[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / acme / animu / arepa / ecopol / fur / leftpol / tacos / vg ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: e2329df44b4fd8c⋯.jpg (87.45 KB, 900x506, 450:253, 5b4dbd46dda4c8cf0b8b4587.jpg)

eb618e No.676858

https://www.rt.com/uk/433461-genetic-editing-embryos-acceptable/

>Genetically modifying an embryo’s DNA to prevent heritable diseases could be “ethically acceptable”, a landmark report has claimed. Critics, however, say it would pave the way for ‘designer babies’.

>The Nuffield Council of Bioethics, an independent charitable body investigating the ethics of certain biological and medical developments, said in a report that while it does not support overhauling current legislation so that embryo gene editing can be carried out, it does not mean the UK should fall short of doing so in the future.

>“Whilst there is still uncertainty over the sorts of things genome editing might be able to achieve, or how widely its use might spread, we have concluded that the potential use of genome editing to influence the characteristics of future generations is not unacceptable in itself,” said Karen Yeung, a professor of law, ethics and informatics at Britain’s Birmingham University, who chaired the panel.

>The body did stress, however, that gene editing may only be possible with consideration of two overarching principles: that the procedure be carried out to “secure the welfare” of the individual involved, and only in circumstances were it cannot be expected to trigger social division.

>But the report was shot down by some who claim it risks paving the way for the approval of so-called ‘designer babies’. Commenting on the council’s review of genome editing, Dr David King, Director of Human Genetics Alert, described its findings as “an absolute disgrace”, noting decades-long international bans on eugenic genetic engineering.

>“But this group of scientists thinks it knows better, even though there is absolutely no medical benefit to this whatever,” King told the BBC. “The Nuffield Council doesn't even bother to say no to outright designer babies. The people of Britain decided 15 years ago that they don't want GM food. Do you suppose they want GM babies?”

What is /christian/'s view on this? On one hand it would drastically improve the quality of life for a child who would otherwise be born with crippling ailments, but on the other it could be considered a perversion of God's creation.

30c552 No.676861

It would be alright in a perfect world if men were not fallen, sinful creatures. Genome editing will be used for good at first, but as our understanding of DNA increases, and as people get used to genome editing in rare cases, people will inevitably get used to it in all cases. It's like how abortion was supposed to be rarely used, until it wasn't.


f5796c No.676896

File: b0907fdbbee9b56⋯.png (28.72 KB, 485x443, 485:443, SA.png)


c6ce86 No.676910

>>676861

This. If we were good, then we would only use it to eliminate heritable diseases; but a mans hubris knows no bound and soon he will try to play God.

It reminds me of a short-story. Genetic engineering goes sky-rocketed and it was seemingly good at first. Then many groups protests and demands to have their slice of humanity pie. Feminists cry to reduce aggression and sex drive in men to reduce 'rape'; parents wishes their children would listen and obey and easier to raise; etc.

Three generations later the teenagers are like household pets, cats and dogs, nonsensical and animalistic. The older generations has only a few years to unwinnie the pooh their sins and sins of the father before humanity gone extinct by looking for the pure human and get their genetics. The unaltered are far and few and mostly probably died when the (((media))) screams all the pure breeds are terrorists, luddites, and stuffs so tough bloody luck.

Everything that a fallen thing such as a man touches are bound to be winnie the poohed. Nature, the church, and even ourselves. The biggest case for why we NEED God.


cd02bc No.676916

>>676858

Imagine the synagogue of satan getting control over something like that. Very troubling; Especially considering the policies they maintain now already.


283dab No.677002

>>676858

Monkey's paw.


a1195f No.677111

File: 455d6db5c47af19⋯.gif (3.35 MB, 415x212, 415:212, i was not ready for that.gif)


e0b216 No.677134

File: f7647a7fe3142ab⋯.png (33.57 KB, 348x330, 58:55, 1530362112047.png)

>just like a superhero maaan. All the things we see in the movies are coming true!


3de208 No.677272

What does the slogan ‘designer babies’ even mean?


c6ce86 No.677296

>>677272

Term from sci-fi films and books. Means the babies that are born with chosen attributes by someone else (parents, etc.). From the colours of their eyes, their skin, handedness up to their talents; most often to gear them towards "perfection" or certain vocation or as much good as the money can buy through genetic engineering.


c8cfe9 No.677300

>>676861

Genome editing will be hijacked, at some point, to make all GM people susceptible to an engineered disease. Once a large enough amount of people are GM'd that the one-world-order people can decrease the world population to what they want instantly, they'll release it and take firmer control during the ensuing havoc. Of course, those of us smart enough to avoid GM or only do solely home-brew GM will survive… but what a world.


411ad3 No.677304

>embryos are genetically modified

>baby comes out physically retarded and in severe pain

>oh well lets just euthanise it lol

Atheists truly are disgusting


244662 No.677330

>>676858

>The catholic nation of Ireland votes for abortion

>Babies become the next accessory for the vanity of women through handpicked traits.

Those two things combined definitely constitute the rejection of God's will. In the case of abortion you reject God's gift of life, and in the case of designer babies you reject the idea that God should have anything to do with how your baby turns out, because "I know better".

Seriously, can the end come soon enough?

Oh, Holy Father, cleanse this world from the vain and the proud.


6f59f0 No.677631

I have a serious question. I think it's obviously wrong to edit the genes of the embryo, but is it wrong to edit the genes of meiotic line? Like the sperm or eggs?

Those aren't alive like embryo, but i dont know?

this has been pestering me for some time because i don't want to pass on my myriad genetic issues.


41b75a No.677673

>>677657

Heresy? Heresy is a false statement. A fictional creature is just an idea, not a statement. That said, trying to create one via genetic engineering is certainly sinful, especially using a human.


255c9e No.677679

>>677673

>Heresy is a false statement.

This is heresy.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / acme / animu / arepa / ecopol / fur / leftpol / tacos / vg ]