The positive side of the argument, although is fairly plausible, often relates to unknown facts surrounding the process. The argument on the side for genetic engineering to go ahead is a valid one, however only really has legs to stand on due to its power of healing medically, because human instinct does not like the idea of tampering with nature and other such nature ethical issues. The thing that makes the subject interesting, furthermore, is that human instinct also does not particularly like the idea of many people dying, when there may be a cure for their suffering.
There are things that have already been proven by scientists to be possible in the subject of recombinant DNA technology. For transplants, pigs can be used to grow organs, such as the heart, lungs, liver etc. without fear of rejection. Fuel can be made by a bacterium that can digest nearly all plastic and waste material and turn it into a synthetic material that could provide this source. In plants, modified grain crops can be given higher nutritional values, making them healthier, more resistant to frost, having low water requirements, the ability to resist disease and also the much lower cost of specialised fertilisers.
There are many tests that have been carried out on animals and plants. In one case referring to animals, using the recombinant DNA technology, a gene hornlessness, known as the poll gene, has been identified. It is morally wrong for humans to surgically remove horns from cattle to prevent them from fighting with each other or the farmer. Scientists could introduce the gene into all varieties of cattle, obviating the need for de-horning. This would greatly enhance the cattle’s life by reducing suffering. In the case of plants, it is morally and ethically wrong for farmers to spray crops with insecticides and dip animals to cut down on insect infestations. However, the needless suffering of the animals could be stopped by genetically engineering, to repel the insects which make their lives miserable. Likewise, the damage which the toxic insecticides are subjecting the land and people too could be stopped by genetically modified crops, which resist insect damage. All life is sacred and mankind has inhabited areas and built on land, stealing valuable animal habitats, many of these species are endangered as a result. It would be morally wrong to allow these species to survive in previously uninhabitable places, or perhaps, even help them reproduce more readily.
If we look at the statement from a Christian’s point of view, the use of DNA technology would be morally wrong, even for the sole benefit of humans. Religion, will always be a difficult topic for scientists to try and avoid and is a very difficult subject to touch on through science. Christians believe that we are all God’s creatures and should be treated equally. That being so, if Christianity thought genetic engineering was morally acceptable, it should benefit life of all kinds. The fact remains that, since the Renaissance, scientific advances have been sullied by Christian beliefs and Christianity is opposed to scientists playing God.
In the cases where people’s diseases and disability are healed, you could say that, if someone lacks the right DNA for the future of our species, why slowly help it on its way to the rubbish heap. If we look at the situation of someone who is about to have signs of a heart disease, where you will usually have to wait for signs to appear, with genetic engineering, you could stop it the sufferer from ever experiencing it.
Transplantation is another interesting topic for discussion. This is certainly a difficult issue to handle, but cloning could be the answer to many problems encountered by organ transplantation in trying to find organs that do not risk being rejected by recipient’s immune system at the insertion of new organs. Cloning could be very influential in helping bone marrow transplant patients, because this is a major operation and it is very difficult to find a compatible donor. There was a similar situation to cloning, where no actual cloning took place, but the principles and idea of giving birth to heal another individual were applied. In June 1991, where Mary and Abe Ayalas announced that they conceived another child just so that they could provide compatible bone marrow for their daughter, who needed a bone marrow transplant. It is very hard to find a compatible donor, even in the same family because the bone marrow tissue and blood type has to match closely enough to the recipient. Miraculously, in this situation, the bone marrow was compatible, however, ethicists question what would have happened if a test showed that the donor child had an incompatible blood type. Would the child have been aborted so that the couple could try again? There are actually many cases similar to this, but this is a good example.
In conclusion, potentially millions of lives could be saved, however this may never happen and is only currently acceptable in practice in many instances and there still remains many ethical issues surrounding the subject regarding religion, risks being taken, people fooling around with nature and animals. Potentially, many diseases could be far less common or possibly even wiped out in some cases, people could be born healthy, Transplanted genes could be developed in crops that are resistant to environmentally friendly herbicides and pesticides, allowing farmers to have weed and insect control while not harming the environment. Without disability or illness, the overwhelming cost of treating these diseases could go down, transplants could be available on demand and hospital waiting lists could be abandoned. The negatives, however, balance alongside the positives and provoke a stronger reaction to people who oppose recombinant DNA technology because of their moral values. Negatives include the possibility of new diseases being (possibly incurable) made during the process of healing, a perfect human being may lose their humanity and it may only mostly be available to the rich, which could create a new system of class. Genetic engineering would effect the environment and economical health aspects. Although greatly frowned upon, genetic engineering is already having an impact on biological research, medicine, industry and agriculture, however Mankind could benefit greater from these innovations if it was more accepted by the majority.
Sources
websites
http://www.wblcoll.vic.edu.au/isp/genetic.htm- contains scientific journals
http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/cellmicro/prescott/student/chap15.mhtml
http://www.gene.com/ae/AB/BA/
http://starklab.slu.edu/Coulter/genetics/cloning.html
Britannica Encyclopaedia
Books
Babel’s Shadow- Genetic Technologies in a Fracturing Society (contains scientific journals)
Author: Peter Moore
A Brave New World?
Author: John Scally
The Frankenstein Syndrome
Autor: Bernard E Rollin