>>565159
>Now I argue against gene therapy during this age because the hubris, atheism, and pride of scientists today are too dangerous to possess such a tool like gene therapy.
>Think of what would happen if a greedy corp like Monsanto creates a gene that accidentally destroys
For the most part, these two particular groups have only a few obstacles if they strongly want altering genes (especially in country like America, where it's not illegal). Currently, China is trying to create a perfect human with gene therapy and cloning, but I only want it to be allow for medical purposes.
>If we were in more Christian times, I would have no problem with gene therapy.
>While it's true the same could be said of space exploration, there have been many high-profile Christians who have influenced that area, like van Braun and Korolev, and so far the only evils to come from space exploration have been weapons of war, totalitarian surveillance and astro-Darwinistic propaganda, all three of which Christians and others have been fighting back.
Then start converting the majority to Christ, dammit!
>but it could be other factors causing them to be leery of it and books where designer babies/gene editing have been portrayed as something negative, sometimes kicking off a zombie apocalypse.
There are already designer baby programs in places like China. I just want the availability of gene therapy for medical reasons.
>i'm on board with it as long as human embryos aren't killed.
I'm glad at least someone else agrees.
>>565167
You can test on mice well before human trials (which are voluntary) take place to prefect a serum.
>understanding how blacks just can't seem to stop fucking up their neighborhood
>Pol
Also, it's because many of them don't have good father figures.