)....whether we see it or not, on our time plane, or His....

 

There are many instances were some existed to glorify God in one way or another regardless if we deem them viable for existance...

 

It's not OUR place to govern who exists....or who does not.....period.

[Trialbyfire]

As far as I'm concerned, There is no such as, "we".

 

God knew us even before our very fibers were being woven in our Mother's womb.

 

Created for His Purpose(s)....whether we see it or not, on our time plane, or His....

 

There are many instances were some existed to glorify God in one way or another regardless if we deem them viable for existance...

 

It's not OUR place to govern who exists....or who does not.....period.

That's your belief. My belief is that if there is a God, he gave us a brain and free will to use it. If he wanted robots, he would have created robots.

[Touche]

I think God did create robots. Some people are so cold and have absolutely no feelings for another. They're robots, pure and simple. They're cold.

 

They're the kind of people who can never really make close connections with anyone.

 

Yes, God creates all kinds.

[Moose]

That's your belief. My belief is that if there is a God, he gave us a brain and free will to use it. If he wanted robots, he would have created robots.

And you would EXACTLY right....just so you know...

[Touche]

Yes, he created robots...some of whom choose to use their free will and others who choose not to.

[Trialbyfire]

Of course there are the overly-emotional, irrational types that are all out there with zero impulse control.

 

It's better that there's a balance. Free will but control over free will, so your actions aren't consistently abusive, harmful or malicious.

[Moose]

sorry..multi tasking....as usual...

 

If man didn't have a brain, we wouldn't have free will, combine the two and add a dash of evil and PRESTO....you have the FALL of man.

 

Hence, the antidote....

 

Christ

 

See why some are chosen?

 

See why this recipe had to be prepared from day 1?

 

See NOW why the end result is like dross being skimmed from the pot?

[D-Lish]

As far as I'm concerned, There is no such as, "we".

 

God knew us even before our very fibers were being woven in our Mother's womb.

 

It's not OUR place to govern who exists....or who does not.....period.

 

Moose... is that a dancing with the stars avatar??? See- you'd shoot loose dogs running about your property... I'd shoot Chloris Leechman if I found her on my deck after dark.... JK;)

 

Okay- but I will disagree that there is such thing as "we"... majority makes up rules. That must indicate that the "majority" of people have a conscience and act as an entity. We may disagree on the derivative of the conscience... but not always on our conclusions stemming from that.

 

I tend to think of the crusades.... that was genocide! Catholics in charge made that decision to engage in murder, so they did essentially govern who existed and who didn't... in that example- it was catholics deciding that non-catholics were not worthy.

 

If the reasoning behind that is god's will is foretold... then it stands to reason that if a law is instated that all "undesirables" should be killed... then such a thing is out of our hands and merely a product of a "grand" design.

 

So, if abortion is legal and taking place about the world... in your logic, does it mean it's just what god has planned?

 

Laws are a combination of antiquity, religion, morality, ridiculosity....

If there is a grand design, there must be reason to all the madness...?

 

Can we agree if Ms. Leechman crawled on our back porch looking for food we would perhaps take a shot at her??? It's only going to be funny if your avatar is a dancing with the stars reference.

 

Anyway- you know I respect your opinion- just interested in what you think about what I said.

[Touche]

If being overly-emotional, irrational and having "zero emotional control" describes me...then all the more power to me! Never had it better in my life! I'll take it!

 

Yeah, 'cause everyone who knows me knows I'm so malicious and such a bitch. Right. No balance in my life. Right.

 

Look within, look within.

 

There's a reason for the situation one finds themselves in life. It's not by accident.

 

We're not victims.

 

We all dictate our own destinies, don't we?