Gattacagenics?
Ross backs down from the semantics, but charges forth with the substance on the entire abortion-eugenics-biotechnology-progressivism debate.
In the case of Gattaccagenics, that’s where the logic of Roe-style reproductive rights will carry progressives, I predict – to open-ended opposition to any attempt to restrict genetically-selective abortion and (eventually) genetic engineering in utero, whether it’s intended to eliminate Down’s Syndrome today, or autism tomorrow, or homosexuality or a predisposition to cancer or what-have-you the day after that.
Two things, its unclear how genetic engineering in utero is really all that objectionable. From a pro-life standpoint, it should even be preferable to selective abortions, because the fetuses are altered, not destroyed. Moreover, it seems absurd to object to engineering a fetus with Down syndrome or autism to not have those diseases. Hell, it would be near unconscionable to not “engineer” the fetus in those situations. I feel people like Ross should welcome the engineering of fetuses in utero – it allows parents to avoid being saddled with an unfair, random burden while preserving the life of the fetus. Of course, this engineering is still far off – at least in the way Ross describes.
Another thing – when reading pro-choice “liberal eugenics” opponents like Michael Sandel, or any liberal eugenics skeptics, I can’t shake the feeling that they are being awfully imperious. Their celebration of the wonder and mystery of parenthood doesn’t seem to grapple with the fact that many parents don’t have the resources, desire or energy to raise children with crippling genetic diseases. Also, Sandel and co. constantly talk about “Promethean ambitions” and “exalted place for human beings in the cosmos” when discussing this whole host of issues. This annoying vocabulary seems to be a classic case of what happens when philosophers and intellectuals approach an issue like this. For the people who actually practice liberal eugenics, they do not think of themselves as Prometheus or pursuing some Progressive Historical telos the cosmos, instead it’s the aggregation of many parents individual choices for them and their families. To ascribe greater notions – just because that’s how philosophers and intellectuals trained to think – is greatly missing the point of the actual reality of the situation.
If we could discuss genetic engineering, enhancement, PHD, eugenics, abortion and the like without the word “Prometheus” being said, or the notion brought up at all, both sides would be much better off. I think the punishment for the next person to do so should be an eagle eating their liver.
