With the age of successful genetic engineering drawing constantly closer, one can't help but contemplate the endless stream of questions that arise concerning the moral and ethical juxtapositions that the integration of genetic engineering proposes to society. The selected reading, on the genomic revolution, from the Museum of Natural History video forum, addresses and discusses several of these hotly debated issues. One of these issues concerns the probability that people will inevitably lose their sense of empathy for humanity with the public availability of genetic engineered birth options. Under the theoretical proposition that doctors and scientists will eventually make genetic trait engineering available to the public, I faithfully believe that the public will not respond enthusiastically, but rather with deep concern for the direction of future humanity.

     Human empathy is an important aspect of civilization not only because it creates a focal point between humans to relate their failures, triumphs, and other experiences to one another, but also for the fact that human evolution has consistently promoted compassion and empathy for one another, believing that emotional correlation will further expand our rights of equality, liberty, and freedom, as well as the public ability to promote these values towards each other. The existence of human empathy creates a link, bridging the worlds we perceive individually, to the worlds of other individuals. The use of genetic engineering to design our children sets fire to that bridge of understanding that pushes our society forward, toward a more united and peaceful existence on earth. By allowing children's personalities to be formulated and engineered before birth, we alienate them from one another, by degenerating the evolution of correlated diversity from human nature. We even grant them the ability to create biases and prejudices against each other, by categorizing and condemning their personalities prematurely.

     Although personally, I may be a little overly optimistic about the future demeanor of American society, it is my belief that humans will not lose their sense of compassion for one another. Not solely because humans will intuitively "know better" but because they will realize that genetically engineering our children, beyond the horizon of eliminating life threatening diseases, is a form of enslavement for future generations. By denying our children the freedom to pursue and develop their own personalities, we endow them with superficial judgment and criticism towards one another for biases that were predetermined before their births. It is a dangerous conspiracy to believe that genetic trait options will be available to the public, assuming as well, that the public will adapt this "programming" our children trend excitedly. Although many people look enthusiastically towards the generation of medical science that endows us to successfully snuff life threatening diseases, I do not know if I believe that the majority of the public would be as enthusiastic about the ability to choose the color of their children's eyes, let alone their tendencies for favoring certain "paths of life".

     Although I am believing as a result of faith rather than fact, I would hope a majority of people would realize that allowing parents to choose their children's occupations and hobbies before birth almost enslaves children to the whims of their parents. This ability allows human desire to disrupt the natural occurrences of human experience, trial and error, and cause and effect. Even some aspects of medical engineering disrupt these qualities of human life. For instance, the successful incorporation of genetically engineered lung transplants, we allow the cigarette smoker to avoid the consequence of lung cancer, which is a more than known possible consequence to smoking, simply because it is within our technology to do so. There is a fundamental order to nature, and to an extent human participation has always coincided and looped around it, but the act of successfully controlling the natural order may have severe consequences to humanity. What will happen when life expectancy reaches 150 yrs of age, and the birth rate does not slow, but rather increases from expanded fertility medications, and the earth becomes void of natural resources, clean water, and over populated? How will we teach our children that all humans are equal and life is diverse and thrillingly complex if we predetermine the characteristics of our heirs? Where will people find motivation and inspiration, if their careers and fancies are programmed into their psyche? The examples are endless, as well as the consequences, to the successful and well received integration of genetically engineered medical science. I am hopeful that people will realize the potential dangers, before it is irreversible.